To sum it all up, euthanasia should be allowed. One has the power of their life. Especially when it is causing them pain and the people around them. Having to either pay for another ill person in result to their family being ill when they are in pain can get very expensive. There are people who need the help and the money more than the people who only have a few months…
There are two factors that have contributed to euthanasia’s distinction with how the world is today. They are both an increasing sense of self-determinism and medical revolution that have the potential of prolonging human life (Michigan, 2006). People think that just because there are things like hospice and medication that euthanasia shouldn’t even be an option. But what people don’t know is that even with the best medication and the patient being made completely comfortable, it is not the pain that causes people to ask for what people call a “hastened death”, but the humiliation and suffering that accompanies most terminal disorders.…
For decades, the public, government, and physicians have been debating over the “Death with Dignity Act” or “Physician-Assisted Suicide.” It started back in the Ancient Greek and Rome time. The debate originated around the Hippocratic Oath and the condemnation of the practice. With the upsurge of Christianity, many physicians continued to condemn the practice. Within the last two centuries the public has spurned many discussions about Physician-assisted suicide and Euthanasia from many different historic perspectives (Procon.org, 2012). Although this debate has been lengthy and many of the issues discussed over the centuries are repetitive, new ideas and concerns do emerge with the current debate. What do you think when you here assisted suicide? Would you want your family member to suffer with an illness that has put them in so much pain that they cannot function? Personally, I would not want to see my family member suffer in pain while they are dying with no cure.…
Supporters of assisted suicide believe that this act benefit terminally ill patients by relieving their suffering. This is probably one of the reasons why Netherlands court determined that a physician is allowed to prevent severe and irreversible suffering, even if it reduces patient’s life (Bosshard et al, 2002). The act of assisted suicide or active euthanasia is allowed in Netherlands, Switzerland and Oregon under different conditions and legislations. The situation can be seen differently in places, where by moral and legal discourse; assisted suicide is interpreted as the freedom or right of the individual as in Switzerland and some states of US. From the ethical perspective, patient’s choice of suicide represents an expression of self- determination and while exercising self- determination people take responsibility of their lives and for the kind of person they become. They have a right to refuse the life- sustaining treatment if they don’t want to suffer anymore and according to law, physicians must respect their decisions to forgo life- sustaining treatment that are capable of making their end of life decisions. By refusing life- sustaining treatment, terminally ill people know that they are going to die soon and in order to avoid suffering or pain they ask physicians for assistance to end their…
The argument that has sent the world into a tailspin is whether or not people suffering from terminal or excruciatingly painful illness have the right to take their own lives by way of physician-assisted suicide. Proponents contend that what one does with one 's life is of no consequence to anyone else -- that it is humane to allow someone to be relieved of constant – if not unbearable – discomfort. On the other hand, critics claim that the act of euthanasia is nothing more than a fabricated form of murder. Indeed, both sides have pertinent points when it comes to understanding and assessing the conflict, but euthanasia supporters have a significantly stronger argument when considering the bigger picture. Clearly, physician-assisted suicide is not only the right thing to do for someone seeking such a decision, but it is ethical and humane for a physician to abide by the patient 's wish.…
Euthanasia is a social issue in today’s world because not only does it affect the lives of those who are terminally ill and/or comatose, and the physicians who have been entrusted with their care, but it also affects the patient’s ability to have control over their own life, whether they are aware of this decision or not, which is one of the reasons why euthanasia has become such a controversial issue around the globe. Caddell and Newton (1995) define euthanasia as “any treatment initiated by a physician with the intent of hastening the death of another human being who is terminally ill and in severe pain or distress with the motive of relieving that person from great suffering” (p. 1,672). Even though the concept of great…
A hotly debated issue regarding the quality of life for terminally ill patients revolves around the morality and legal implications of euthanasia, or physician assisted suicide which is defined as the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease, or in an irreversible coma. There are already a multitude of laws in place regulating physician assisted suicide in some states and countries, as well as laws preventing the practice. But despite these preventative laws physician assisted suicide remains an underground practice to relieve patient suffering. In lieu of the supposed moral issues associated with physician assisted suicide,…
