Euthanasia Essay: Physician Assisted Suicide

A controversial human rights issue in modern society is the right to die, an issue that has much to do with the way that human beings relate to society at large, the notion that a man has ownership of their own body, and the obligations set forth in the Hippocratic oath and medical ethics. Physician assisted suicide, or the right to die as those in the pro-assisted suicide movement call it, divides two very different kinds of people into two camps. One’s opinion on the subject is entirely related to one’s core values. Whether one values the individual or whether one places more emphasis on the will of the majority has a great impact on one’s beliefs concerning the issue of the right to die. In this essay, I will prove

In homes across the world, millions of victims are suffering from fatal and terminal illnesses.With death knocking on their door, should these people have to endure pain and misery knowing what is to come? The answers to these questions are very controversial. Furthermore, there is a greater question to be answered—should these people have the right and option to end the relentless pain and agony through physician assisted death? Physician-Assisted Suicide PAS is highly contentious because it induces conflict of several moral and ethical questions such as who is the true director of our lives. Is suicide an individual choice and should the highest priority to humans be alleviating pain or do we suffer for a purpose? Is suicide a purely

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

Suicide is one person’s personal decision; physician-assisted suicide is a patient who is not capable of carrying the task out themselves asking a physician for access to lethal medication. What people may fail to see however is that the physician is not the only healthcare personnel involved; it may include, but is not limited to, a physician, nurse, and pharmacist. This may conflict with the healthcare worker’s own morals and there are cases in which the patient suffers from depression, or the patient is not receiving proper palliative care. Allowing physician-assisted suicide causes the physician to become entangled in an ethical and moral discrepancy and has too many other issues surrounding it for it to be legal.

Physician assisted suicide is referred to as the act that defines the prescription of having drug

Physician assisted death is a physician aiding in a patient’s death by prescribing a lethal dosage or informing a patient on a lethal amount of medication. This is not a new phenomenon, over the ages of medicine physicians have been asked by patients to end their suffering. More than half of physicians in today’s society have been asked in some form of way to participate in physician assisted death. People should be able to choose rather or not to end their life through terminal illness or in their own manner.

Assisted suicide, by definition, is suicide facilitated by another person, especially a physician, in order to end the life of a patient suffering from an incurable or life-threatening illness. Ever since its first use in the 1970s, physician assisted suicide has been a topic of much controversy in the modern world. Issues surrounding the life or death of a person come with many sensitive areas of concern, including financial, legal, ethical, spiritual, and medical matters. Today, physician assisted suicide has only been legalized in two states while many other states have been fighting to pass or amend the Death with Dignity Act. But while some may say that physician assisted suicide is immoral and impractical because it deserts the hope

Physician-assisted suicide is the voluntary termination of one 's own life by administering a lethal substance with assistance of a physician. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in five U.S. states. It is an option given to individuals by state law in Oregon, Vermont, Washington and California. It is an option given to individuals in Montana via court decision. Individuals must have a terminal illness as well as a prognosis of six months or less to live. Physicians cannot be prosecuted for prescribing medications to speed up the process of death. Since 1992, efforts to legalize the practice have failed in California, Michigan, Maine, and most recently, in Massachusetts. Meanwhile, 41 states have passed laws making it a crime to assist in a suicide. Everyone has the right to choose how they live or die. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that the only hope of bringing that agony to an end is through assisted suicide. Many different conditions are set in whether someone is eligible for assisted suicide because sometimes even with a little help they can change their mind about suicide. Maybe not exactly when they want to make such decision but if it gets to the point that death is the only option, they should have the right to fulfill their wish.

the problem is much more pressing than it has in the past, and both the

Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are both types of medical assistance aiding in ending a suffering patient’s life. This pain may be due to a terminal illness and suffering as well as those in an irreversible coma. This practice of doctor assisted suicide is illegal in many countries, but is increasing in popularity as people start to recognize the positive aspects that euthanasia has to offer for those that fit the criteria. Euthanasia is essential for those, placed in such life diminishing situations, and whom no longer want to experience suffering. This is where the issue gets complicated, and many religious groups argue that individuals should not have the legal right to choose whether they get to die or not, but that it is simply in God’s hands. Suffering patients argue that they should be given the right to choose whether or not they have to experience this suffering, to end their life with the dignity they still have, and to alleviate the stress that their deteriorating life conditions have on their families, themselves and the entire healthcare system. Therefore, despite the many arguments, euthanasia can have a very positive impact on the lives and families of suffering individuals, as well as the Canadian healthcare system.

Physician assisted suicide is one of the most controversial topics in the medical world today. Many individuals feel as if it is wrong to ask your physician to end your life regardless of your condition. Patients that are terminally ill and that want to end their life with dignity and on their terms often seek assistance in ending their life. They may have many reasons for wanting to end their life instead of holding on such as they do not want to become a burden to their family members, they want to pass away peacefully, or they fear losing their independence. Patients that are in extreme pain and just want it all to be over are also on the top of the list for wanting assistance from their physician to stop the pain the only way possible. The legal definition of assisted suicide according to Duhaime.com is, “A form of suicide or euthanasia which involves a person other than the person taking his or her own life, and during which the other person assists in direct or indirect physical means in giving effect to the suicide or, in the event of a statutory definition, in a manner as set out in that statute.” (Duhaime, L.) Assisted suicide laws are continuously changing and at a rapid rate. As of February 7, 2012 the only two states to have a law allowing assisted suicide were Oregon and Washington. At that time, Montana was welcoming the idea of less suffering for its people and Vermont and Massachusetts are on the way to having bills in the works.

Physician-assisted suicide should be a legal option, if requested, for terminally ill patients. For decades the question has been asked and a clear answer has yet to surface. It was formed out of a profound commitment to the idea that personal end-of-life decisions should be made solely between a patient and a physician. Can someone's life be put into an answer? Shouldn't someone's decision in life be just that; their decision? When someone has suffered from a car accident, or battled long enough from cancer, shouldn't the option be available? Assisted suicide shouldn't be seen as cheating death, but as a way to pay homage to the life once lived. As far as including the mentally challenged in this equation, I am against it. The mentally

For hundreds of years a doctor was sworn into practice with the Oath of Hippocrates. Although in the present time parts of the oath have oath has come into question on how they should be interrupted. "To do no harm," the question is what does one consider harm? With our modern technology in medicine our medical community has the ability to prolong a person's life for quite awhile. So the question now is to prolong a person's life that is suffering or basically alive from life support harmful? Or is ending that person's suffering harmful? Death is just another part of life. We are born, we live and then we die. But who is the one that decides when, where and how we die?

Yes, we would like to believe there is an answer or a solution to every problem we face, but often that is not the case. Some of us do not stop until our problem is resolved. This can work for problems such as mathematical ones, but not necessarily medical ones. It is undeniable that we have had countless medical advances throughout the years and unquestionably that there will continue to be more. With that said, those medical advances take time and often patients do not have that time. Sometimes they would prefer to be taken out of their misery than to wait for a cure; there also may never be a cure. Doctors and physicians are highly trained professionals, I do not doubt that if there was a way they could help a patient they would.

it be morally right to allow that person to suffer in pain in anguish through