Susan Wolf, in writing about her own father's death, is facing a difficult and emotional issue that challenges her to consider her views on assisted suicide (Wolf, 2008). Assisted suicide is the common term for actions by which an individual helps another person voluntarily brings about his or her own death. "Assistance" may mean providing one with the means to end one's own life. In the article, “Confronting Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia”, by Susan Wolf, Susan shares the difficult and painful death of her father.…
In today 's society one of the most controversial issues is physician-assisted suicide for the terminally ill. Many feel as though it is wrong, regardless of their health condition to ask their health care provider to end their life. Others feel it is their right to be able to choose how and when they die. For those who believe physician-assisted suicide should be their choice, they feel it should be legal because: they don 't want to go through the suffering caused by the life-threatening illness, they fear the loss of their independence, becoming a burden to their family and friends, and the fear of dying alone.…
Upon being questioned regarding his stance on, “The Right to Die”, Richard Branson stated, “an assisted suicide law would not result in more people dying, but in fewer people suffering.” Though modern medicine is truly a marvel to behold, it has yet to unlock the secrets to curing all of the diseases that plague this world and as a result, a countless number of patients are forced to be imprisoned within a body that is not only withering away, but is the source of much suffering. For patients that have passed a mental health assessment, physician assisted suicide is a viable option for when the agony from a terminal disease becomes too unbearable. The reasoning behind why physician assisted suicide should become law stems from the right of…
John D. Arras looks at a situation which poses a patient suffering from uncontrolled pain by having the physician ignore their decisions amongst life and death. He mentions that physicians may contribute to “suicide and suicidal ideation” (page 478, column 1) which is statistically shown in over fifty percent of cancer patients who suffer from uncontrolled pain that is often brought on by untreated depression. In this situation however, if patient is given control of their own lives and obtain adequate psychiatric and palliative care to treat depression, it is assumed that most would lose interest in PAS/euthanasia. Using a similar example, there will always be a small amount of patients who may have pain that cannot be treated, for these patients J. Arras believes that present law on PAS/euthanasia can represent an impossible barrier to a distinguished and decent…
Most people would agree that the right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid any unnecessary excruciating pain seems as though it should be a basic human right. To have someone go through more suffering than absolutely necessary seems as though it would fall under the description of an inhumane act, and frankly an injustice against the basic human right of bodily autonomy and integrity. Due to these almost undeniable arguments, physician assisted suicide, in many cases, is seen as a basic human right that we need to be granted access to. Activists argue that it is simply an additional choice that we will be able to make, and that it will surely never be pushed onto anybody or used sinisterly (Maynard 2014). Although this claim is something that we cannot be entirely sure of, as I have continued to research the pros and cons behind physician assisted suicide, I have come to the conclusion that in many cases it truly does seem that the legalization of physician assisted suicide is the best option for everyone involved. It is a means to cease any unnecessary suffering that a person may be going though, and provides a sense of comfort for them during a time in their lives where they are not given many choices besides to deal with what they are going through and try to survive. Additionally, with many of the extreme medical advancements of the 20t century, our goals have been clouded by the quest to…
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…
Physician-assisted suicide is one topic that many countries have yet to tackle. Considering the many complex issues and underlying controversies, there is no doubt that the idea of taking one's life with medical collaboration is one of many criterias. There are many benefits for those individuals affected by terminal illnesses and irreversible damages to their health (i.e. AIDS or Parkinson’s Disease), such as removing the pain from their lives and allowing their families to be at peace knowing that they are no longer in harm’s way, but suicide in and of itself is a difficult challenge to defend. The act of taking one’s life is one that has been fought against for years, and…
State legislatures across America debate whether to make it legal for doctors to administer lethal drugs to terminally ill patients upon request. It is viewed as a choice issue, and oftentimes the word “suicide” is considered insensitive to use in this context: some advocates argue that people do not choose this route because they are suffering from a psychiatric condition or are distressing over life. They…
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…
Physician assisted suicide is a highly controversial bioethical issue that has been increasingly debated in recent years. Advocates of physician assisted suicide argue that it champions patient autonomy and reduces suffering while opposers suggest the benefits outweigh the risks and that there are other acceptable alternatives to the practice. This paper attempts to demonstrate the permissibility of physician assisted suicide as a regulated, medically reliable end-of-life option that can help end the suffering of individuals struggling with terminal illnesses. This will be achieved while still providing a comprehensive view of both opponents’ and supporters’ perspectives on the issue, specifically regarding the nature of the death that comes…
End of life medical issues are a very sensitive subject for doctors, patients, and family members. Some support the patients’ right to terminate their own life. Euthanasia loosely called physician assisted suicide is when one takes deliberate action to end life when faced with persistent suffering and certain death (Medical News Today, 2012).Many feel that patients should not have to suffer unjustly when faced with serious pain and debilitating illness. Often times it is just as difficult for family members to stand by and watch loved ones suffer. As someone that has witnessed both my grandmothers die on hospice care in the last six months, I know that watching someone die can be more painful than losing them all together. With as much compassion as I have for people in pain, I do not believe people have the right to end their lives whenever they chose. I oppose euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (PAS) because I believe that it is a doctor’s duty to keep patients alive, it may create financial and ethical issues when it comes to patients and insurance companies, and God should be the only one who decides when ones journey has been completed.…
As a society we associate doctors and health care professionals with the idea of healing; and having physicians be able to assist in the suicide of a patient might alter people’s opinion on doctors as a whole. In Jon Fullers article, “Physician-Assisted Suicide: An unnecessary Crisis”, he states, “granting [this] power to physicians would sully subconscious image[s] of the healer” (Fuller 10). Fuller believes that allowing physicians to take part in ending someones life, would change how health care professions are viewed. Fuller also writes that participating in the,“ taking of life crosses a threshold and threatens the trust in beneficence that is the root of the physician-patient relationship”(12). It takes a strong relationship between doctor and patient to come to the consensus that there are no other options for that patient. There has to be a great deal of trust for a patient to believe the physicians profession opinion on their course of treatment is accurate. For the patient having the their doctor help them end their life is an act of beneficence. The laws for physician assisted suicide are clear on the fact that the patient must be terminal with less than six months to live. Many people choose physician assisted suicide because they don’t want those last six months to be full of suffering and the worse months of their life. To the patients…
In physician-assisted suicide, a physician gives a terminally ill patient a prescription for a lethal dose of narcotics to be self administered when the times comes that the effects of his disease are no longer controllable or tolerable. As of now, it is legal only in the state of Oregon. It has long been disputed for many reasons. Among them are religion, public opinion, and how to govern and restrict the process. As there is supposed to be a division of Church and State, religion should play no part in making this decision. According to a poll, “61% of people answered ‘yes’ to the question ‘Shall…
Gunderson, Martin. “A Right to Suicide Does Not Entail a Right to Assisted Death.” Journal of…
The effect of the Patient Self-Determination Act on health care delivery is that it gives the patient the chance to choose how or if they will be kept alive in case of terminal illness or during a risky procedure. The patient will put in writing how they want to be kept alive and what measures to use to keep them alive in the case there is not a “reasonable hope of recovery” (Thomson Delmar Learning, ND), if they do not want any life saving measures to be taken then this will also be in writing. This legal document is to be followed by all medical personal even if they do not believe in the advanced directives the patient has choose and since it is a legal document the family has to follow the patients written wishes and can not stop the medical personal from caring them out.…