Legalizing the Right to Your Own Life The term assisted suicide refers to the practice of a physician giving a patient, per their request, a prescription for a lethal drug which the patient would consume as a means of ending their own life. Assisted suicide should be legalized for any and all people who seek this out in order to put an end to their life. People deserve to have a right to their own bodies and lives, so if they choose to put an end to it, they should not be restricted in their access to a way of doing so. Much of the debate over whether assisted suicides should be legalized has to do with whether people have the right to die along with the right to live, whether or not people should have to suffer, the Hippocratic Oath that physicians have to abide by, and religious standpoints. Many of these arguments have an ethical grounding, and deal with the morality of the action of a suicide.
Originally, assisted suicide was known as, or synonymous with euthanasia, which is the killing of a person out of and by a doctor’s mercy for that person. Many people tend to equate euthanasia with physician assisted suicide because both involve having the help of a physician. However, physician assisted suicide differs from euthanasia because it requires the patient’s consent and an evaluation of the patient before the patient is given a prescription for lethal drugs. The practice of an assisted suicide where it is currently legal, involves a patient who is terminally ill, and has received evaluation from two different physicians saying they have a terminal illness, being given a prescription for lethal drugs that the patient can take which, will end life functions for the patient. Physician assisted suicides first gained notoriety in the 90’s, after a physician named Jack Kevorkian, was seen on CNN’s 60 Minutes, administering a lethal drug to a patient who had requested it. This ended up getting Kevorkian prosecuted and sentenced to 25 years for second-degree murder and the illegal delivery of a controlled substance. His work before being sent to prison prompted Michigan courts to make a law against assisted suicides, with the penalty for doing so being a maximum five year sentence or a $10,000 fine. Recently, the subject of assisted suicides came back into the public light after Brittany Maynard had an article published on CNN, which detailed her decision to have an assisted suicide. As it stands today, physician assisted suicides are legal in Oregon, Washington, and Vermont via legislation. In Montana the practice is legal via court ruling. In 39 states there are laws prohibiting assisted suicide specifically. In Alabama, Massachusetts, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia, assisted suicide is prohibited by common law. Nevada, North Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming currently do not have laws that specifically make assisted suicide illegal. Laws regarding assisted suicides are mostly left to be handled on a state level as there are no federal laws regarding assisted suicide. Although, it came to light in modern times in the 90’s, assisted suicides have been being practiced since the 5th Century. However, back then it was mainly viewed as euthanasia, even though patients back then would also request for the doctors to give them the poisons the requested. Also back then, the Hippocratic Oath that physicians would take was more strongly enforced, and the views on euthanasia were mainly against it being practiced. There are organizations such as Death with Dignity and The Patients’ Rights Council, which help people familiarize themselves with assisted suicide and their other options when nearing the end of life.
Any arguments involving the life of a person, involves whether everybody has a right to live. For instance, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states that, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” (“Universal Declaration of Human Rights”). However, it is never explicitly stated that people also have the right to die. Life, which can be ended before one even gets the chance to live, is not always guaranteed. Death, however, is always guaranteed if one has the chance to live. Therefore, if people are allowed to have a right to live, they should also be granted the right to die because it is inevitable. Moreover, if a person realizes they cannot escape death, and they are at a point where they see it fit for them to die, why restrict their ability to die, if it is bound to happen. By arguing against legalization of assisted suicide, people are essentially arguing to restrict a person’s right to their own death. This restriction should be viewed as wrong because others should not have a say in how another person dies or lives, since they do not have to withstand that other person’s life or death. If it is illegal for somebody to take another’s life, then why should not it be illegal for somebody to force another person to live their own? Both of these concepts have to deal with others infringing on a person’s rights that were granted once they were born. Dr. Michael Irwin, a retired doctor in the UK, has stated, “The right to die should be a matter of personal choice,” and he goes on to say, “whether you have a terminal illness or whether you're elderly, you should have a choice about what happens to you” (Irwin). In the U.S., it is not illegal for a physician or a patient’s family to withdraw life-sustaining treatments, if said patient has fallen gravely ill. This is done by physicians and family members in order to take the person who has come to a point where they can no longer go through life sustaining processes themselves, out of their suffering. Those who come to a point where they are nearing the end of their lives suddenly, may prefer to be put to their deaths, rather than allowing life to continue to take its course, which could mean allowing pain and suffering to endure. Both withdrawal of artificial life support, and physician assisted suicide, involve the end of a person’s life. However, only one of those, physician assisted suicide, allow for a patient to have a say in how their life is going to end. Those who are physically ill, are not the only people who seek out assisted suicides, those with mental illnesses also tend to explore this option, yet there is no legislation in place which says they are allowed to partake in the practice. Suffering, which can be relative to a person, can come in a variety of ways including pain, illness, depression, and mental disorders. Those who are going through mental suffering may also seek to end their lives via assisted suicide. This is something that they should have the right to do because a person should not be forced to live a life that is causing them to suffer. Furthermore, if suffering is relative, because what feels terrible to one person, could feel ten times as terrible to another, who is anybody else to say that one person’s suffering is not prominent enough for them to seek the end of their lives. A key part of an assisted suicide is the