Research Paper On Physician Assisted Suicide

In the Newsweek article, “Physician-Assisted Suicide Is Always Wrong,” by Ryan Anderson, it is stated that the legalization of assisted suicide “would be a grave mistake.” Anderson provides a few examples of why assisted suicide is detrimental. One, he states it leads to an endangerment of the weak and disenfranchised in societies. His outlook is that the purported safeguards of eliminating risk has mainly been nonexistent, which in some countries like the Netherlands who has legalized physician assisted suicide (PSA), has lead to doctors administering lethal injections to patients without request. Two, Anderson, sees assisted suicide as a compromise in the practice of medicine.

By allowing the option of physician assisted suicide, the state may be softening the idea that there is no hope for someone that ill, and that sends the wrong message to the public. Just as well, the Death With Dignity legislation may compromise the view that people have on doctors as healers (Plaisted 205). Patients may lose trust in them if they condoned, or even participated in physician assisted suicide. Those who are against PAS feel that there should not be a loss of hope for someone suffering from an incurable disease, and are against my argument

Public opinion polls showed increased support for physician assisted suicide. This was due in part to technological advances in medicine as well as a greater recognition of patient’s rights.” Twenty-nine-year-old Brittany Maynard, utilized Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, took her own life in November 2014 following a diagnosis of terminal brain cancer. “A Pew poll conducted after Ms. Maynard’s death, revealed that people viewed this as a heroic act. Also, revealed, the majority of Americans, most likely including physicians, now favor legalizing physician-assisted suicide for painful and incurable conditions: 68 percent in favor, 28 percent opposed.

Physician assisted suicide is a contradiction to the hippocratic oath. It allows physicians to administer lethal medication to a patient upon request and good reasoning. Some may argue that this procedure is unjust, but physician

First, Oregon was the front-runner in the world of physician-assisted suicide in the United States. In 1994, the state of Oregon passed the bill of a terminally ill individual’s right to die by lethal injection. Shortly after the passage of the bill, Oregon received their first challenge in the courts. In the case of Lee v. Oregon State, doctors and patients challenged Oregon, stating that the law violated the Constitution’s 1st and 14th amendments, as well as many other federal laws (Devlin, 1996). Due to this challenge in the courts, there was a temporary hold on the law.

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 suicide is something that has been debated all the way back to 1st century B.C. As opinions back then favored physician assisted suicide, opinions in the 12th-15th century did not support it, with the backup of the hippocratic oath. As the years progressed opinions on this subject flipped back and forth. Today, the opinion on physician assisted suicide is on it’s favor. However, there are only five states that allow this practice.

Physician-assisted suicide is a very controversial topic in today’s society. Physician-assisted suicide is defined as an action performed by the physician at the request of the patient to end the patient’s life with certain medical procedures. The legalization of physician-assisted suicide should not be passed in the United States because it is not morally acceptable in the society, leads to misunderstanding of a physician’s duty and increases mental suffering of both patient’s family and doctor. Physician-assisted suicide should not be legalized since the action itself is not justified morally. It is never morally acceptable for the society to give up on its people’s lives.

Two court cases, Vacco v. Quill and Washington v. Gluksburg, brought about many controversies to the U.S. Supreme Court about Assisted Suicide. Directly from U.S Legal it says, “… The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that physician-assisted suicide is not a protected liberty interest under the Constitution. However… left the door open for states to permit physician-assisted suicide” (U.S Legal 2004). Although the U.S. Supreme Court believes assisted suicide to be a felony by the national government there isn’t a total ban in every state. The Supreme Court left this decision to be decided among each state individually whether to ban physician-assisted suicide or not.

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.

It has been 21 years and physician-assisted suicide is still one of the biggest legal issues today and in the Supreme Court. “When Sue Rodriguez took her case to court, she changed the very nature of the decision-making process that might affect how she would live out her final days and how she would die. She tried to change the law of the land” (Bereza). This impacted today’s society and law; in fact the federal government will appear in front of the BC Court of Appeal later this month for discussion of the band on assisted-suicide. The crucial debate on this controversial topic continues to

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.

Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 23 Apr.