...initially come to terms with. The Right-to-Die movement cites the daunting possibility of a life filled with pain due to ailments and sickness and promotes assisted killing as a favorable alternative when quality of life is below a certain standard. Supporters of this cause also reference the staggering costs of the continued medical assistance needed simply to keep a person alive. Individuals who choose to live while battling terminal or long-term illness will often pay higher premiums for insurance and their...
Words: 1704 - Pages: 7
...dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information (Merriam-Webster, n.d). For over ten years, there has been much controversy about the ethics and legality of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) not only in the United States but also worldwide. In 1997, the Supreme Court had a unanimous ruling that there was not a constitutional right or a constitutional ban to PAS. Since then almost every other state have opposed legalization of PAS. There are many terminally ill people that feel assisted suicide should be their choice, not something left to the government for debate. Assisted suicide should be legal in all states because those who suffer with a terminal illness that want to die should be able to end their life peacefully instead of living in agony. Almost everyone that lives in the United States has rights; the right to free speech, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but those that are dying from a terminal disease do not have many rights. They do not have a right to seek help to end their pain and suffering. They lose the right to be in charge of their own life. The pursuit of happiness seems to not exist for those that wish to end their life. For some having their pain and suffering ended would make them “happy” because they no longer have to live with pain, live with a disease that cripples them so they cannot enjoy life the way they want to. Why should ailing people be forced to withstand unreasonable...
Words: 2498 - Pages: 10
...Joyce Chen Aaron Lay ENC 1101 12 August 2013 Killing Them Softly Death is an ineluctable phenomenon, but it can be quick, possibly painless, or one can bear insufferable pain. It is stated in the Hippocratic Oath, “I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a pessary to cause an abortion” (United States). A physician should uphold his or her duty to save a person’s life, even though that person may be in immense amount of pain and rather die. This is where the debate over legalizing euthanasia comes in. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are very similar, however, dissimilar at the same time. In all technicality, physician-assisted suicide is the active form of euthanasia, and it gained popularity after the largely controversial case of Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Comprehending the basic knowledge of euthanasia and its history will help one to understand why euthanasia is not such an unacceptable practice, but also why legalizing euthanasia can benefit many people. Euthanasia is derived from “the Greek word for ‘good death’” (Terri). This “may imply that the Greeks and Romans who coined the term agreed on the basic issues [of euthanasia although,] history shows on us that this is not the case” (McDougall 3). Until Christianity came about, if the person is suffering from immense pain and/or the quality of life is futile, a physician’s duty to kill was equated to the duty to heal. Unfortunately, euthanasia...
Words: 1432 - Pages: 6
...with terminal lung cancer and her heart cannot withstand treatment via radiation or chemotherapy. She has less than six months to live. Day in and day out you pass her room and hear her crying out from the immense pain. The pain medications are no longer working. She’s tired of fighting, tired of hurting, and tired of waiting to die. After consideration and discussions with her family she has decided to ask the doctor to help and end her life. The doctor feels remorse for the elderly lady and wants to help but cannot decide if it is the ethical thing to do because he knows that what he’s being asked to do is considered physician-assisted suicide. How is physician-assisted suicide any different than regular suicide? Does the fact that a person is terminally ill make it right? Who gets to decide if it is right? These are questions people may ask themselves when deciding whether or not they think physician-assisted suicide is ethical. Whether it is requested or not, many would say it is unethical for a physician to deliberately cause death to a person. Physicians take an oath to first do no harm. Others may say that a person has the right to make his or her own decisions about his or her life. In this paper, I will explore each side of physician-assisted suicide and how it relates to virtue ethics, along with how I feel relativist would see the issue. Does physician-assisted suicide differ from regular suicide? Physician-assisted suicide is when a physician aides in...
Words: 2486 - Pages: 10
...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...
Words: 3217 - Pages: 13
...Physician-Assisted Suicide Suffering has always been a part of human existence. Request to end suffering by means of death through both physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have occurred since the beginning of medicine. By definition, assisted suicide is a type of active euthanasia in which a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means of death to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act. Usually by prescribing a lethal dose of drugs but the patient is responsible for performing the final act (Codes of Ethics). Even though physician- assisted suicide is illegal, many people and doctors believe that it should be legal to help terminally ill people at the end of their life while others believe it is against their beliefs and religion to commit any type of suicide. This paper is going to show why doctor assisted suicide should be legalized because at the end of their lives, most people do not want to suffer. Only a terminal ill patient is really aware of what it is like to experience intractable suffering; even with pain relievers. Those who have not experiences it cannot fully appreciate what effect it has on quality of life. Apart from physical pain, overcoming the emotional pain of losing independence is an additional factor that only the patient comprehends fully. In medicine prolongation of living may sometimes turn into prolongation of dying. Why should be a patient be forced experience a slow death? Many families don’t want to see...