permission of a physician for a patient to have access to drugs that cause their life-sustaining functions to end. By legalizing physician assisted suicides, the amount of euthanizing will decrease. Euthanasia is defined as being a “mercy killing” for instance, a physician has a patient whose chances of survival from an illness are low, and they take it upon themselves to administer treatment which cause that patient’s death. However, if assisted suicides were to be legalized, the physician could offer that as an option to their patient after they have told them their life expectancy. By doing this, if the patient declines the assisted suicide, the physician would not feel as though they need to take mercy on the patient because it is their own decision to endure their illness. As a physician it should be their duty to serve their patient as best as possible. That can be ensured by physicians carrying out their patient’s wishes and being able to help their patients as much as they can. Other than being able to fulfill a patient’s wishes, by legalizing assisted suicide, physicians would also be able to lift a weight off of a patient’s family in regards to whether or not they should withdraw life sustaining functions or not. Families play a large part in whether or not a patient continues to live once they have been placed on a machine that keeps them living because the patient’s body can no longer provide life sustaining functions itself. For many families the decision to end these functions come out of not wanting to see their family member suffer anymore. However, making that decision puts a weight on the family because they have in a sense caused their own family member’s death before nature could take its own course. An example of the stress of witnessing a family member’s suffering is the case of Matthew Donnelly, who had been suffering from brain cancer and wanted to put an end to his life. However, assisted suicide was not legal in the state he lived in so he did not have that as an option. One day, after being unable to ignore his brother’s cries of pain, Harold Donnelly shot his brother dead while he lay in a hospital bed, as a way of ending Matthew Donnelly’s suffering. If assisted suicide would have been legal in the state where Matthew resided, the weight of his suffering would not have been on his brother, and he would have been able to choose to end his own life on his own terms (Andre and Velasquez).
In the medical field, there is a set of values that all physicians are taught to uphold throughout their careers, and it is the Hippocratic Oath. A part of the oath which doctors abide by states that, “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect” (MedicineNet). Therefore, the oath that doctors take essentially forbids them from supporting assisted suicides or helping administer them. It is also argued that if doctors’ roles were to change to conform to the practice of assisted suicides then, “the concept of what it means to be a doctor must also radically change,” (Randall and Downie 2). Physicians also believe that advocates of assisted suicide cite that there is insignificant pain control and intolerable suffering at the end of life are reasons why assisted suicides should be legal. However, data from Oregon in 2010 indicated that only 10 percent of patients who chose assisted suicides report poor pain control as an end of life concern, and this can be attributed to advancements in palliative care and advanced methods of pain control (Cunningham). Dr. R. Sean Morrison, president of the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, states that, “When high-quality palliative care is provided, people are comfortable, they live longer, they spend time with their families and the worries that drive somebody to say I would like assisted death typically vanish," (Reinberg). The Hippocratic Oath is a set of standards that have been changed over time to adhere to today’s medical practice. An example of this is the change that has made abortion acceptable for physicians to carry out. The original Hippocratic Oath stated, “I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy” (MedicineNet). This is a part of the oath that has now been ruled out, as it is legal in most states to perform abortions. If the Hippocratic Oath can be changed to allow doctors to take a life that is not their own, it should also be able to be changed to where a doctor can help a patient make a decision about their own life and aid them in that decision whether it be prolonging a life, or relieving a person of their life.
In Abrahamic religions, such as Christianity and Judaism, suicide is seen as going against the religious values. Since it was originally created, the Hippocratic Oath has been modified to conform to Christian doctrines. Arguments against assisted suicides also come from those who believe in the Christian belief that suicide is a sin. The Commission on Christian Action says that, “A fundamental conviction Christians have is that they do not belong to themselves,” and so therefore in killing them, “Christians cannot claim such autonomy” (“General Synod Statements: Physician-Assisted Suicide”). In Judaism, suicide is also an act that is regarded as not in adherence to being faithful to the religion. Under Jewish law, there are two categories regarding those who commit suicide. The first is that those who are of sound mind and are physically well, do not receive the same burial and mourning rites as those in the second category who are mentally or physically strained and receive full Jewish burial and mourning rites (Kolatch). In Dharmic religions such as Buddhism and Hinduism, suicide is also looked down upon. In Buddhism, is it believed that a person’s actions in their past lives affects what will happen in their next life. So, if a person were to commit an act deemed as suicide because of their suffering, it would only affect their next life which would then be rooted in suffering (Attwood). Much like in the Buddhist religion, Hindus believe that what you do in your life now, will go on to affect your next life. However, in Hinduism, those who commit suicide through fasting because of terminal illness or mental suffering, will not suffer as intense karma as those who do it out of selfish reasons (Subramuniyaswami). While those who are faithful to their religions may find comfort in following beliefs of said religion, those who do not practice religion at all should not have to be held to the same standards as those who do practice. People in religions that are against assisted suicide should have more faith in the followers of their religion and trust that those in the religion will not partake in assisted suicide. With that being said, they should also not try to force their beliefs on people who do not practice religion. Furthermore, any legislation having to do with assisted suicide should not take religious perspectives into consideration when making decisions, because that would not be in adherence to the Constitution which allows freedom of religion.
