Terminally Ill's Suicide Research Paper

However, one may argue that euthanasia should be an option for the terminally ill with consent. A lethal injection will kill both a healthy individual and a sick individual(Muehlenberg). Giving consent is still not enough. Recent statistics from the Netherlands indicate at least 300 assisted deaths without consent occurred and were rarely reported (Schadenberg). Physicians should report treatment otherwise it is considered involuntary treatment. As a result, euthanasia makes a criminal act to be lawful. I can agree that no one deserves to be in intolerable pain but there are other treatment options. Administering pain relievers with

Human life is invaluable and doctors should not be involved directly in causing death. The trust a patient has in their doctor is unlike any other bond because the patient trusts the physician with their life. In order to become a doctor, physicians must recite the Hippocratic Oath which begins with the words, “First, do no harm.”(Messerli 1). Participating in a patient’s suicide would obviously break this oath. This occurred during a case in 1999 when Jack Kevorkian was sentenced to a ten to twenty-five tear prison term for giving fatal medication to a patient (“Facts and Statistics on Euthanasia”1). Although it is illegal in most states, in some cases euthanasia can be done non-voluntarily (“Pros and Cons- Euthanasia”1). The non-voluntary option presents doctors with too much power; a life should not be taken because it is no longer convenient or cost efficient. The power then given to the doctors would provide the insurance companies with an opportunity to put undue pressure on the physicians to avoid heroic measures and to end life prematurely simply to save money or avoid hassles. Euthanasia is suicide and should not be legal because it devalues human life.

“We don’t let animals suffer, so why humans?”(Stephen Hawking) Not only is assisted suicide not legal in most states, but people are judged for taking that option. So basically, they should just live in pain because you’re uncomfortable…? How is ending your dog's life because he’s in unbearable pain any different from helping a person end their pain?

Should terminally ill people be allowed to decide rather or not they want to live in constant pain and suffering? “Physician-assisted death is defined as the physician providing the means for death, most often with a prescription. The patient not the physician will ultimately administer the lethal medication” (Braddock & Tonelli, 1998) To better explain physician-assisted suicide, a situation in which a patient kills him-or herself, using means which have been supplied by the physician, with the physician being aware that the patient will use those means for the purposes of suicide. Physicians are trained to heal the sick, care for the injured, and cure diseases. However, medical school does not prepare them when they cannot cure

It’s one’s right to decide what happens to their body. Deciding one wants to end their life because they’re terminally ill and in pain should be permissible. It's no worse than a cancer patient refusing treatment, or a person being taken off life support. In fact, it might be better for people to be able to access physician assisted suicide as those suffering with chronic pain and no hope for a better future will be able to choose to die painlessly and with much more dignity. When the government refuses patient’s physician assisted suicide, people do at times decide to take matters into their own hands and attempt to end their own lives. This can go wrong and cause the patient to be in even more pain. This only includes those who are mobile enough to attempt suicide as well. The law against physician assisted suicide can also drive loved ones to end the patient’s suffering: so they no longer have to see them live in agony and misery. This causes many issues as the loved one may go to jail, or deal with psychological guilt for the rest of their lives. It seems better to allow people the ability to access physician assisted suicide as it’s no different than when one refuses treatment which is only prolonging

Doctor assisted suicide has ignited a national debate recently. Physicians have always helped patients die, that is, to tolerate the course of treatment that ends with their death. The vital question is, if doctors should be allowed by law to help a patient kill himself? If physicians are entitled to have refuge with the law to have the ability to kill, they are then given permission to murder and trust will be destroyed. Hence, I believe the process is not legal activity.

No one, especially a doctor, should be allowed to deliberately kill, or assist in killing intentionally. Through legislature, assisted suicide should be illegal; Doctors who aid a patient with suicide should be penalized by the law.

