Physician Assisted Suicide

They claim health care costs would be lowered, doctors would have more time for “savable” patients, and that it would relieve unavoidable suffering. In actuality, physician assisted suicide is completely impractical. Allowing physician assisted suicide would have very negative results. It could cause complacency in the treatment process that could be dangerous. Premature death eliminates the chance for recovery. Medical discoveries can be made before the natural end to person’s life, and in many cases, the desire for death is not because of intolerable pain, but are the result of the patient fearing intolerable pain. (Oregon Public Health Division). Another big factor to the desire for a hastened death is the presence of a recognizable and treatable mental disorder. Patients are at very high risk for mental illness especially depression. Pain is not the reason patients are asking for their death. “Although pain and other factors such as lack of family support contribute to the wish for death, recent research has confirmed that none is as significant as the presence of depression, which researchers have found to be the only predictor of the desire for death.” (Hendin). Terminally ill patients who have depression are more likely to request physician assisted suicide. “In cancer patients, depression was ‘the major risk factor for suicidality’ and depressed patients ‘were 4 times more likely to have a

A tough issue on the rise in the United States is whether or not Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) should be legal. Physician Assisted Suicide allows a physician to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a patient to end their life. However, the patient has to take the drugs on their own. PAS would be only offered to those suffering from a terminal illness with less than six months to live. The way these patients go about treating and or living with a terminal illness is a very hard decision to make. This is the first time they have been given the choice of how they wish to die. PAS is an option that allows the sick to avoid the immense pain in their final months. The issue however, is whether this allows them to die with dignity or if it allows them to be taken advantage of.

Imagine suffering day to day with consistent hospital visits, numerous medications, and unbearable pain for the next six months of your life, then being told that dying peacefully is not a granted privilege. Then imagine not being able to die in a controlled and dignified process like you prefer to. How would that affect the way you feel about death and the rest of your life you have left? Millions of people suffering from terminal illnesses consider physician-assisted suicide, but their wishes are rejected due to state and government beliefs. In fact, only five states out of fifty have a law permitting citizens the right to participate in physician-assisted suicide. That leaves just only 10% of the United States entitling critically ill patients to die with nobility. However, many citizens are commencing to lean toward physician-assisted suicides once they ascertain they hold a terminal illness.

I believe physician-assisted death is morally permissible if one relied on the philosophical methodology of utilitarianism. Physician-assisted death can be defined as a patient administered form of death prescribed by a physician. Not to be confused with euthanasia, the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent patient for their alleged benefit. Physician-assisted suicide comes with a multitude of legal safeguards to protect certain communities, either physician or patient, who might abuse the practice. In order for a patient to qualify they must fulfill the following: The patient must be at least 18 years of age, must be a resident of the state legalized to practice physician-assisted death, two physicians must evaluate the patient

Who has the right to decide when it is our time to go? Should the government, the insurance company, or ourselves decide? Should nature be able to take its course with no interference from humans?

Patient assisted suicide, death with dignity, euthanasia or patient assisted death; whichever one that is used, they all mean the same tragic thing. The life of another human being is more than what comes to eye. For years now, everyone has been arguing whether physicians have the right to assist with patient assisted death. The man who started this epidemic was known as Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Kevorkian was a pathologist who assisted the acute and critically ill with ending his or her life. After Kevorkian spent years battling the legality of his actions with the courts, he ended up spending eight years in prison. Today, there are only 7 locations that allow physicians to do this: Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Montana, Colorado, and Washington DC. At the start of this whole situation, doctors would attempt to use very high dosages of analgesic, pain relieving medication, to end a patients life; however, that ended very quickly. Shortly after that time, doctors would use the same drugs administered for lethal injections. Typically a three step process: the first shot induces unconsciousness, the second shot causes muscle paralysis and respiratory arrest, and the final shot causes cardiac arrest, which ceases heart contractions. Currently, doctors use a drug called

There are many facts or opinions brought up against the physician-assisted suicide. One of the most impactful oppositions is that the law goes against the Hippocratic Oath that states first do no harm. In the oath, the quote “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” The counter to that statement is that it is more harmful to do nothing for a terminally ill patient and force them to endure endless pain and suffering when their choice is to end their life (Pros & Cons, 2016). Another opinion against physician-assisted suicide is that by having it as an option it puts pressure on ill patients to take it, so that they are not a physical or financial burden to their families. Some religions see that the physician-assisted suicide is morally unethical. The Catholic Church views the law as morally wrong, killing of a human being, even by an act of omission to eliminate suffering, violates divine law, and offends the dignity of the human person (Death with Dignity.org, 2016). The pope has quoted “Freedom to kill is not a true freedom, but a tyranny that reduces the human being into slavery.” Another opposing viewpoint considers the chance for abuse or misuse by family for monetary gain. One of the hypothetical scenarios is that the family may influence or fool a dying patient into thinking that the suicide is the best for everyone so that they may collect on an inheritance or insurance policy

