Physician’s Assisted Suicide

In life, there is a cycle of life that everyone follows, however, there will be a time when sudden situations come and one is forced to make life changing decisions. One of the decisions is Allowing someone to die, what this means is simply there is a crucial decision in life that for any reason this is the only one that matters. It all comes down to an irreversible and incurable choice that needs to be made.

1. (problem – PAS): In today’s society, Physician Assisted Suicide is one of the most questionable and debatable issues. Many people feel that it is wrong for people to ask their doctor to help them end their life; while others feel it is their right to choose between the right to life and the right to death. “Suffering has always been a part of human existence.” (PAS) “Physicians have no similar duty to provide actions, such as assistance in suicide, simply because they have been requested by patients. In deciding how to respond to patients ' requests, physicians should use their judgment about the medical appropriateness of the request.” (Bernat, JL) Physician Assisted Suicide differs from withholding or discontinuing medical treatment, it consists of doctors providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication to aid in the use to end their life.

It’s one’s right to decide what happens to their body. Deciding one wants to end their life because they’re terminally ill and in pain should be permissible. It's no worse than a cancer patient refusing treatment, or a person being taken off life support. In fact, it might be better for people to be able to access physician assisted suicide as those suffering with chronic pain and no hope for a better future will be able to choose to die painlessly and with much more dignity. When the government refuses patient’s physician assisted suicide, people do at times decide to take matters into their own hands and attempt to end their own lives. This can go wrong and cause the patient to be in even more pain. This only includes those who are mobile enough to attempt suicide as well. The law against physician assisted suicide can also drive loved ones to end the patient’s suffering: so they no longer have to see them live in agony and misery. This causes many issues as the loved one may go to jail, or deal with psychological guilt for the rest of their lives. It seems better to allow people the ability to access physician assisted suicide as it’s no different than when one refuses treatment which is only prolonging

Many people argue that humans have the right to life but unknowingly they agree that they have a right to death as well. Just as a coin has two sides: heads or tails so does the human life, it has life and death. Life cannot occur without death. As you live your practice your right to life and as you die you practice your right to die. With that being said, everyone should have the right to end their life if and only if they are terminally ill with no chances of living beyond their expected death

People who support physician-assisted suicide as a rightful death are unaware of the amount pain a patient is undergoing; therefore they assume it is wrong for them to refuse their decision on how they want to end their lives. Doctors fulfill their patients’ planned death because they believe it is a merciful, ethical, and beneficent act. Patients have the right to decide whether to prolong their death or end it anticipated (Ersek). It seems wrong to take away a patient’s one and only wish and others need to have the decency towards the patient to respect their decision. In a way, doctors and loved ones are dictating the way the patient should live their lives. If the decision was up to anyone, it would be in the rightful hands of the patient.

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).

Many people have been faced with having to deal with hard truths of both life and death. One of these decisions that can be fronted to a person with a terminal illness may be what to do next. With what can be considered looming doom, one has to ingest the decisions of self, family and the pain that lies ahead. The debate over physician assisted suicide has been a long time argument wielding both positive and negative views exactly how a person should proceed once a decision has been made. Three questions are often asked in the attempt to argue the case for physician assisted suicide, that of legality, ethicalness, and morality. In the long run, the debate between the cause, effect and personal ideology that is social

Physician-assisted suicide is, “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 aware of the patient’s intent,” as defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Though today it more commonly known as euthanasia.

(Interview) The patients have their own decisions and wants on how they want to be treated, allow them to have a voice and speak for themselves. Everyone would like to be allowed a respectable, painless death, so we must allow one for everyone else who wants one. We cannot limit or accuse those who chose physicians-assisted suicide and the ones who don’t chose it, we have many medical advances today, such as nursing home and hospice care, but they are not always enough to cure or stop any pain that someone may be in; physicians-assisted suicide is the only answer to this problem. (Interview) Everyone will make plans to ensure that the end of our life remains in our own personal control. Just as we write wills to dispose of our prized possessions, we can make decisions about what medical treatment is acceptable and what is not. (Euthanisa) You can even choose someone to make your health care decisions if you are unable to. This is called the Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care or Health Care Proxy; and that individual you so choose should be someone you trust, who knows what you want, and will fight for your rights. (Euthanasia) In a survey of thirty thousand Americans over the age of fifty-five, sixty-five percent said that people with a terminal illness should have a

What is the single common denominator that unites all of humanity? That every person will die. Death is a macabre subject, but it is a universal one that entangles itself within our lives. Even while living, death is omnipresent, and it has remained unchanged throughout the ages. What have changed are the definitions of death and its timeline. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek for ‘good death’. While that definition is rooted in etymologic studies and not open for interpretation, the very idea of a ‘good death’ is quite the opposite. What is a good death? Who determines ‘good’? And the question that is under much debate and discussion: Should anything be done to make it so? That, in the form of physician-assisted suicide (PAS), is one of the pressing topics that faces healthcare today. It is imperative that healthcare professionals, particularly nurses who bridge the divide between physicians and patients, are aware of this issue and its components.

Modern medicine no longer prolongs life, but rather prolongs death and because of this, we need to rethink the idea of death itself especially within terminal illness and treatments. No one should be pressed towards suicide by the government however, they should not be denied that right. In the words of supreme court justice William Brennan said, “an ignoble end, steeped in decay is abhorrent. A quiet, proud, death, bodily integrity intact is a matter of extreme consequence” (Intelligence Squared Debates). Anyone who wants to die should have a right to do so. It is not up to the government to control the personal decisions of its subjects and it isn’t right. When someone feels like a burden economically and/or mentally, that person should have the ability to end their suffering. When a doctor comes to the realization that medicine will no longer be able to rehabilitate someone who is burdened with a sickness, they should

Should a patient that is very ill have the choice of committing suicide with the help of professionals? This question has long been argued amongst religious leaders, jurists, and medical ethicists. Some say that it is right to give the patients with diseases or disabilities to get assist from experts in ending themselves to stop their pain, it also helps bring relief from pain through death, and it helps save money for healthcare to others that fight. Others disagree on the right to die act, because it goes against religion, the system could abused and legalized murder, and the ill person have a chance in recovering in full health. Even though the federal government doesn 't allow this idea, some states actully have this policy.

We all die at some point. Though, none of us really want to die, death itself is inevitable. So, what is the most important thing when it comes to someone who is terminally ill? Would you rather them prolong their lives at the cost of high medical care while their health deteriorates day after day, just to make them comfortable until they die as a result of their disease? Or, should we instead focus on the quality of one’s life, whose pain and suffering is a fate in which they consider worse than death? Euthanasia is both an ethical and logical option, because the result would bring peace to those suffering individuals who are otherwise facing a lengthy and sometimes horrific death, it would reduce health care costs tremendously, and vital organs can be saved and used on patients that are curable.

There are many arguments in health care that bring about debate. The is one however that stirs up as much emotion, politically, scientifically, emotionally and spirituality and this argument is whether or not humans should have the legal right to die when they choose, intentionally, to end their life by their own hand, to end their own perceived suffering and pain. Every American who was born in the United States was born with the privilege of having rights. Choosing to die with dignity should without a doubt be one of those choices and rights.

If you knew you were dying and were suffering from endless pain would you still want to live? Imagine yourself or a loved one not being able to walk, see, and barely breathe on their own let alone speak, due to a terminally ill condition. This is a real situation for many people. These people should be able to have control over their lives and choose when it’s time to end their suffering.