Why We Should Legalize Physician Assisted Suicide

Brittany Maynard is a women who recommend to people to take assisted suicide because she does not want to see people suffer from pain. However, the author do not agree with her idea. She said that Maynard’s reasoning has a huge flaw. She suggested that people do not choose suicide lack dignity in order to people even take palliative medication but they still suffer pain, personality changes, and verbal, cognitive loss.

Every day in the United States 1,500 people are diagnosed with a terminal illness. These people are given few options when determining if the wish to try treatment and if treatment does not work, how to deal with the end of their lives. (author unknown, “Cancer”) With this horrible future ahead of them many may wish to make amends before it’s too late, however, an increasing number of people are seeking an alternate solution. In states such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana and soon California a relatively new, legal option is available for people with terminal illnesses. The states of Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana created a law which allows people with a terminal illness and less than six months that are mentally healthy seek professional medical help that will end their lives (Humphrey, Derek) . This topic has created heated debates across the United States with each side have clear and defined reason as to why or why not this controversial law should be processed for the whole country. The people who defend the law believe that people who are losing their lives should be able to leave this world on their own terms, and with the help of physicians they can go in a painless and mess-free way. Supporters also believe that by not wanting to the end it can help save patients, doctors, and insurance time and money that could be better spent on patients who may have options and may not be able to reach them without

Brittany Maynard was given six months to live after being diagnosed with the deadliest form of brain cancer; she had recently just turned 29. To make matters worse, doctors had told her she would suffer from the tumor in a slow and painful manner before succumbing to death. Maynard decided she would die on November 1, a few days after her husband’s birthday under physician-assisted suicide. Unfortunately, she had to relocate from California, where her friends and family lived, to Oregon in order to fall under the “Die With Dignity” act. According to euthanasia.procon.org, only four states in the whole country have legalized assisted suicide. Unfortunately, there are many like Maynard, who have to relocate and leave their home or go through a long and strenuous court battle to receive this treatment plant. This is due to the disapproval of physician-assisted suicide.

In 2014, Brittany Maynard became the face for those supporting physician assisted suicide or PAS. At 29 years old and newly married, Maynard was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer and immediately underwent a partial craniotomy and partial resection. Her tumor came back much stronger, however, and in April she was given six months to live. Maynard’s only treatment option to slow but not stop the growth of the tumor was full brain radiation, but she opted against this because of the unavoidable side effects of hair loss, first degree burns, and the inevitability of death. In consideration of hospice, Maynard feared becoming resistant to morphine and losing her cognitive, motor, and verbal skills. Even more so, she did not want her family

The topic of physician-assisted suicide has become very controversial because of the ethical questions. The physical state of health of the patient, the patient’s personal life, and even the financial pressure of the patient are all factors to consider when contemplating whether or not to legalize this controversial cause of death. Physician-assisted suicide regarding medical ethics states that a physician cannot legally give any patient a lethal injection to end their life, but they can take the patient off of life support in order to increase the process of death. Physician-assisted suicide should be legalized at a federal level and should be morally acceptable for patients who are terminally ill and can no longer be treated to improve their medical situation.

With a mere four states out of fifty in the nation allowing PAS, terminally ill patients with fewer than six months left to live will relocate to Oregon, Washington and Vermont in order to have their wish to end their lives fulfilled (as only legal residents of each state can get PAS). These are people who may be barely able to walk, bedridden, or on their last limbs. One could hardly call them fit for long-distance travel and relocation yet their desperation and desire to end their pain attracts them to the geographic extremes of the United States. Having laws as such force terminally ill patients and their families to leave their homes into an unfamiliar place in order to watch their loved one pass away at their fingertips. According to the San Jose Mercury News, "No one should have to leave their home and community for peace of mind, to escape suffering and to plan for a gentle death.” Out of the complications that a person who is on his deathbed may encounter en route to a hospital hundreds or even thousands of miles away from home, the most pitiful one is the pain. The pain

Physician-assisted suicide, abbreviated as PAS, is a topic that carries wide concerns to people in the United States. PAS is being deliberated on whether a physician should be legally allowed to prescribe a lethal drug to its patient. Many views conflict each other on this topic, whether it is because of religion, morals, or ethics. As PAS can be a difficult subject to others, PAS is usually decided by the patient itself.

