Assisted Suicide Argumentative Essay

Introduction People have moral and ethical values that assist them in making decisions about their healthcare on a daily basis. What if a person found out that they had a terminal illness and only had months to live? What if those few months would be filled with treatments, pain and suffering, tear filled family members, and high cost medical bills? Physician- assisted suicide remains a debated topic which causes physicians, nurses and those involved to take a look at what they value and what they are willing to do in order to carry out a patient’s wishes.

Death is a natural process that will be experienced by everyone at some point, desirably at the end of a long, well lived life. The reality is that no one knows when that time will come or how it will happen. Unfortunately, for the terminally ill, death is in the near future and it is a sobering reality. Therefore, when that time comes, people need to know that they will have options, and the assurance that death does not have to be an agonizing end. They can choose to endure the annihilating pain that comes with the disease and allow it to take its natural course or choose to put an end to it, surrounded by those who love them.

The legalization of physician assisted suicide is a very polarizing topic with many advocates for each opposing position. Despite the position that physician assisted suicide should be illegal there are still many valid arguments for its legalization. One of the more popular arguments in favor physician assisted suicide is that it ends the suffering of patients who are experiencing intolerable pain. Most jurisdictions in which, have legalized physician assisted suicide to terminally ill patients, have done so on the belief that it presents a more “merciful death”. As physician assisted suicide does bring a more painless alternative most patients do not request the practice for the purposes of pain.

Our life is all about making choices and when a terminally ill patient decides it is their time to go then their doctor can help provide drugs to help reduce the suffering and kill

Most people do not think about death very often, or even at all, if they are young, strong, and healthy. For those diagnosed with a terminal illness, those thoughts are always lingering. How will one die is probably the most common thought that runs through people’s mind. Recently, in some states, that question may now have an answer. Currently, in six states, there are new laws that allow aid in dying, also known as physician-assisted suicide.

In order for a patient to receive the prescription for medication, a physician must declare the patient to be terminally ill, which means they have an incurable and irreversible illness, and they must have no more than six months to live. Also, a second doctor must agree with the first doctor. In addition, the terminally ill patient has to be mentally competent and able to administer the medication themself (“Threat” A12). These rules act as safeguards to ensure that the patient requesting aid in dying is making an informed decision and is acting voluntarily (Gopal

All euthanasia is requested, so how beautiful and meaningful can life truly be to a person who wants so greatly to be released from it. Also the majority of people who disagree with euthanasia believe that taking your own life is murder, no matter what the circumstances. It is understood that a person taking their own life is horrible, but it should be thought that forcing someone to stay alive while experiencing continuous pain is worse than them dying. Whatever that argument is, it should always be believed that the patient should be given the opportunity to choose and that their decisions should not be made by others who do not understand their

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

In the defense of Physician Assisted Suicide, a wide publicly talked about topic, it should be a choice every terminally ill patient receives. Physician Assisted suicide is when a patient is terminally ill and has no chances of recovering. The patient themselves can make the decision, with the help from their physician, to get lethally injected and end their life reducing and ending the pain. In America each state has a little over 3,000 patients that are terminally ill contact an advocacy group known as the Compassion and Choices to try to reduce end-of- life suffering and perhaps hasten their death. Physician Assisted Suicide shouldn’t be looked at as suicide, but as ending the pain and suffering from an individual whose life is going to be taken away anyway.

It brought to my awareness both the limitation and the capacity of medicine. Although there was no medical intervention that could cure the diseases of those terminal patients, their quality of life was improved  by an outstanding team of doctors, nurses and volunteers. This awareness helped reconcile myself to the fact that certain things, such as death and terminal illness, can not be avoided or changed. By viewing death as a natural part of life, I will be able to offer my dying patients the best care possible while also understanding my limitation as a physician and a human being.

Currently in the United States only five out of the fifty states have legalized assisted suicide. Assisted suicide is the help from a physician for a patient to end their life because they have a terminal illness. Many people believe that euthanasia should be illegal across the board, however, people who have terminal illnesses should have a right to be in charge of how to end their life. Many people do not want their family to see them at their lowest, and they do not want to see their selves at their lowest either, therefore, giving a person a right to end their life peacefully, should be an individual’s choice. When someone is diagnosed with a terminal illness it is devastating going through the long and grueling process of death, for the family and the patient both.

Artificial respirators, for example, can help people breathe, and feeding tubes can provide sustenance for patients unable to swallow, allowing such individuals to live for years, even if they exhibit minimal brain activity lengthened life spans and, in some cases, improved the quality of life for the elderly and the ill, they have also introduced new moral questions regarding end-of-life decisions.(infobase). Some patients with terminal, painful, or disabling illness or whose quality of life is extremely poor should have autonomy and the right to choose a dignified death. Courts have ruled that patients have a right to refuse medical treatment, and they should also have the legal right to hasten their deaths with professional help

Seeing as patients who are in a vegetative state cannot recover or “wake up”, choosing to prolong one’s existence for thousands of dollars a day is just plain foolish (Palmer). Families should not have to worry about financial troubles during their loved one's last days. In many states, brain death is recognized as final death, and no financial support is given from the government. Since those suffering from this condition require so much attention and expensive technology to keep them “alive”, families are left with massive medical bills that they can’t pay. Considering the patient will have to be taken off life support eventually, it is unwise to spend six and seven figure sums on something that won’t produce positive results.

From an economic standpoint, euthanasia is a brilliant alternative. Though many see it as unethical, it may be relieving for the victims to know that once they’ve passed they’re no longer considered burdens to their families. Though harsh, keeping a terminally ill person alive for a year costs no less than $55,000, dying in a dignified way is their last resort when they know their condition is not going to improve. Many patients with incurable diseases have stated that the lengthy and expensive time and operations granted by their families are not worth the few extra months they get of spending time on Earth.

' Practitioner can play a role in improving the quality of life of a terminally-ill patient in both pharmacological aspects and non-pharmacological aspects. After all, what remains in a patient 's mind is the care and love given by practitioner, not the medical information. Something as simple as a warm-hearted pat on the shoulder or a word of assurance can enlighten their day. If we can treat every patient wholeheartedly, as if he/ she is our friend, it makes significant difference in patient life. Conclusion Hepler & Strand define pharmaceutical care as the responsible provision of medicine therapy for the purpose of improving a patient