Essay On The Pros And Cons Of Physician Assisted Suicide

5. Prohibiting organ transplant based on patient socio-economic status is discriminatory. Society should not make eligible for a transplant only those persons who can afford it, because that would mean that only those with financial means would be eligible. One is not more entitled to life based on their financial status. To the same point, a persons ability to contribute to society cannot be considered. It is unfair to make assumptions about what one is and is not able to contribute to society. A disabled person who never is seen to contribute to society through taxes may spend their life as a motivational speaker, encouraging children to succeed despite adversity. Is that person less worthy of a transplant than the CEO who pays a high amount in taxes? I don't think so.
Physician-assisted deaths have pros and cons. Physicians are sworn to do no harm, and there are points in life where the quality is so diminished that to force one to live based on quantity is harmful. Patients have a right to live life on their terms, and the same should apply to death. If a physician is unable to aid the patient in this decision from a rational, informed place, that patient may feel obligated to find another means to reach the same end. The extensive process and requirements involved help to ensure that both the patient and the physician are making the best decision based on the circumstances. A large con of physician assisted suicide is the stigma that suicide carries. On the outside looking in, it is challenging to be empathetic to the person who is deciding to end their life or the physician who aids in that process. Without giving the topic thoughtful consideration, it is easy for an outsider to jump to a negative reaction and take a stance against physician assisted suicide. That being said, the rights of the patients and physicians to make that decision, protected by the laws of their state, should be respected no matter what opinion an onlooker may