Physician-assisted suicide is a personal, divisive, and greatly debated issue in the United States of America. The contentious nature of physician-assisted suicide makes it ideal to be solved by a national referendum. The American Medical Association defines physician-assisted suicide as “when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means and/ or information to enable the patient to perform the life ending act.” Only four states in the United States of America have legalized physician-assisted suicide; however, a recent Gallup poll showed that fifty-one percent of Americans supported legalizing physician-assisted suicide. The distinct divisions among the American public on whether or not physician-assisted suicide

Hospice care has not been around for very longs but it is one of the fastest growing medical fields in the country, with over 1.58 million patients being cared for in 2010 alone. Hospice is an important part of caring for terminally ill patients and helps the families and loved ones to grieve.

Since the turn of the 20th century, modern medicine has made significant advancements in treating the progression of disease. Diseases such as tuberculosis, pneumonia, and several cancers are easily managed in today’s medical community. Yet, just a century ago, those diseases would ensure a swift and unfortunate demise. Since the mid 1960s, the emergence of technological advancements and treatment modalities has increased the U.S. population’s life expectancy. Presently, life can be extended for years due to the development and use of ventilators, gastro-intestinal tubes, and hemodialysis in terminally ill patients. With of the spark medical innovation, an unanticipated dilemma has developed within the holds of modern medicine and the U.S.

Physician-assisted suicide is “often defined by its supporters as helping an individual who is suffering to die with dignity. It is often considered the merciful thing to do” (all.org). It is currently legal in six states, including California as of October 2015. I, as well as seven out of every ten Americans, believe that legalization of assisted suicide should be nationwide (Ross, “Dying Dutch: Euthanasia Spreads across Europe”). Patients all over the country experience life-threatening illness that is often coupled with excruciating pain, physical and emotional. Legalizing assisted suicide provides patients with the option to end their lives with dignity and peace. This also allows patients to no longer feel like a burden on family, friends,

People who die of a prolonged illness or had a predictable steady decline due to a condition like heart disease, diabetes, or Alzheimer’s disease account for ninety percent of deaths each year (Girsh 45). Most of the people who died suffered greatly because of their disease. However, if euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide was legal, the suffering could have been severely lessened. People who oppose both options have many reasons why euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should not be legal. The Hippocratic Oath, the fear they could be abused by the poor, Nazi-styled teachings might return, or people may feel coerced, and the right to die is not an actual right are a few examples of what the people who oppose euthanasia or physician-assisted

Imagine yourself lying in bed at the hospital hooked up to all sorts of machines that are just barely keeping you alive. Imagine the pain and suffering you are in on a daily bass and the medication being given to you isn’t cutting it any longer and all the doctors and nurses can do for you is just keep you comfortable. The doctors have literally given you no chance of survival and death is imminent. You have taken the time you have left to say your good-byes, came to terms with dying, and you are ready to leave this world. If you could choose to end your life instead of wasting away, would you take advantage of it?

I personally disagree with the American Medical Associations statement about physician assisted suicide. I believe that a physician’s role is to help a patient to the best of their ability, which also means to do all they can to relieve a patient’s pain and suffering.

Physician assisted suicide is requested by the terminally ill, typically when the pain from the illness is too much to handle and is not manageable through treatments or other medications. Assisted suicide is more of a broad term for helping someone die a good death, physician assisted suicide is where a medical doctor provides information and medication and the patient then administers the medications themselves. Euthanasia is also another term that is commonly heard, this refers to a medical doctor that voluntarily administers the lethal dose of medication to the patient when the patient requests it, due to not physically being able to do it themselves (Humphry, 2006). There pros and cons with this topic throughout the world, but is one of the biggest debated things here in the United States of America and to this day there are only five states that have legalized physician-assisted suicide (ProCon.org, 2015). The government should allow patients that are terminally ill the right to choose physician assisted suicide, why should they have to suffer when there is a way out.