Should Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legalized Essay

As mentioned, physician- assisted suicide is a debate that has been discussed for decades. A newspaper article written by Ezekiel J. Emanuel, Four Myths About Doctor-Assisted Suicide, provides information about the arguments that have been debated decades ago. Emanuel informs the reader both the arguments and the realistic statics since 2012. The first myth is concerning of the pain patients endure, Emanuel quotes the main argument advocates gave, “Most patients want to die are suffering from depression, and not pain”(1). Emanuel claims the statement to be false, due to statics done in 2012.

It provides a competent patient with a prescription medication to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life. Physician-assisted suicide has its proponents and its opponents. This procedure is not to be taken lightly. All patients pursuing PAS should be evaluated. It is required that “...a patient's request for assistance with a hastened death should generate a thorough evaluation of the patient's motives and attempts at ameliorating the patient's suffering”(NCBI).

Jack Kevorkian was a compassionate doctor who believed in his patients’ rights to choose physician assisted suicide and some say he was hero while others called him a monster or Dr. Death. He assisted 130 terminally ill patients to voluntarily end their own lives with dignity, peace, and at their own time to avoid severe pain, humiliation, and added stress to the patients’ family members. He believed it was the patients’ choice to end their life on their own terms without the government or insurance companies intruding, or a physician’s “keep a patient alive at all costs” mentality. “Lethal injection is now the main method of execution in all but two states due to our desire for the worst of the worst to die in a dignified manner, yet we want the terminally ill to endure suffering, pain, humiliation, and the erosion of their estate without giving them an opportunity to choose the time and method of their death?” Dr. Kevorkian believed a great start for Congress to enact a law providing any terminally ill patient the ability to seek a humane, dignified death by lethal injection.

For instance, from a mental health perspective. To understand the mental health perspective of physician assisted suicide, it is important to understand how suicidal behaviors in the psychiatric and general community can correlate to those behaviors in the terminally ill as well. It is also important to understand the relationships between doctors and patients from the perspective of a mental health professional. This way it is possible to look past the basic, simplified assumptions about physician assisted suicide; that a terminally ill patient’s decision for suicide is only a response to the pain and suffering caused by the illness without any other factors. And the best way to be able to look past the oversimplification of physician assisted suicide is to take into account the fact that there is no one single factor in suicidal people that causes suicide.

In the last decade, a controversial topic in the medical field in America is about Physician-assisted suicide. Many citizens are questioning where the line stands in whether or not this goes against medical ethos, and if it is a right for terminally ill patients. While there are benefits and deficits to either side, I believe everyone should have the right to choose to participate in assisted suicide when battling a terminal illness. While a handful of states in America that include, Oregon, Washington, California, Colorado, Vermont, and with court decision, Montana have already passed the Death with Dignity Act, it is still not easily accessed and there are a lot of parameters regarding the Act ("Death with Dignity"). In Oregon you have to meet certain criteria.

The first of many reasons that physician assisted suicide should be legalized across the whole nation is the fact that it is an option that is covered by many safeguards that ensure that the patients who receive the deadly prescription are those who are, in fact, terminally ill. One such example of these safeguards comes from the Oregon Death With Dignity Act which states: “Requests for [Death With Dignity Act] drugs must be confirmed by two witnesses and approved by two doctors. The patient must not be mentally ill. And most important of all, both doctors must agree that the patient has no more that six months to live.” (Drum).

Everyone’s life has a start point and an end point. We all feel love, sadness, pain and illness. Some are fortunate enough to never have to deal with a life threating or terminal illness. Others are not as fortunate and must deal with the daily struggles of that illness. On October 27th 1997, Oregon enacted a law that legalized physician- assisted suicide for terminally ill patients.

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.

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.

Based on the source of publication, the target audience for this article are lawyers who are arguing against physician-assisted suicide. The purpose of this article is to examine the psychological effects of physician-assisted suicide/euthanasia on physicians that practice this principle. The article is geared towards people that are examining the emotional and psychological effects of physician-assisted suicide in participating physicians. This article specifically views the areas in which physician-assisted suicide is legal. The author is a board-certified radiation oncologist, cancer specialist in the state of

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.

Physician assisted suicide has been an intensely debated problem for years but if used properly, could be an effective way to help those who are suffering at the end of their life. Countless people have been advocating for physician assisted suicide for years and the most famous advocate for assisted suicide was Dr. Jack Kevorkian. He was a pathologist but received the nickname Dr. Death after it was estimated that between 1990 and 1999 he assisted 130 terminally ill individuals in their assisted suicides (“Jack Kevorkian”). Dr. Kevorkian is considered a crusader for physician

Euthanasia and Suicide. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://www.kc-cofc.org/39th/Lectures/2002 Manuscripts/Jenkins-Euthanasia_and_Suicide. PDF Manning, M. (1998). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: killing or caring?. New York: Paulist

Other factors can be eliminated with help and a patient can then decide if they want to be euthanized. While euthanasia debates can depend on patients making the right or wrong decision, there are also many factors depending on other’s decisions. Non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia are the main reasons that people worry about legalizing euthanasia. While voluntary euthanasia can be legalized without non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia not being legalized, there can be cases where patients are left suffering for they cannot give consent themselves, but it is obvious that they should be euthanized.

Euthanasia has been a controversial debate and is a part of a larger issue concerning the right to die. In the United States, only four states, California, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont have legalized assisted suicide by legislation, and by court ruling in Montana.1 Proponents of euthanasia consider it as “mercy killing,” while the opponents question the ethics and the moral dilemmas such as “is helping someone die a moral and justifiable action?” or “how can killing be ‘merciful’?” The term euthanasia comes from the Greek word “eu,” meaning well, and “thanatos” means death, or “a well and peaceful death. ”2 In this modern world, euthanasia implies that one’s life is ended in compassion either actively or passively by another person due to