The Legalization of Physician-assisted Death

Legalization would bring honesty, clarity and transparency to an existing practice. Meier et.al (1998) in his national survey of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia in the US; found that even when PAS is not legalized, there have been requests to hasten death in some situations.

Who gets to make the choice whether someone lives or dies? If a person has the right to live, they certainly should be able to make the choice to end their own life. The law protects each and everyone’s right to live, but when a person tries to kill themselves more than likely they will end up in a Psychiatric unit. Today we hear more and more about the debate of Physician assisted suicide and where this topic stands morally and ethically. Webster 's dictionary defines Physician assisted suicide as, suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of the patient 's intent (Webster, 1977).

Physician assisted suicide is a controversial moral issue that I feel should be allowed in all states not just a few. Right now there are only five states that have some type of death with dignity law; one which has some extra steps that need to be taken to be able to use the law. Over the last year there has been more media coverage on this topic because of a young woman named Brittany Maynard, who decided to tell her story with needing this option. The real question though should be do we have the right to tell someone that they do not deserve to have this choice?

According to Mirror News, In October of 2014 a women named Charlotte Fitzmaurice Wise was watching her daughter Nancy Fitzmaurice suffer from pain. She was born with Hydrocephalus and septicaemia which made it impossible for her to walk, talk, eat or drink. She required around the clock care and was fed through tubes. As time went on her health worsened and she would scream in pain even though she was injected with morphine. Wise believed that her daughter was in excruciating pain and deserved to be at peace. Wise submitted an application to end her daughter’s misery, and soon her application would be approved. She was able to relieve her daughter from pain, and made it legal in the United Kingdom for a parent to end their critically ill child’s life if they are disable and can’t speak for themselves.

Physician-assisted suicide can be described as the act of a terminally ill individual obtaining a lethal prescription in order to exercise their right to die with dignity. Though physician-assisted suicide is highly controversial, it is legally practiced in a small number of states within the United States. Much of the controversy surrounding physician-assisted suicide relates to the social, political, and ethical questions and considerations concerning the practice. Regardless

Did you know, about 57% of physicians today have received a request for physician assisted suicide due to suffering from a terminally ill patient. Suffering has always been a part of human existence, and these requests have been occurring since medicine has been around. Moreover, there are two principles that all organized medicine agree upon. The first one is physicians have a responsibility to relieve pain and suffering of dying patients in their care. The second one is physicians must respect patients’ competent decisions to decline life-sustaining treatment. Basically, these principles state the patients over the age of 18 that are mentally stable have the right to choose to end their life if they are suffering from pain. As of right

of life. Death is inevitable. Why should each of us not have the right to

Support for the participation of physicians in the suicides of terminally ill patients is increasing. Much of the controversy surrounding physician-assisted suicide however focuses on the debate over whether the practice should be legalized. A woman suffering from cancer became the first person known to die under the law of physician-assisted suicide in March of 1998. In 1994, voters in Oregon approved a referendum called the Death with Dignity Act, which was enacted in 1997. This law allows patients who have been given six months or less to live that wish to hasten their deaths to obtain lethal doses of medication prescribed by two doctors. Between 1998 and 2000, ninety-six lethal prescriptions were written, and seventy patients took the

Brittany Maynard was diagnosed with an incurable brain tumor at the age of twenty-nine. She was given six months to live and the option of full brain radiation. If she chose to go with radiation, it could have caused her to experience the following: fatigue, nausea, memory loss, and speech loss. She began to research physician-assisted suicide and decided that it was the best choice she had left. Physician-assisted suicide is the act of a doctor ending a terminally ill patient’s life using lethal drugs. As of modern day, physician-assisted suicide is only legal in 6 states which include; Oregon, Montana, Washington, Vermont, California, and Colorado. Luckily, she lived near Oregon: one of the six states to have it legalized. She went through with it to end the suffering. More states should legalize physician-assisted suicide because it would let people who are terminally ill die with tranquility and dignity.

The process of assisted suicide, or physician-assisted death, is a hotly debated topic that still remains at the forefront of many national discussions today. Assisted suicide can be described as the suicide of patient by a physician-prescribed dose of legal drugs. The reason that this topic is so widely debated is that it infringes on several moral and religious values that many people in the United States have. But, regardless of the way that people feel, a person’s right to live is guaranteed to them in the United States Constitution, and this should extend to the right to end their own life as well. The reasons that assisted suicide should be legalized in all states is because it can ease not only the suffering of the individual, but the financial burden on the family that is supporting him/her. Regardless of opposing claims, assisted suicide should be an option for all terminally ill patients.

In today’s society, suicide, and more controversially, physician assisted suicide, is a hotly debated topic amongst both every day citizens and members of the medical community. The controversial nature of the subject opens up the conversation to scrutinizing the ethics involved. Who can draw the line between morality and immorality on such a delicate subject, between lessening the suffering of a loved one and murder? Is there a moral dissimilarity between letting someone die under your care and killing them? Assuming that PAS suicide is legal under certain circumstances, how stringent need be these circumstances? The patient must be terminally ill to qualify for voluntary physician-assisted suicide, but in the eyes of the non-terminal patients with no physical means to end their life, the ending of their pain through PAS may be worth their death; at what point is the medical staff disregarding a patient’s autonomy? Due to the variability of answers to these questions, the debate over physician-assisted suicide is far from over. However, real life occurrences happen every day outside the realm of debate and rhetoric, and decisions need to be made.

In 1997 a Supreme Court case, Washington v Glucksberg, questioned the status quo asserting that a physician should not be allowed to legally assist a terminally ill individual if he or she wishes to die. While the plaintiffs lost, the case made clear that several people in the country were questioning the status quo. The legality of physician assisted dying (PAD), synonymous with death with dignity, ultimately rests on the opinions of the public (which are often religiously and politically influenced) and therefore is dependent on a theory known as system justification (New York University). (System justification states that people will accept and even defend a status quo, simply because it is the norm.) This case was one of the many steps

Over the years, the legalization of physician assisted death has been a highly debated subject that has divided medical

According to the article by DiMartino at el. (2014), Cancer is considered the second leading cause of death in the United States and majority of patients that are diagnosed with cancer will die from these disease without receiving proper care, such as hospice. Some people in the United States and other places all over the world believe in a myth that says hospice speeds up a person’s death. But, without hospice patients may feel like they are a burden to their families and they would want to die sooner. However, through this research and six articles a reader can see that, “hospice provides extra time for the families and the patient to say their goodbyes, to seek out resolutions, and find the closure that the both parties need” (Connor et

Physician assisted suicide, the suicide of a patient suffering from an incurable disease, effected by the taking of lethal drugs provided by a doctor for this purpose. The question of whether or not this practice should be made legal in the United States has been one of controversy since 1997. Beginning with the case of Washington v. Glucksberg, where the United States Supreme Court ruled that the matter of the constitutionality of a right to a physician’s aid in dying, was best left up to the states. Then gaining even more controversy when Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act, which allowed terminally-ill Oregonians to end their lives by the practice of physician assisted suicide. (CNN.com) Proponents of physician assisted suicide