Words: 1670 - Pages: 7
...that every human being born into this world has a "right to life," then it logically follows that every human being has a right to end their life (or a "right to die"). Because death is a part of life, a person's right to life logically assumes a right to not have that life. Thus, any law upholding a person's right to life has inherent within that same law a person's right to die, otherwise it would not be a right to life in the true sense of the term. But there is a legal battle going on in America right now over whether or not a person has a right to die. Does the government have the right to prolong your life by artificial means whether you desire it or not? With the passing of this law nationwide, you, as the voter will simply be saying, “It is YOUR choice” (Patashnik, 2004) The issue of “Having a Personal Right to Die,” has been long simmered beneath the surface in legal and political circles: under what circumstances do terminally injured and ill Americans have the right to choose to die? The Supreme Court made a definitive statement in the landmark 1990 case Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health that severely injured patients have a constitutional right to refuse medical treatment and die. But the court also ruled that states can require "clear and convincing" evidence of a patient's intent to forgo medical treatment, a rather high evidentiary standard to meet. History The actual word for “having a right to die” is Euthanasia. According to Dictionary.com, euthanasia...
Words: 4441 - Pages: 18
...customs, and have legal implications to consider. Physician assisted death is one of these very complex and controversial issues that all people will never agree on. Many questions arise in the debate of physician assisted death such as patients’ rights, physicians controlling the right if someone lives or dies, a patience’s mental state, a family member’s rights, religious beliefs of the parties involved and the law. Philosophers attempt to explain the different theories that people will use to argue their belief systems in terms of logic and reasoning. For example, some people may take the position of a deontologist who would argue that it is our moral duty to support and sustain life therefore assisted suicide should not be allowed. Unfortunately, this very emotional thought provoking debate is not a “black and white issue,” as most ethical arguments are not. In the situation of physician-assisted death, I disagree with the deontologist point of view that it is immoral for a physician to assist a patient in suicide. I believe as some relativist due, that as long as the patient is fully capable of making this decision and the patient is in a constant state of agony, then the patient has the right to make the choice to live or die. A relativist believes that morals are only relative to that particular society and if physician assisted, death was considered moral in that group then it would be considered a moral act. Neither theory is without flaws as some deontologist even...
Words: 2594 - Pages: 11
...clinical hallways or sits and waits in the drab and impersonal waiting rooms represents a very human side to the realm of medicine, and each person’s story during the medical process involves many choices by both the physician and the patient. It is important that choices of death are equally respected by physicians as are choices of life, which is why life-ending medication should be accepted legally for all citizens. In terms of “death with dignity”, dignity is considered the choice to live and die at will, without either life or death causing an affront to that dignity. In 1972 Arthur Morgan, then president of Antioch College in Ohio, recounts “[crying]...
Words: 699 - Pages: 3
...Should living wills over ride doctors and caretakers? THE STORY Imagine someone you love or better yet, imagine yourself lying in a hospital bed oblivious to the world around you, unable to move or show any signs of life, your own existence controlled by an I.V., a respiratory machine, and a feeding tube. In essence you are dead. Your body is no longer able to sustain life, its entire purpose is now replaced by a machine - you are being kept alive by artificial means. At this point the question arises - should you be kept alive by these means or should you be allowed to die a natural death? Unfortunately you are unable to answer this question because your voice is limited to a "beep" on a heart monitor machine. Who then is going to decide if you live artificially or die naturally? Who gets to play God? Well, if your family doesn't have your written consent in the form of a living will, to cease life support, then the doctor will make the ultimate decision for both you and your family. Most often this is the case. Even though writing a living will is just as easy if not easier than writing a death will, many people don't take the time to do so. Therefore, doctors have to debate the question of euthanasia – a question that each one of us should ponder long before we are put in this situation. Euthanasia is defined by The American Heritage Dictionary as "the action of Killing an individual for reasons considered to be merciful" (469). The word "euthanasia" comes from the Greek...
Words: 2285 - Pages: 10
...Some of the primary issues that have been a constant to this day are the right of ending a life via abortion, contraception, and the right to die. The Roe v. Wade case has been a foundational driving force in shaping the abortion policy (Lui, 2013). This case confronted a Texas law that banned abortion in all cases except life-threatening situations. Lui (2013) illustrates how the court ruled in a 7-2 vote where a conclusion was made by Judge Blackmun’s that stated “the Constitution does explicitly mention any right to privacy,” it is still guaranteed in amendments within the Bill of Rights that create zones of privacy (Lui, 2013). The only limitation to this right could be valid if there was a state interest. This fundamental case has transformed the laws and encouraged advocates to challenge exaggeratedly unclear statutes, which they felt violated the fundamental right to privacy or the right to equal protection laws (Lui, 2013). This case also provided rights to areas concerning...
