Physician Assisted Suicide And Euthanasia

Thesis: Physician assisted suicide and euthanasia ethical issues from the prospective of health care professionals and ethicists on both sides of the debate holding implications for the practices of critical care.

Physician Assisted Suicide/Dying is a medical practice surrounding the accelerated process of death among patients who – typically – have a terminal medical disorder that will either end the life of the patient, or have them live in suffering, pain, in a state of life they deem less than minimally good, or less than a life worth living. According to a study done in 1995, approximately 88 percent of physicians interviewed claimed that they had received at the very least, one request for PAS/D. (Maas, et al., 1996) As the practice becomes more commonly considered – and more importantly more commonly accepted – it is logical to assume these percentages will have increased. This increase due to not only more patient requests, but also due to the

Who gets to make the choice whether someone lives or dies? If a person has the right to live, they certainly should be able to make the choice to end their own life. The law protects each and everyone’s right to live, but when a person tries to kill themselves more than likely they will end up in a Psychiatric unit. Today we hear more and more about the debate of Physician assisted suicide and where this topic stands morally and ethically. Webster 's dictionary defines Physician assisted suicide as, suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of the patient 's intent (Webster, 1977).

Keating discusses the differences between euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Euthanasia is where the doctor gives the lethal medication, where physician-assisted suicide, the patient presses the bottom that gives them the medicine. She mentions Brittany Maynard, who took advantage of the “death with dignity act,” and states she would be loved to the very end, implying she should not have used PAS. Also, she states that the Netherlands was the first country to have passed euthanasia legally. The last final point that was given was the use of the word “dignity.” Dignity implies honor or choice, meaning death without the use of PAS is none worthy. This author seems to be biased and not very detailed. Also, she seems to just state facts,

In today’s society, suicide, and more controversially, physician assisted suicide, is a hotly debated topic amongst both every day citizens and members of the medical community. The controversial nature of the subject opens up the conversation to scrutinizing the ethics involved. Who can draw the line between morality and immorality on such a delicate subject, between lessening the suffering of a loved one and murder? Is there a moral dissimilarity between letting someone die under your care and killing them? Assuming that PAS suicide is legal under certain circumstances, how stringent need be these circumstances? The patient must be terminally ill to qualify for voluntary physician-assisted suicide, but in the eyes of the non-terminal patients with no physical means to end their life, the ending of their pain through PAS may be worth their death; at what point is the medical staff disregarding a patient’s autonomy? Due to the variability of answers to these questions, the debate over physician-assisted suicide is far from over. However, real life occurrences happen every day outside the realm of debate and rhetoric, and decisions need to be made.

The ethics of physician-assisted suicide of terminally ill patients is a very ambiguous topic. Critics see physician-assisted deaths as normalization of the growing death culture that started in 1973 with the legalization of abortion.

Death is a touchy enough subject for people; add in the idea of assisted suicides and there’s an uproar in society. Euthanasia or physician assisted suicide is a very controversial topic in our society today. Physician assisted suicide by definition is “suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician aware of the patient’s intent (Merriam-Webster). There are two modes of looking at assisted suicides; either it’s seen as an absurd immoral decision to take away the life of someone or it’s seen as a logical and peaceful release from pain and misery. There’s this idea that asking a healthcare provider to help you end your life is unfair and unnecessary, no matter how much a person is suffering suicide is not justified. People fear patients changing their minds, physicians being severely impacted by this, and families not agreeing with the decision making it hard to cope. On the other side people believe that it’s freedom of choice to choose to be medically assisted with a suicide; this is a right the patient has. Some believe if you’re in pain and dying why should you be forced to stay in a painful state of life. Freedom of choice versus life isn’t ours to take away. If you were in a terminally ill patients position, what would you do?

Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a heavily debated topic; people have very strong opinions about whether or not people should have to right to die. People taking their own lives is something quite frowned upon in our society, usually those who commit suicide are depressed and need to seek help; people see this a simply being weak, taking the “coward’s way out.” Those who would benefit from PAS would be people with terminal illnesses who have no hope of getting better.

Physician-assisted death has been a hotly debated subject in the later 20th and early 21st century. The subject of physician-assisted death and euthanasia brings about a multitude of ethical dilemmas and causes people to dig deep into personal morals and self-evaluation. In this paper the different types of euthanasia will be defined, Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act and similar the laws enacted in Washington, Montana, and Vermont will be assessed, and the roles and viewpoints of healthcare professionals will be discussed.

