Physician Assisted Suicide Ethical Dilemmas

What is a doctor’s point of view? Doctor Michelle Stanford, was served as the chief resident at Children’s Hospital in Denver among many other accolades. Dr. Stanford, states it undermines the integrity of the medical profession; she goes on to quote the American Medical Association “Allowing physicians to participate would cause more harm than good, physicians assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s as healer would difficult or impossible and would pose serial societal risks.” (Prop 106 - Dr. Michelle Stanford).

One of the main objections to autonomy-based justifications of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) that Gill talks about is that many people believe it does not promote autonomy, but instead is actually taking it away (366). First, it is important to clarify what autonomy means. According to Gill, it is the ability of a person to make big decisions regarding their own life (369). Opponents of PAS argue that it takes away a person’s ability to make these big decisions and so it is intrinsically wrong for them to choose to take their own life.

Physican-assisted suicide is defined as a voluntary termination of one 's own life by administration of a lethal substance with direct or indirect assistance of a physican. (Webster Dictionary, 2011). This topic has been a very controversial subject among so many people from different types of states and countries. The fact that, some physican are agaisnt this and some are fore it can lead to a very huge debet on whether or not to legalize this act. For one moment, imgine that you are in the hospital bed, and you have been getting treated for years now and the doctor just tells you that you have no more hope and starting now, you will be going down hill with serve pain that not even medication will help relive this pain.

Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Right to Murder? Doctors spend over eight years attending college, studying and practicing how humans work and how to save them. So why should it be right for physicians to help out their patients in killing themselves? If a person chooses to end their life, they completely loose the possibility of a medical miracle of being able to live through whatever condition they have.

I think arguments opposing it are the most compelling. Physician-assisted suicide would violate human dignity, viewing disabled family members as burdens would increase, and it would corrupt the profession of medicine by permitting something that is supposed to be used for healing to be used for killing. Death assisted with medication from a doctor and dying alone in a hospital bed is a heartbreaking concept to me. It pains me that patients with terminal illnesses would make the decision to end their life because they are miserable or believe they are a burden to their family. Life is a precious gift we have been given.

Their argument is that the medical practice of physician-assisted death is unethical because it violates the bioethical principle of nonmaleficence, which refers to the obligation of the physician to not cause needless harm. Physician-assisted death is not causing needless harm because the patient themselves is requesting the death-dealing medication and taking them, or not taking them, when, and if, they feel ready to die. It would be needless harm if the physician in question actively euthanatized the patient by administering the death-dealing medications without the patient’s consent. However, from a legal standpoint, physician-assisted death does not include active euthanasia, which is illegal in all fifty states; it simply requires the physician to provide the mentally competent patient with the information they asked for regarding the process and a prescription for the death dealing medication. The physician is not causing needless harm to a terminally ill patient who wishes to die mercifully on their own time instead of six months down the line in possible pain and suffering.

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.

“Legislation that allows people to end their lives automatically creates incentives to seek death as a cost-saving option. The elderly and infirm are seen as burdens and can easily be disposed of. Suicide becomes the easy way out.” (Ben Broussard) Most of the time physicians are against the idea of physician assisted suicide because it goes against their job description and personal beliefs.

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.

What some people think though is that if we set regulations on the doctors, then the Assisted Suicides will be kept to only those who wish for it, but what if the doctors think a patient is better off dead than alive? What if the physician thinks that the patient is not worth saving or keeping alive? One person says “Of all the arguments against voluntary euthanasia, the most influential is the 'slippery slope': once we allow doctors to kill patients, we will not be able to limit the killing to those who want to die”

The Right to Die 1) Introduction a) Thesis statement: Physician assisted suicide offers patients a choice of getting out of their pain and misery, presents a way to help those who are already dead mentally because of how much a disease has taken over them, proves to be a great option in many states its legal in, and puts the family at ease knowing their love one is out of pain. i) The use of physician assisted death is used in many different countries and some states. ii) Many people who chose this option are fighting a terminal illness.

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

Hunter Blalock Mr N Bradsher English IV Honors Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. What about Death? Chronic diseases affect approximately 133 million Americans each year (National Health Council 1). Even more, are mortally wounded.

Have you ever known a friend or family member who had cancer or was critically ill and in the hospital? It’s hard to watch those suffer due to a physical injury or disease. It’s even harder to watch someone struggle in a critical mental state whether it’s caused by a mental or physical disease. Would you rather ease the pain of those people than watch them suffer? The answer solution is assisted suicide because it is supported by ethics and should legally be allowed.

This argument is flawed because there are multiple doctors that think euthanasia is ethical, and even more will participate in assisted suicide once it becomes legalized. In a survey completed by the American Medical Association, fifty-three percent of the public and twenty-nine percent of doctors think it should be legal for a physician to commit suicide. (Bar Graph) General practitioner, Dr. Simon Benson declared that he is prepared to participate in euthanasia. Benson states “I would be doing a person a service.” and “I would be treating them well and humanely”.