Ethical Dilemma In Physician-Assisted Suicide

One main decision that could have been changed was lines 37-40. It was when the dad saw flood coming and was yelling to run. If he hadn’t seen the flood things would be different because then his family couldn’t have noticed until it was too late. Gertrude could have well been dead, along with most of her family. The other decision is when Maxwell McArchen jumps off the roof to help Gertrude.

Mary Smith’s biggest fear is how her son, Brian Smith, 29, will survive when she and her husband die; a grim realization that she has come to terms with. Her son has down syndrome and the functional level of a three-year-old. Her son requires around the clock care and ca not be left alone. “I don’t think you are allowed to legally leave a three-year old alone,” said Mrs. Smith. “I would be put in jail if I left a three-year old alone and my house went on fire, and my three-year old died.”

Some believe that this undermines the role of a physician as a healer. This argument is somewhat valid, but still should not make Physician Assisted Suicide illegal. The way I see it, a physician is always there to help it may be killing but the Physician is just prescribing the dose and the patient takes the pill on his/her own. Another argument is that a physician who helps a patient commit suicide, breaks the trust and bonds between a patient and his/her doctor. Again, we have a valid point.

Lee Johnson, who lived in Oregon, was a retired federal worker who began a subsequent career as a furniture maker. He then developed brain cancer. Although the disease was inevitably going to kill him, he took the necessary precautions intended to extend his life. However, his condition worsened and he became bedridden and endured blurred vision, soreness, and a lot of pain.

The enigmatic Hamlet once said, “To be, or not to be, that is the question.” In Hamlet’s soliloquy, he ponders on the idea of suicide and whether it would be a practical solution to all his problems, in other words was it better to live or to die? A situation parallel to Hamlet is the landmark case Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, where it discusses how the Constitution protects a person’s right to die and how states can regulate it. During 1983, a woman by the name of Nancy Cruzan laid in an eternal vegetative state after being involved in an auto collision, where she sustained severe injuries and was put on life-sustaining equipment. In addition, after five years with no signs of recovery, the Cruzan family asked to terminate her from the tubes that were feeding her, but were denied by the staff, without approval of the court.

Physician-assisted death is the practice in which a physician provides a mentally competent patient with the means to take his/her own life, usually in the form of prescribing death-dealing medications. It first became legal in the United States in Oregon in 1998. It is now legal in four other states: Washington, California, Montana, and Vermont. In order for one to exercise their right to die this way, the law states that the patient must be at least 18 years old, be mentally competent, be diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death within six months, and must wait at least fifteen days before filling the death-dealing prescriptions. This controversial practice has raised the question of whether or not it is ethical for a physician

Even though some patients have this fear, many are for the use of this practice because they are afraid of getting old (Pearlman, 2005). This has some physicians on their toes because they are the ones making a decision on assisted suicide, and they need a strong reason to why the patients requests for this procedure and to move forward with it. For physician-assisted suicide to occur, the law states that a patient must have a reasonable explanation on why they want this procedure done. This process is known as autonomy (Ersek, 2005). Some of these reasons could include illness, and the decision of someone who is on his or her deathbed.

Physician assisted suicide is when a physician provides the means required to commit suicide, including prescribing lethal amounts of harmful drugs to a patient. In the United States alone, there is great controversy about physician assisted suicide. The issue is whether physician assisted suicide is murder or an act of sympathy for the patient. The main point is that terminally ill patients should have a right to physician assisted suicide if it meets their needs and is done properly. Physician assisted suicide is an appropriate action for the terminally ill that want to end their life in peace before it ends at the hands of the terminal disease.

After researching both sides of the argument, it is clear that the benefits of physician-assisted suicide outweigh the disadvantages. The benefits of ending a patient’s pain and suffering, minimizing the emotional and financial effects on families, and preserving the right for patients to decide their own fate, supports the legalization of physician-assisted suicide.

Physician-Assisted Suicide Physician-assisted suicide is when a doctor provides the means and the information necessary for a patient to end his life. A bill legalizing physician-assisted suicide was recently signed into law in California, and four other states have also legalized physician-assisted suicide. While many people may say that physician-assisted suicide should not be legal, the fact of the matter is that assisted suicide is a way to end a terminally ill patient’s suffering, and therefore should be legal. All doctors must abide by a very strict code of medical ethics. One of the biggest arguments against physician-assisted suicide is that it violates the Hippocratic oath, which is a code of medical ethics which all new doctors must swear to.

" Physician Assisted Suicide: An Unbiased Review." PDF. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. .

Patients have the right to the kind of treatment they want. 3) Conclusion a) Physician assisted suicide can help treat the terminally ill how they would like to be treated. b) The long history of assisted suicide speaks for itself in the matter of if it should be legal or

Many people think that there are too many problems with physician assisted suicide. Physician assisted suicide is a procedure that allows physicians to prescribe their patients a lethal medication that they can inject themselves with in order to die on their own terms. There are specific requirements that the patients must meet in order to receive this medication. Physician assisted suicide is only for patients that have life threatening illnesses and do not have much time left to live. It is legal in numerous places around the world including certain places in the United States.

The medical field is filled with opportunities and procedures that are used to help improve a patient’s standard of living and allow them to be as comfortable as possible. Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a method, if permitted by the government, that can be employed by physicians across the world as a way to ease a patient’s pain and suffering when all else fails. PAS is, “The voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician.”-Medicinenet.com. This procedure would be the patient’s decision and would allow the patient to end their lives in a more peaceful and comfortable way, rather than suffering until the illness takes over completely. Physician assisted suicide should be permitted by the government because it allows patients to end their suffering and to pass with dignity, save their families and the hospital money, and it allows doctors to preserve vital organs to save

Assisted suicide is a rather controversial issue in contemporary society. When a terminally ill patient formally requests to be euthanized by a board certified physician, an ethical dilemma arises. Can someone ethically end the life of another human being, even if the patient will die in less than six months? Unlike traditional suicide, euthanasia included multiple individuals including the patient, doctor, and witnesses, where each party involved has a set of legal responsibilities. In order to understand this quandary and eventually reach a conclusion, each party involved must have their responsibilities analyzed and the underlying guidelines of moral ethics must be investigated.