The decision to choose death over life should not be regulated by law, but rather be an individual’s afforded right. Therefore, physician-assisted suicide should be legalized in all 50 states. Debates on legalizing physician-assisted suicide (PAS) have increased dramatically in recent years, however there has been little action taken on state and federal levels that encourage the reform of this social policy. The main reason for this hesitance lies in the question of whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be regarded as morally acceptable. Many argue that legalizing PAS can bear lasting social effects, but surely the same can be true if our nation continues to deny an individual’s right to autonomy and self-determination.

Imagine living with a terminal illness that causes immense pain and suffering. It’s likely that many of us have not given it much thought. It’s much easier to believe that it won’t happen to us. The reality, however, is that people are diagnosed with these terrible illnesses every day. So, what options do patients have? For many years’, members of the medical community have discussed the practice of physician assisted suicide. This would allow terminally ill patients, many of whom have cancer, to make the difficult decision to end their lives peacefully. Doctors are able to simply write their patient a prescription, designed to end a person’s life in a non-painful way. Doctors and medical personnel have struggled with this topic, exploring the various consequences and benefits that come with making assisted suicide legal. Currently, physician assisted suicide has been made legal across a handful of states in the U.S; however, many people continue to question the ethicality of this practice. There are many different arguments to explore for and against physician assisted suicide. Some believe that physician assisted suicide will lead to involuntary euthanasia, while others say patients should have the choice to live or die. While each individual conviction may seem vastly different, they do share something in common: Their concern for the well-being of others.

Currently, in Vermont, California, Oregon, Washington,and New Mexico, lethal medication is being given to terminally Ill patients to end their lives. There are several reasons why assisted suicide is illegal in the majority of states, such as the demand for suicide due to a patient 's excruciating pain, misinterpreted life expectancies and diagnoses, poor medical coverage by insurance companies, and the financial interests of the patients families. On the other hand, some suggest various reasons why assisted suicide should be legal. The legal status of physician assisted suicide, as a hotly debated topic, teeters on both sides of legality in varying

In February 6, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada made a momentous decision that would legalize physician-assisted death within a year. Physician-assisted suicide (PAS), in simple words, means doctors prescribe a lethal dose of medication that patients take themselves. The question that whether the Criminal Code provisions should prohibit physician-assisted suicide has been discussed in public for several decades. Actually, decriminalizing PAS may cause some sorts of abuses, but not decriminalizing it would make more patients dying with excruciating pain.

The subject of legalizing physician-assisted suicide is hotly debated these days. There have been many high profile cases including Dr. Jack Kevorkian in the 90’s to the young Oregonian Brittany Maynard who ended her life just this year. Physician-assisted suicide is currently legal in Oregon, Washington, and Montana. However, even where legal, it is unethical for medical professionals to engage in assisting patients to end their lives. There are many good alternatives to physician-assisted death available to terminally ill patients. Physician-assisted suicide should not be legalized.

In the article “Why Doctors Must Not be Complicit in Killing Their Patients,” published in Ethics and Medicine: An International Journal of Bioethics Dr. C. Ben Mitchell, Ph.D., discusses the ethics of physician-assisted suicide. In the process of physician-assisted suicide, a doctor purposefully provides a terminally ill patient with the means to take their own life. This is often confused with active euthanasia; however, they are not the same thing. In euthanasia, the doctor administers the lethal drug to the patient, but in physician-assisted suicide, the patient must take the lethal drugs themselves. There is much debate over physician-assisted suicide today. Some people believe physician-assisted suicide should be illegal because

Doctor-assisted suicide helps numerous people with life threatening illnesses die in peace. Brittany Maynard is the most recent case that deals with the moral and immoral rights of doctor-assisted suicide. Other doctors helped their patients, however they did not publicize the action being done to help. Doctor Kevorkian was the first doctor that did not hide as to how he would help his patients that were terminally ill. Doctor assisted suicide is frowned upon by a variety of people. Despite this social viewpoint, doctor-assisted suicide is a freedom available to the terminally ill.

The most valid argument in the favor of Brittany Maynard’s decision comes from the Ethics of Care moral theory. According to Ethics of Care, an ideal society is the one in which a person cares for others and also expects to be cared. Clearly, Brittany does not feel the caring from others because she needs to end her pain, and the only possible way of doing this is active euthanasia. In addition, her decision also seems to be in accordance with utilitarianism because it certainly leads to the greatest happiness for her, which is ending an extreme pain.