There was once a man who had brain cancer. The man was not getting better he was getting worried and worried every day. One day he just gave up, he had so much pain he just want to die. So he asks the nurse to kill and the nurse did what she was told and kill the man. Assisted suicide is when people want to die because they are in pain. Assisted suicide should be illegal because it is killing people to put them out of their pain. It should be illegal because people want to die and people should not want to die. People deserve to have a long life.

Assisted suicide is a physician facilitates a patient’s death by giving a lethal drug to someone they know is contemplating suicide. Assisted suicide is wrong. We do not get to choose how we die or when we die. God is the only one who gets to decide. Making a patient, who is dying, comfortable is acceptable. Assisting a patient in suicide is wrong. This type of suicide is a murderous act. By participating in assisted suicide, one is picking a choosing what laws we must abide.

Some physicians have gone against the law and practice euthanasia. “In those places in which euthanasia was approved for persons with incurable illness associated with intolerable suffering and who would repeatedly request for an end to their lives, it has been seen that, over the years, euthanasia has been performed on patients with curable illnesses, who did not have intolerable suffering or who had not requested to die.” (Requena 101). It is understandable on why a physician's might go against the law if they see a patient suffering or if they think euthanasia is the best option for the patient at that time. But physicians should not be performing this procedure without informing the patient. If the physician never asks the patient if euthanasia

If a patient was going to die because of an extremely painful, incurable terminal disease and wanted to end their life as soon as possible due to the unbearable pain, then they can submit a request to be euthanized. If this request is approved and the physician chooses withdraw treatment, the patient would die an even more painful death. The act of passive euthanasia is seen as more moral than active euthanasia because the disease itself is killing the patient, not the physician. Unfortunately, death does not come right when the machines shut off. They would have to slowly succumb to their illness though infection, dehydration, or even starvation. The ultimate goal of euthanasia is to end persistent and extreme suffering. Letting someone die through this method instead taking a more direct action, such as giving a patient a lethal injection for a quick and painless death is inhumane. Not only is it difficult for the patient and their families to go through this process, but the hospital staff has to live through this ordeal as well.*** Physicians have an introspective view of euthanasia because it pertains to their

The definition of terminal as given in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is “of relating to an end, extremity, boundary, or terminus”. A terminal illness is a disease that cannot be cured or effectively treated and is likely to result in death of a patient in a relatively short time.

The history of physician assisted suicide is a long one filled with many details, history, and much debate. Being that the topic of a physician being able to euthanize a patient has been around since the first practices started. To illustrate this, it says in the Ancient Hippocratic Oath, which states the conduct and obligations to doctors, holds a physician to “neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor make a suggestion to this effect”(Emmanuel 2). Showing that since the beginning of the practice, doctors were told that it was not their right to take a patient's life or encourage the patient to go through with this plan, no matter the circumstance. This is because it is not their right to take a life that is not their own, even if the patient is dying. In the event that a physician were to take a life, it is murder. What is the difference between a person taking someone’s life on the street or in an office? There is none, a life is a life no matter by who

Assisted Suicide is the acts of helping a person kill himself/herself by providing them with information or lethal doses of drugs. Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending a person’s life in order to relieve the person of pain. The word Euthanasia comes from the Greek word euthanatos which means “good death”. Euthanasia can be categorized into two types; Voluntary Euthanasia and Non-voluntary Euthanasia.

Euthanasia is defined as “A mode of ending life in which the intent is to cause the patient’s death in a single act. (Medical-Dictionary 2003-2017).” With active euthanasia, the patient is usually given drugs to aid them in passing away. About 900 people annually are administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent, and in one jurisdiction, almost fifty percent of cases of euthanasia are not reported (Current Oncology 2011). Euthanasia is for the most part illegal across the United States, despite this, there are still cases in which doctors aid a patient in dying. If a human cannot physically bear living anymore due to terminal illnesses or significant pain they should not be forced to suffer. When looking at legalizing euthanasia we should closely look at autonomy, the physician’s oath, and the argument from mercy.