Adversaries of assisted suicide also feel like the emotional capacity of a person influences their decision to have an assisted suicide. It has been argued that there are people who request an assisted suicide in a depressed state, and without being in such a state the request would not be made. An example of this is those who are terminally ill want an assisted suicide not because of the suffering from the illness, but because they feel depressed due to the fact that they have been given a shorter amount of time to live their lives. The quality of end of life care is also thought to be another reason why those who are terminally ill seek an assisted suicide. As a hospice nurse, Laura Petrillo says, “I also believe that there are many things we can do to restore dignity to the dying process that do not involve lethal medications, such as reforming hospice care and being more thoughtful about end-of-life treatment” (Petrillo). Also, opponents of assisted suicide believe those who are suffering from depression and request this can be given medications that help them come out of their depressed state, and they would no longer want an assisted suicide. Many believe that while assisted suicides for those suffering from a terminal illness is acceptable, many also feel that those suffering from a mental disability should not have the same allowance as those with a terminal illness because they think that a mental illness such as depression or being bipolar can be treated in such a way that changes how that mental illness affects them at any given moment. Nevertheless, a person should not have to suffer in a life whether it be mentally or physically. One person’s mental suffering could be as bad as another person’s physically suffering, and it is no one’s place to have a say over how bad a person’s suffering is or how a person goes about dealing with their suffering. Assisted suicide is an option that most people are not familiar with as a choice they have as an end of life means. It is important for people to recognize assisted suicide as an option they could have if they ever feel as though their suffering is too much. People who have grown up in communities where suicide is viewed as wrong, believe the same because they have never heard an argument in support of any form of suicide. The argument being made here in support of assisted suicide is for those who are trying to form their own opinion about what rights they have to their own bodies and minds. Assisted suicide is an action that allows people to have total control over their own life or death if they so choose it, which is why it should be legalized. By legalizing assisted suicide, it would not be telling people to go kill themselves, it would, however, be a way to allow those who are seeking to end their lives because of their own reasons, to do so.

Works Cited
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. "Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong?" Santa Clara University. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2015.
Attwood, Michael. "Suicide as a Response to Suffering." Western Buddhist Review. N.P., n.d. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.
Cunningham, Brian. "Doctors: Speak Out Against Assisted Suicide, Protect Patients." LifeNews.com. Liberty University, 13 Dec. 2011. Web. 06 Nov. 2015.
"General Synod Statements: Physician-Assisted Suicide." RCA: Reformed Church in America. Reformed Church in America, n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 2015.
"Hippocratic Oath." MedicineNet. MedicineNet, Inc., n.d. Web. 06 Apr. 2015.
Irwin, Michael. "Euthanasia: The Right to Die Should Be a Matter of Personal Choice." Mirror Online. The Mirror, 19 Aug. 2013. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.
Kolatch, Alfred J. The Second Jewish Book of Why. Jonathan David Publishers, Inc.; Middle Village, New York, 1985. Web. 2 Nov 2015.
Petrillo, Laura. "Assisted Suicide Helps Very Few, Endangers More." Soapbox. The Sacramento Bee, 25 Feb. 2015. Web. 04 Nov. 2015.
Randall, Fiona, and Robin Downie. "Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia: Role Contradictions for Physicians." Clinical Medicine 10.4 (2010): 323-325. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 Nov. 2015.
Reinberg, Steven. "Most Doctors Oppose Physician-Assisted Suicide, Poll Finds." US News. U.S.News & World Report, 11 Sept. 2013. Web. 06 Nov. 2015.
Subramuniyaswami, Sivaya. "Let's Talk About Suicide." Hinduism Today 01 Dec. 1992: n. page. Hinduism Today. Himalayan Academy. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.
"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UDHR, Declaration of Human Rights, Human Rights Declaration, Human Rights Charter, The Un and Human Rights." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2015.