Words: 786 - Pages: 4
...Is Euthanasia Immoral Active euthanasia is the willful taking of a person’s life to relieve them of pain and suffering (lethal injection) and passive euthanasia (discontinuing treatment) is to cease medical treatment to prevent the prolonging of pain and suffering resulting in death. The objective and purpose of this paper is to dispute and argue against the use of active euthanasia as a cautious selection of choice to end a persons’ life based on the purposes of relieving pain and suffering for that person using Kantian theory to best support this claim. This paper will consider the ethical complexities of euthanasia. It will take into consideration and briefly explain the ethical theories of deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics to analyze whether the use of active euthanasia is indeed a moral act and if it is morally permissible for doctors to end the lives of their patients by use of euthanasia and should laws allow it? Euthanasia is a form of suicide. People should not be allowed to kill themselves nor should others be allowed to assist them in doing it. The debate of the use of active and passive euthanasia and whether it should be morally permissible and accepted into law has been under much controversy over the years. Active euthanasia should not be permitted because it violates laws against killing, such as criminal homicide-the unlawful taking of the life of another. It is also contrary to the role of the physician which is to prolong the life of patients...
Words: 3317 - Pages: 14
...Euthanasia According to Webster’s dictionary, euthanasia is “intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit”. Clearly, everybody hopes that his or her death is gentle and easy, and bypasses pain and suffering and loss of dignity. However, the question of whether people can legally passively or actively end their own lives raise many issues. Some argue that by allowing euthanasia will permit people to look down on human life, as if it is not important and can be used for certain criminal circumstances. On the other hand, others argue that permitting people to take their own lives actually maintains human dignity, since people should not have to die painful deaths. I believe that human dignity and the value of human life can best be protected and preserved by permitting people to chose to stop treatments which prolong their lives, but without legalizing the active taking of lives. The philosopher Dyck is representative of the the position that euthanasia should never be legal, because it does not entail compassion for one, or one owns human dignity. Dyck proposes an alternative moral argument to euthanasia, the idea of “benemortasia.” Benemortasia is the belief that a “good” death doesn’t need to be painless or be fully controlled by the person.. Not only does Dyck argue that our definition of good death should change, but he has multiple arguments for why euthanasia is morally wrong. First off, one who causes someone...
Words: 998 - Pages: 4
...Death with Dignity Act Esther Harris November 29, 2015 Business Law – BA3310 Death with Dignity is a very controversial subject that has spanned many decades and continues to spark great debate from both sides of the subject. Death is a very personal matter, and those who support that law believe that a person should be able to die with dignity if he or she chooses to do so. Those who oppose the law believe that there should not be any human intervention into the process of dying. There are two distinct sides of the debate, but people should have the choice if he or she chooses to do so. Death with Dignity should become a legalized process throughout the United States. HISTORY Death with Dignity laws in several states allow mentally competent, terminally-ill adult residents to voluntarily request and receive a prescription medication, from a physician, so they can die in a peaceful, humane manner in a place and time of their choosing (Death with Dignity, 2015.) In layman’s terms, a person who is eighteen years or older and has received a terminal medical diagnosis, with less than six months to live, can request for a physician to provide him or her with a prescription of pentobarbital, which can be used at the patient’s discretion to end his or her life. Some states require that the patient request the medications in writing and then again verbally, while others only require the patient to make a verbal request. The patient’s primary diagnosis must be validated...
Words: 3359 - Pages: 14
...death” or “easy death.” Euthanasia occurs when one person ends the life of another person for the purpose of ending the killed person's pain or suffering. Assisted suicide is closely related to euthanasia. An assisted suicide occurs when one person gives another person the instructions and means to commit the suicide themselves. A few proposals to legalize euthanasia were made in the United States and Germany during the latter portion of the nineteenth century. Now, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg are the only jurisdictions in the world where laws specifically permit euthanasia or assisted suicide. The strongest argument made on behalf of legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide is that it, like abortion, is a “choice issue.” It is a persons ultimate civil right. The possibility of a predictable escape from suffering if it becomes overwhelming is important to many patients. To deprive a mentally competent, terminally ill person who wants to end their suffering in a peaceful way is disrespecting their civil rights. Over 90% of people with terminal illness will endure their situation, but between 5 and 10% find it intolerable and request euthanasia. Have you ever watched a person suffer terribly before finally dying? I have, and it is something I will never forget. I watched my father and my mother both die from lung cancer. ...
Words: 696 - Pages: 3
