Physician Assisted Suicide

Physician-Assisted Suicide
Machele Carter
Informal Logic PHI103
Instructor Jason Lum
May 19, 2013

The argument over physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and the right-to-die movement has plagued American society, for decades. A large amount of people are concerned that legalizing doctor assisted suicide is irrational and violates the life-saving tradition of medicine. Nevertheless, the main issue surrounding the issue of assisted suicide is who has the right to choose when someone dies? There are countless of questions in different levels, and views surrounding this right. Physician-assisted suicide should be a legalized medical practice for terminally ill patient who needs to be relieved from suffering so that they may have a peaceful death.
Physician-assisted suicide takes place when the person place when the person assisting in the suicide is a physician rather than a friend or family member. Nevertheless, physicians are the ones use to their patients’ medical condition. They have the knowledge to access, and carry out certain wishes for death. Terminally ill patients, who have made the choice to end their lives often, turn to their physicians for advice and help. Studies indicate that many physicians are hesitant to provide their assistance in suicide with the fact of ethical beliefs and/or it is illegal.
“Physician-assisted suicide is the act of a physician prescribing a drug to a patient, who then is able to take on his or her own without the assistance of a medical provider or other person” (Gunderson, 2000). The drug generally results in unconsciousness within five minutes and death within thirty minutes. This is similar to the way they do euthanasia in pets with the first drug and then the second to shut everything down until it stops. This is the best pain free with no suffering way.

Physician-assisted suicide this is distinguished from euthanasia. Euthanasia is the performance of putting to death a person suffering from an incurable condition. Voluntary active euthanasia occurs when a medical provider or some other person administers a lethal dose of drug to a patient upon the patient’s request. Involuntary euthanasia occurs when a medical provider or some other person administers a lethal dose of drug to a patient without the patients request (Anonymous, 1998).
Physician-assisted suicide became legal in the state of Oregon on October 27, 1997. Since the date of legalization through December 31, 2000, there have been seventy reported cases of people utilizing this law to end their lives. Oregon, Washington, and Montana, are the only states that have physician-assisted suicide. Washington passed the law in November 2008, and enacted in 2009. Montana had passed the law December 2009; however, today they are now trying to overrule this law that has past. There are several other states, which are considering passing the law; they would be Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Vermont (Gordon, 2013).
Supporters of legalization believe that terminally ill individuals have the right to end their own lives in a peaceful manner. Supporter of legalization are responding to the fear of being terminal ill requires many sacrifices and changes. The fear of being filled with limitless suffering, anguish, and terrible pain and agony, they are too numb with the vast amount of drugs that are being put into their bodies. They are hooked up to some form of life support equipment and are kept alive in a persistent vegetation state simple because they are biologically alive. Nevertheless, there are diseases from which patients will simply never recover, many of which are extremely painful. With many of these situations, the patient will eventually become unable

to care for him or herself and must rely on caregivers, by this point it becomes financially and an emotional burden on the family. When somebody makes a rational decision that their quality of life will deteriorate to such level that makes life unbearable for them, do we have the right to deny a place and time which suits them and with medical assistance to ensure that there are no mistakes?
We will look at the nature of property rights, as described by Demsetz (1967, p. 347) this is a good point to start: “An owner of property rights possesses the consent of fellow men to allow him to act in particular ways. An owner expects the community to prevent others from interfering with his actions, provided that these actions are not prohibited in the specification of his rights. It is important to note that property rights convey the right to benefit or harm oneself and others” (Demsetz, 1967). From the description it could be inferred that one may dispose of one’s life in particular ways. Note that this view requires the entitlement to one’s own life to be in that subset of all possible actions to which Demsetz definition applies.
I feel that people should be allowed to choose whether they live or die, it is their own life to do as they please. Patients are prohibited from facing death with dignity. They are so numb with the medication that is pumped into their system. I had watched my father for over 20 years; suffer from a terminally ill disease. He had asked several doctors when it was to a point in his life that he could not function on his own is there anything they can give him to end his own life. He was always told no, California does not have the law were he can end his own life.
He finally reached a point where he was too weak to even get up and use the restroom, or take a shower. His driver’s license was taken from him and no longer aloud to drive. He was

