Terminally Ill Patients Research Paper

Only a small minority of people will ever experience illnesses that fall under the category of eligibility for assisted suicide. This is good, because these illnesses rob people of their lives and leave them in great suffering and without self-determinism or control over their state of being. The truth is most people will be able to go through life without ever having to deal with symptoms such as abscesses in the lungs, paralysis of the vocal cords, or internal hemorrhages. But it very well could have been or will eventually be any one of us afflicted with a terminal disease. Therefore, we should protect the rights of individuals afflicted by these disorders.

Others have argued that physician assisted suicide is not ethically permissible, because it contradicts the traditional duty of physician’s to preserve life and to do no harm. Furthermore, many argue that if physician assisted suicide is legalized, abuses would take place, because as social forces condone the practice, it will lead to “slippery slope” that forces (PAS) on the disabled, elderly, and the poor, instead of providing more complex and expensive palliative care. While these arguments continue with no end in sight, more and more of the terminally ill cry out in agony, for the right to end their own suffering.

It is said that helping somebody who wants to die in a peaceful, painless way should be legal. Choosing how we die is a basic human freedom and if an individual's quality of life is deteriorating, due to a terminal disease such as cancer, they should have the right to stop their suffering via physician assisted suicide. It might be the case that the drugs for assisted suicide are far less expensive than the cost of their current medical care. This allows the government to save money as well as the lift the financial burden from the family of patients who are suffering from serious illness. Some people say that physician assisted suicide decreases the value of human life, but this isn't the case as it actually helps those who are terminal retain their dignity and choose their own death.

physician-assisted suicide protect patients’ rights and maintain justice. Not allowing a patient todecide when his life should end is in fact denying them freedom. In the case of physician-assisted

The word suicide gives many people negative feelings and is a socially taboo subject. However, suicide might be beneficial to terminally ill patients. Physician- assisted suicide has been one of the most controversial modern topics. Many wonder if it is morally correct to put a terminally ill patient out of their misery. Physicians should be able to meet the requests of their terminally ill patients. Unfortunately, a physician can be doing more harm by keeping someone alive instead of letting them die peacefully. For example, an assisted suicide can bring comfort to patients. These patients are in excruciating pain and will eventually perish. The government should not be involved in such a personal decision. A physician- assisted suicide comes with many benefits for the patient. If a person is terminally ill and wants a physician assisted suicide, then they should receive one.

After patients have been suffering for so long, it only seems right to allow them a peaceful death surrounded by family or, truthfully, however they see fit for their last days. If assisted suicide is legalized, patients will be able to control the assets and precedences of their own deaths. This will let them go peacefully and with bravery knowing they stuck out their fight but still got to die before their suffering was truly unbearable. In the article "Counterpoint: Assisted Suicide is a Civil Right", Issitt and Newton explain, "First and most importantly, it would allow each person the freedom to control the time, place, and circumstances of his or her death. Patients facing the slow progression of a fatal disease or the prognosis of living for years with incurable pain would be able to end their lives with dignity before their suffering became unbearable" (Issitt and Newton 4). In other words, patients should have the ability to control where they are and how they finally die, and assisted suicide can allow them to do just that. It is only right for a patient to have a peaceful death before the pain is too much to handle. With assisted suicide being legalized, patients and their families can make the patient's last few days dignified, celebratory, and comforting as they have struggled for so long. The same article also states, “In this article about assisted suicide, Issitt and Newton state, "In some cases, having the right to die might allow patients to make more informed choices about their health care. A patient might choose to postpone suicide in favor of alternative treatment options comforted by the knowledge that, if the pain becomes too unbearable, suicide would be an ultimate option to escape their suffering" (Issitt and Newton 4). Essentially, a patient being able to control their death is comforting and beneficial.

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

When it comes to the topic of, should physician-assisted suicide be legal in every state, most of us will readily agree that it should be up to a terminally ill person to make that decision. Whereas some are convinced that it is inhumane, others maintain that it is a person’s decision to end their own life. I agree that physician-assisted suicide should be legal in every state because in most cases, people that are terminally ill should have the right to end their own life with the assistance of a physician.

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.

The terminally ill should have the right to doctor assisted suicide since every person has the right to personal control over his or her body. Every individual has personal morals. No one wants to suffer while others, especially family, can do nothing but simply watch them perish. Everyone has the right to a peaceful death. A woman, carrying an unborn baby, has the choice to keep the baby or abort it. We give women the right to murder innocent, unborn babies who have never even seen the world, therefore, terminally ill people

Although a patient’s choice of suicide symbolizes an expression of self-determination, there is a great distinction between denying life-sustaining treatments and demanding life-ending treatments. The right to self-determination is a right to allow or reject offered treatments, not to choose what should be offered. The right to refuse life-sustaining interventions does not correlate with a right to force others to hasten their death. The inability of physicians to inhibit death does not mean that physicians are allowed to help induce death.

Terminally ill patients, who are mentally competent and have less than six months left to live, should have the right to choose how they will end their life. Active Euthanasia will eliminate any suffering and pain from that patient by ending the patient's life. Therefore, terminally ill patients, with less than six months to live, should have the right to exercise active euthanasia. Active euthanasia should be limited to a select few of patients who meet the requirement.

     Once having a mere glimpse into the lives of the terminally ill or disabled, some are able to understand their plight; but usually most are not. In most cases, these people are able to take what they've been given and deal with it. However, in some cases, some simply can not tolerate their lives as they are. They feel that the only solution to their problem is to end their lives. Unfortunately, in some cases, the terminally ill or disabled are not capable of accomplishing this task by themselves, and are left trapped in a life that they do not want. In these cases, when one wishes to end his life and is terminally ill, disabled, or otherwise unable to do so independently, he should have the right to die by assisted suicide. Although most people that are terminally ill or disabled do not wish to end their lives, there are still those few who do. While examining the issue of assisted suicide, three facets of the controversy must be considered: the political, the moral, and the human or compassionate views. By supporting their decision, we support their right to choose and decide what they want to do with their bodies and their lives, we do not

Such a controversial topic as euthanasia and physician assisted suicide obviously brings about both proponents and opponents. When it comes to the case of a terminally ill person who is fully competent, how can one say no to his desire in having

“Another concept increasingly deployed by advocates of euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide is that the terminally ill have a ‘right to die’-that is, not only a right to refuse treatment, but a right to obtain help in committing suicide” (Moreover). In the article “Killing With Kindness”, Caroline Daniel states that two academics from Glasgow University’s Institute of Law and Ethics in medicine believe that keeping a person alive who wants to die is not only an infringement of their rights, but arguably an irresponsible use of resources (Daniel). They are saying that the terminally ill cannot be denied the right of euthanasia. A person should have the right to decide his/her own fate, and if the patient and their family both state that they want euthanasia to be performed, then they cannot be denied that right.