Euthanasia, is the act of killing a person painlessly for reasons of mercy. It is known worldwide by many people, in many countries. It is illegal in the United States, but Physician Assisted Suicide is legal in 6 states. Physician Assisted Suicide is the voluntary ending of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with direct or indirect assistance of a physician. The debate on if Euthanasia should be legal has been going on for hundreds of years, really becoming prominent in the 1920’s then dying down. But today this topic is as strong as it was almost a hundred years ago. In the book Taking Sides by Stephen Satris, however has two opposing views by two different people. Both are philosophers, and these are their sides.

The civil argument in the U.S. over whether or not to authorize physician-assisted suicide and active euthanasia has reached new levels of vehemence. Oregon, California, Vermont, and Washington (and Montana, via court ruling) have become the first states to legalize physician-assisted suicide. There has, too, been campaigning, ballot measures, bills, and litigation in other states in attempts to legalize one or both practices. Supporters increasingly urge either absolute legalization or another form of legitimation, through claims of “mercy killing” when compared to homicide. As stated by representatives of the Ethics and Human Rights Committee, “Many people fear a painful and protracted death or desire more control over the dying process” (209).

Albert Camus once quoted, “But in the end, one needs more courage to live than to kill them self.” Today I will be discussing the topic of Euthanasia also known as “assisted suicide.” The word originated from the Greeks, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia refers to the ending of one’s life, primarily to end suffering and pain. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and generates many political and religious debates. Although euthanasia is illegal in Canada, in some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the American states of Washington, Oregon and Montana, euthanasia is a legal and common practice.

The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu” which means well and “thanatos” which is derived from death. Euthanasia literally means a “good death” (Davis F.A., 2013, p. 858-859). A good death is different to each person but usually constitutes having friends and family close, dying somewhere familiar, and dying in a comfortable manner with no pain. Voluntary stopping of eating and drinking is beneficial to the terminally ill patient in this way because it helps the family and the patient experience personal closure and it assists with a peaceful end to life. People also view it as an ethically appropriate decision (less controversial) to forgo an unwanted life prolonging measure than active euthanasia. The terminally ill using VSED are in control of their decision until the very end. They can choose at any time to opt out and begin eating/ drinking again. Patient’s die in a very dignified manner of their own accord instead of when their disease tells they should “go” which parallels their want for autonomy in making that choice. VSED is a more humane and dignified way to abide by the wishes of patients who wish to hasten their own death.

Life and death is a controversial topic. To most, death is negative. Within life you laugh, smile, communicate and create new experiences both good and bad. It is a human right to be alive. Although, if people have a right to live they also have the right to die. Tragic things happen everyday because life has a very dark sense of humor. After certain experiences life becomes more like a continuous cycle of suffering than anything else. The laughs become riddled with pain and life becomes dull in the best moments. With strict restrictions, physician assisted suicide (also known as Physician Aid-in-Dying) will offer a more dignified and comfortable way for terminally-ill patients to end their suffering.

Doctor assisted suicide is a topic that has recently become a much larger debated issue than before. A timeline put together by Michael Manning and Ian Dowbigging shows that prior to Christianity, doctor assisted suicide was something that was tolerated, and was not heavily questioned (2). Yet, in the 13th century, Thomas Aquinas had made a statement about suicide as well as doctor assisted suicide, and his words shaped the Catholic teaching on suicide into what they teach today. Beginning in the 17th century, Common Law tradition frowned upon suicide, as well as assisting in suicide, and the colonies had adopted the Common Law principles. (2) In 1828, New York passed a law completely outlawing the assistance of suicide, and made it to where whomever assisted in the suicide could be tried for murder. In 1976, California became the first state to allow patients to withdrawal themselves from life saving medicines, and this Natural Death Act was seen as a gateway to assisted suicide. (3-7) As controversy about California 's Natural Death Act increased, Pope John Paul II released a statement in 1980 which opposed to killing someone out of mercy, but allowed the increased use of painkillers (8). Although, in 1994 Oregon passed their Death with Dignity act, and with it came incredible amounts of backlash. Yet, in 2008 Washington state passed the same act to legalize doctor assisted suicide. (10-12)