house bound. He became very resentful, on how he needed to depend on everyone to help him with everything. We all had to take turns taking care of him, my mother could not do it all on her own. He would tell me he just wanted to die; this was not fair that he has to suffer in this manner. Finally, one evening he received his wish and had a massive heart attacked. He had suffered and did not die with dignity. This is one main reason why I believe in PAS.
Opponent for not legalizing physician-assisted suicide fear this will create a condition in which some people are pressured into committing suicide. Loved ones are being pressured to pursue the option out of desire to avoid the burden of caring for him or her until death. Doctors begin pressuring terminally ill to commit suicide. The poor are more at risk; they are unable to afford health care, which may give an incentive to health care providers to euthanize an individual in order to cut cost. Euthanasia becomes a misleading choice for insurance companies to cut costs? Will it reduce the incentive of physicians to off rigid therapeutic care to patients who are terminally ill feel it is their duty to die to escape any problem for their loved ones (Gunderson, 2000).
“A 1997 study showed by the American Medical Association (AMA) found that more than half of Americans believe physician-assisted suicide should be legal” (AMA, 1997). When people are informed about alternative to the technological treatments many of us fear, with the availability of pain control and hospice care. Their support for physician-assisted suicide goes down one-fifth (AMA, 1997). “This study seems to show when people are informed about all of their end-of-life choices they are less likely to opt for assisted suicide” (AMA, 1997).

“On October 27, 1997, Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act became law, therefore, legalizing physician-assisted suicide (PAS). This legislation, a morality policy, arose from patients’ rights and right-to-die issues. Since the passing of this law, 597 Oregonians have committed PAS. Oregon’s Death with Dignity policy modifications is analyzed using one specific policy development process model” (Altmann, 2010).
Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is the issue of a means, by a physician, for a terminally ill patient to end his or her own life (Kraus, 1996). This takes place when a physician prescribes to self-administer, causing death.
“Peter Goodwin, a Portland physician who campaigned for an Oregon law that permits terminally ill patients to end their lives with dignity. Peter Goodwin died March 11, 2012 at his home after using lethal chemicals obtained under the initiative he championed, he was 83. A spokesperson for the organization, Compassion and Choices confirmed the death. The group advocates, aid-in-dying laws and supports patients and families facing the end of life” (Luscombe, 2012). Nevertheless, in Peter’s view, when at deaths door, “the situation needs thought it does not need hope, it needs planning. Hope is too passing at that time” (Goodwin, 2012).
“Oregon was the first state to allow terminally ill patients to take their own lives with the help of lethal medications supplied by a doctor, this is a measure known as the Death with Dignity Act and approved by voters in 1994 and 1997. In 2010, 65 people used it to descend their death in Oregon, the highest number since it was passed. Washington and Montana have adopted similar legislation” (Altmann, 2010). Dr. Goodwin campaigned for years to endorse the

law. He said it encouraged medicine to focus attention on the needs of dying, with more therapeutic care and hospice. In his interview with the Oregonian, Dr. Goodwin said, “life is unfair, however, offered a prescription” (Goodwin, 2012).
Nevertheless, it is argued, we ourselves have an obligation to relieve the suffering of our fellow human beings and the respect of their dignity. Lying in hospitals today are people stricken and intensely painful with terminal conditions and diseases that have left them permanently incapable of functioning in any dignity human fashion. They can look forward to lives filled with more suffering, degrading, and deterioration. When such people beg for a merciful end to their pain and dignity, it is cruel and inhumane to refuse their pleas.
It can be argued that Physician-assisted suicide would allow terminally ill patients with some authority over what is happening in their lives. It might decline the amount of needless suffering an individual must endure and provide him or her with dignity, independence, and integrity in the final journey.
I strongly support the view that in the case of assisted suicide the choice for death is a deeply personal one. One with a terminally ill, a caregiver of the patient would carry out under the conditions they specified. Each condition is different and unique, each patient experiencing pain in their own way. It should not be of someone else, or even society telling these patients that they do not know what is best for their bodies. Nevertheless, telling them they cannot end their own lives. Those situations expose itself as an incredible pretense, given the fact that nearly no one who goes through the pain that these patients encounter. They do not know what is best for their bodies, that they cannot end their own lives. If physician-assisted suicide is not

legalized; it will not stop people from doing it themselves. I have given reason for and against physician-assisted suicide. I believe physician-assisted suicide should be legalized; nevertheless, it will benefit the terminally ill patient, so they may die with dignity. No one should hold jurisdiction over an individual’s life.