Should People Have Autonomy over Their End of Life Decisions

Imagine laying in a hospital bed living everyday in extreme pain with no hope of getting better. This scenario explains what many people go through everyday, which is a living with a terminal illness. M. Lee, a science historian, and Alexander Stingl a sociologist, define terminal illness as “an illness from which the patient is not expected to recover even with treatment. As the illness progresses death is inevitable” (1). There are not many options for the terminally ill besides dying a slow and painful death, but assisted suicide could be best option for these patients. Assisted suicide is “any case in which a doctor gives a patient (usually someone with a terminal illness) the means to carry out their own suicide by using a lethal dose of medication” (Lee and Stingl 1). Some feel that assisted suicide is unnecessary because it is too great of a controversy and will only cause problems in society. However, assisted suicide should be legal in the United States as long as there are strict regulations to accompany it.

Secondly, the patient should be capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him or herself. Thirdly, the patient must be diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death within six months.  Interested patients must also provide the request for termination in writing to the physician. In addition, physicians are expected to inform patients to alternative means of care including hospice care and other medications. Only after precautions evaluation, the laws then permit patients to make the ultimate life ending decision.

The ethical dilemma of this highly controversial subject will continue to split our approach to the notion of assisted suicide. As we age, we come to terms with our own mortality, how we choose to leave this world isn’t always up us. For those who suffer from a terminal fate, maybe they should have the choice, and those who understand their current condition can provide them the dignity they deserve without repercussions. The only way we as a society can move ahead, is to find a common

People base euthanasia and physician assisted suicide on a moral and legal stand point. A health care physicians obligation is to provide support to their patients and to the families throughout treatment and death. Autonomous individuals should be free to decide their own fate when an important life choice concerns a private matter, and when the individual making that choice is near death and suffering without relief, then the state should not interfere unless it can prove that interference is necessary to protect vulnerable third parties (Schafer). People should have the right to request that their life be terminated through medical methods.

Although the arguments on both sides of the debate are powerful, the provision of safeguards that would inevitably follow the legalisation of assisted dying would reduce, if not prevent the fears of those who oppose the change in legislation. The fear of regulating requests and judging the involvement of third parties would be overcome by the provision of a safeguard which requires any request to be assessed by two independent doctors (Kutner, 1969, p545). By having two doctors independently examine the request of the patient, the consultation would ensure that those who are pursuing assisted dying have been fully informed and have considered all other alternatives, such as the provision of palliative care (Lewis et al, 2012, p66). In theory,

Voluntary Euthanasia has been considered a controversial topic for many decades. The idea of committing an act that involves the taking of human life is not one that many people would care to discuss openly. The main argument is that a person who has been diagnosed with an incurable illness and is in extreme pain and their ability to move has been limited, while that person still has control over their destiney should they be allowed take their own life (Bowie, R.2001). The worldwide debate weather one should be allowed to end a life is still one of the biggest ethical issues. The attempt to providing the rights of the individual is in conflict with the moral values of society. Voluntary Euthanasia has been highly rejected by many religious and pro-life institutions.

This article begins by referencing an incident of a 74-year-old woman in the Netherlands whom requested euthanasia for her chronic dementia. The author (Lane) explains how euthanasia is so commonplace in the Netherlands and how they use subjective criteria such as “"unbearable suffering," "due care" and, fuzziest of all, especially in cases of dementia or mental illness, a ‘voluntary, well-considered request’”. The author goes on to explain how the current euthanasia laws are problematic and “In some cases, physicians knowingly pushed the limits of [the] law”. The author goes on to conclude that if euthanasia were to be expanded beyond what it is now, the impaired patient’s ability to consent would become doubtful or null. The legislation in

The “Right to Die” (Euthanasia) should be further looked into as an option for terminally ill patients and not considered unethical. There has been an issue concerning the topic of “Human Euthanasia” as an acceptable action in society. The research compiled in conjunction with an educated opinion will be the basis for the argument for voluntary Euthanasia in this paper. Patients suffering from an incurable illness, exhausting all medical treatments, should be given the freedom of choice to continue their path of suffering or end it at their own will. “The Right to die” is not suicide, as you are fully aware that death will be certain, as Euthanasia spares the individual of additional pain.

Autonomy emphasizes on patients desires and demand. Physician-assisted suicide goes against the moral law to kill oneself in instances when continued living produces more pain than satisfaction. On maters ethics physician assisted suicide is supported by the autonomy principle. However, physicians should make efforts in assisting patients to understand the medical options in their hands as well as to ensure that patients undergo full psychological analysis in the event they request for physician-assisted suicide. Mental depression resulting from long term suffering due to diseases or a spiritual crisis might cause patient to request for physician-assisted suicide. Patient empowerment, by both family members and physicians, plays a vital role when considering undertaking patient assisted suicide by informing them about the implications of their decisions.

With major advancement in medical treatments, it is now possible to keep a patient alive, which would not have been possible in former times. This has made end of life issue one of the most controversial issues in healthcare. Medical improvements have set the stage for ethical and legal controversies about not only the patient’s rights but also the family’s rights and the medical profession’s proper role. It is critical that any decision made in such situation is ethical and legal to preserve the rights of the patient and also protect the healthcare institution involved. It is very important when making decisions to discontinue treatments to make sure all other alternatives have been explored.

There have been organizations supporting the legalization of voluntary euthanasia in Britain and in the US for years now. They have had some public support but were unable to achieve the goal of legalizing voluntary euthanasia in either nation. In England a society, called “The Voluntary Euthanasia Society” was founded to make voluntary euthanasia legal for an adult that is suffering. The first group that was formed in the US that was for the legalization of euthanasia was the Hemlock Society. This societie’s purpose was to support the decision of a person to die and to offer support when a person is ready to die. The only way the society would support a person was if the person believed in euthanasia for a certain amount of time before requesting to die. “On May 5, 1998, the Voluntary Euthanasia Research Foundation announced its establishment. Its purpose is to make available up-to-date information on developments in technology and methods for those seeking voluntary euthanasia” (Fox 134).

What would you consider a “reasonable decision”? If you had someone’s last seconds at the tips of your fingers, would you fulfill their final wishes, even if they went against your innate values? Where would a physician, or you, draw the line? These questions, among others, have been the cornerstone of many conversations regarding euthanasia. This tricky ethical dilemma attracts attention primarily from individuals in the medical field, but also society as a whole. What doctor would decide that the patient is in the “right” state of mind?

Euthanasia is a highly debatable and controversial topic that should ultimately be left up to personal decision. On the pro side of the euthanasia battle, there are organizations that conduct research on euthanasia to improve the quality of the information on hastened dying options such as, The Euthanasia Research Guidance Organization. Exit International is another organization that sets itself apart by taking a civil rights approach to topic of euthanasia. In accordance, The Death with Dignity National Center website states that, “the California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, Death with Dignity laws allow mentally competent, terminally ill adult state residents to voluntarily request and receive a prescription medication so that they can die in a peaceful, human manner in a place and time of their choosing” (Death with Dignity National Center, n.d.). This

   Euthanasia or assisted suicide would not only be available to people who are terminally ill. This popular misconception is what this essay seeks to correct. There is considerable confusion on this point, perhaps further complicated by statements in the media.

With the many debates on what is and is not ethical with the end of life care, humans are faced with more ethical issues. All humans have an idea of what they believe to be moral or ethical. Looking at ethical concepts helps us as a society determined what treatment may be ethical or moral for a person during a chronic or terminal stage in their life. One ethical concept that plays a large role in death and dying is autonomy. The freedom for a patient to have control over their own health care decisions. If a patient has the ability to make informed