Many of us have felt the pain of watching a loved one’s life slowly diminish in a hospital bed. Today, modern medicine and doctors can only go so far to care for terminally ill patients. Even with the knowledge of this country’s best medicine and most extraordinary doctors, many of the terminally ill suffer persistently; they become unhappy, and some are not able to fend for themselves in ways healthy individuals find to be easy and are able to do. The simple every day actions begin to be tremendous struggles such as eating, moving, and even communicating. In extreme cases, terminally ill patients may no longer find the will or strength to move forward. Physician-assisted death can be constructed to have reasonable laws, which still protect against its abuse and the value of human life, easing the patients suffering when nearing the end of their life. Physician-assisted death is ethical and is a compassionate response to unbearable suffering. Physicians should be required by law to help terminally ill patients, with no hope, which have a strong desire to end their lives.…
Euthanasia should be legalized to allow terminally ill patients the opportunity to prepare for their deaths, avoid unnecessary pain and die with dignity. Euthanasia is “the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.” (Am. Heritage) The literal meaning of the word euthanasia, "‘an easy or happy death,’ from the Greek word eu- ‘good’, and thanatos ‘death’"(Harper), is proof in itself that the whole idea is to help people and not to belittle the value of life. The fact that suffering animals can be put out of their misery, but suffering people are forced to stay alive and endure the pain, is inhumane. Legalizing euthanasia would be no more than an act of mercy allowing medical personnel to bring slow, painful deaths to a halt.…
Euthanasia the assisted killing of a terminal patient is a controversial topic that medical professionals cannot avoid. Many health professionals face the ethical dilemma of whether or not they should end a patient’s misery. Patient’s rights are always the top priority, doctors are taught to find every possible way to treat and cure the patient, but the possibility of the patient being irremediable to what extent is the health care professionals willing to go to give the patient their wishes?…
Assisted suicide is defined as a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, medical practitioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death. An assisted suicide is usually a situation where a patient is terminally ill, and a doctor prescribes a lethal dose of medication for the patient to ingest when they choose. Another way this is done is when the doctor discontinues giving certain treatment, at request of the patient. The conflict of whether assisted suicide is right or wrong has many different branches in the aspects of ethical, social, and legal issues, often with two main arguments; on the supporting side, people say that everyone should have the right to decide the time, place, and circumstances of his/her death, while the opposing side of this issue state that assisted suicide infers that certain people’s lives are…
Who are we to say when we should die? Are we trying to play God, or do we just want the right to end the inevitable a little sooner than God’s plan for us? This paper will discuss pros and cons of euthanasia with stories and research. Such as the case of a ninety five year old comma patient, whose family receives the news that she could live for months, years even in a vegetative state on life support; leaving the family questioning whether or not to pull the plug and put an end to what otherwise would be like the “death of a hundred deaths.”…
In recent years, assisted suicide has become a rather controversial topic regarding whether or not a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. While some are against it due to moral beliefs, others support it as a result of their respect for those suffering. However, physicians remain divided on the issue, being torn on the difference between relief from dying and murder. After analyzing the issue in depth, it is clear that terminally ill patients should be granted the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce financial burdens placed upon their families, and preserve the right of individuals to determine their own fate when facing death.…
Throughout the literature, there have been many arguments both in favour and against physician assisted suicide. One of the most common argument is that doctors are supposed to save lives and not take them. Hippocratic Oath states that physician’s duty is to use treatment to save the patient and not do any harm (Beauchamp & Childress, 2009, p. 149). They also argue that assisting in the patient’s death is not only against the ethical traditions but it may also prevent patients from seeking help due to fear(Ersek, 2004). While, people in favour of assisted suicide emphasize the importance of principle of autonomy. They argue that It should be the patient’s right to decide if he wants to live or die. By preventing patients from ending their life, healthcare providers are imposing their own views onto their patients(de Vocht & Nyatanga, 2007)…
In ancient days, assisted suicide was frequently seen as a way to preserve one’s honor. For the past twenty-five years, on the other hand, the practice has been viewed as a response to the progress of modern medicine. New and often expensive medical technologies have been developed that prolong life. However, the technologies also prolong the dying processes, leading some people to question whether modern medicine is forcing patients to live in unnecessary pain when there is no chance they will be cured. Passive euthanasia—disconnecting a respirator or removing a feeding tube—has become an accepted solution to this dilemma. Active euthanasia—perhaps an overdose of pills or a deadly injection of morphine—remains controversial. Assisted suicide is most widely defined as a type of active euthanasia in which a doctor provides the means of death—usually by prescribing a lethal dose of drugs—but the patient is responsible for performing the final act.…