Persuasive Essay Over Euthanasia

Assisted Suicide: A Controversial Topic Assisted suicide, also known as physician-assisted death (PAD), has been a topic of controversy for decades. While some argue that PAD should be legalized to grant terminally ill patients the right to die with dignity, others believe it goes against the sanctity of life. This essay will explore the arguments for and against assisted suicide and offer recommendations on how to approach the issue. PAD is Important

Legalization of physician-assisted suicide has been in discussion throughout the years in the United States. While many state and federal lawmakers have this up in discussion, the state of Oregon is the only U.S state were physician-assisted suicide is legal. Not only is assisted suicide illegal, the use of euthanasia is also an illegal substance being prescribed to patients. There are four distinguished types of euthanasia, all with different meanings that are mentioned later on in the text. Over the last forty years and counting, Pakes had informed that the views of physician-assisted suicide have been changing, and it is still ongoing today.

The idea of physician assisted suicide is one that has almost always been meet with an uncomfortable stare, even though public opinion has increased since it first became a well known issue in Northern America. Real drive for the movement started in the 70’s when about 53% of the population supported the movement, a large advance from the mere 37% at the start of the 50’s (Drum). As of now, roughly 70% of the entire population support the idea of having the option of Assisted Suicide, yet only four states have passed legislation in the support of ‘Right to Die’ laws. Most of this hesitation to pass the laws is because the ethics behind the idea of assisted suicide have long been viewed as twisted, and this has been because of false information or just a plain lack of knowledge about the subject. Assisted Suicide, no matter how controversial, should be open for the decision ultimately to be that of the individual themselves without the input of anyone else, as the decision to die is the most personal that one can make and should not be skewed by misconceptions or false information.

This project has conferred an extremely controversial and relevant topic. Euthanasia is illegal throughout all of the United States; however, physician assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Colorado, Washington D.C., and Montana. In addition, there are many benefits and drawbacks of legalizing euthanasia in the United States. Some advantages, including allowing a patient to die with dignity and granting a patient a pleasant death. One disadvantage is the possible abuse of euthanasia by physicians, since euthanasia gives a lot of power to doctors.

However, not everybody shares the same morals so this cannot really be argued in the sense of creating a law of it. Also, people don’t think the government should assist in ending someone’s life, and I believe that one is all up to the patient them self, they don’t know the pain they constantly have to go through day by day. A lot of people also make the argument of “they could find a cure for it” and that just raises false hopes in a sense of already having to live with it and just losing faith in being cured. It also lowers health care cost and people may take advantage for health care cost containment. Although it may not lower it too much, it still lowers the cost of healthcare

In 1991, a Dutch report into euthanasia found that in 86 percent of cases, euthanasia shortened life by a maximum of a week and usually only a few hours. In words, it was a last resort—an escape

Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is the act of permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured patients. This is never suggested by the caretaker rather than requested by the patient or their family. Few areas such as the Netherlands have already legalized this practice. This debate, as split as a fork in the road, is over whether or not this approach should be legalized worldwide on stances regarding religion, ethics, and self choice.     I see this as being extremely unethical on both religious and social morality levels.

It also has people who disagree with this kind of killing. Some people think it is a crime. I agree that Euthanasia is the right ways for patients. There are many reasons why Euthanasia is valid.

The Right to Die has been taking effect in many states and is rapidly spreading around the world. Patients who have life threatening conditions usually choose to die quickly with the help of their physicians. Many people question this right because of its inhumane authority. Euthanasia or assisted suicide are done by physicians to end the lives of their patients only in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, New Mexico and soon California that have the Right to Die so that patients don’t have to live with depression, cancer and immobility would rather die quick in peace.

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS), however, slightly differs from euthanasia as it refers to a killing action processed by a terminally ill patient him/herself 'with the assistance from a doctor, relative or another person' (Nordqvist, 2010). From the terminally ill patients' point of view, it is important that desires for euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should be considered seriously to help them in treatment, regardless whether euthanasia

Since the debate is a national argument, only certain states in the United States of America legally offer this procedure to their terminally ill patients. The

“Only a morally bankrupt society would not allow euthanasia.” Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient that suffers from an incurable and painful disease or an irreversible coma. Euthanasia can also be considered as mercy killing and assisted suicide. While it may be true that many patients that are in severe pain may request for euthanasia towards their suffering life, the real point to consider is doctors oath to be heroes not murders, patient’s mindset, religious beliefs, and grasping hope of life. Doctors in the medical field believe that euthanasia should not be law because it goes against everything they believe in.

INTRODUCTION Euthanasia alludes to the act of deliberately close a life keeping in mind the end goal to assuage torment and enduring. There are different euthanasia laws in each country. The British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering".[1] In the Netherlands, euthanasia is understood as "termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient"". Euthanasia is sorted in diverse ways, which incorporate voluntary, non-voluntary, or automatic.

Euthanasia is not a procedure doctors suggest to patients; it is a choice patients come to on their own after doctors have made all efforts possible to treat them. The few states that do allow euthanasia have requirements patients must meet before receiving a lethal dose of medication. For instance, two doctors have to confirm that the patient has a terminal illness and no more than six months to live. In addition, the patient must be in a sound mind when requesting euthanasia, and two witnesses must confirm the request that is made twice in a two week time period. These requirements are in place to insure it is what the patient wishes

request it. Support for the concept of euthanasia by lethal injection came from the growing perception that people were living longer and more and more were dying lingering deaths, as well as the publicity surrounding the increasing medical use of subcutaneous injections with syringes for the relief of pain. Th en, in the post–World War II era, the accepted defi nition of euthanasia broadened to include the withdrawal of life-prolonging medical treatment for dying adults or infants with severe defects, or physician-assisted suicide (PAS)—the act of providing a terminally ill patient with the drugs to kill himself or herself. Th ese changes refl ected sweeping shift s in personal values, as well as a host of demographic, scientifi c, medical,