Physician-Assisted Euthanasia What is a physician's duty to a patient? Are doctors ever justified in ending a life entrusted to their care, even at the request of the patient or his family? These questions are being asked in today's society as part of the growing debate surrounding physician-assisted euthanasia (PAS). Several well-publicized cases in the past few decades have only fueled the fire, inspiring equally convicted individuals and organizations to rise up on both sides. Pro-life advocates argue the immorality of assisted suicide, and are, except for a few instances, supported by the law. Pro-choice supporters not only cite ethical justification, but argue the practical benefits and recent legislation legalizing of some instances of euthanasia in limited areas of the world. Despite certain economic benefits and legal support, it is never justifiable for a doctor to facilitate the death of any patient. Review of the Literature as a Whole Advantages of Economic Euthanasia Elderly people, as a whole, use up much of the nation's healthcare budget; six times as much money is spent by the federal government on health services for those over 65 than those under 18 (Callahan, 1997). More people are entering into this age group than are dying due to medical advances that can now prolong life for years, using up hundreds of thousands of dollars on one feeble life that could possibly help hundreds of younger people and thereby prevent future health expenses (Caplan, 1987). America's healthcare budget is not large enough to support every patient adequately- instead of a few getting sufficient healthcare, many are merely getting a half-way supported (Callahan, 1997). With so many last- ditch efforts available, th... ... middle of paper ... ...remove food and water tubes, or other life support machines, but not to "intentionally cause the death of a patient" (Hentoff, 1987). If a position must be veiled and sugar-coated to gain followers, what does that say about the argument? We cannot afford to let flowery words detach the medical profession from its fundamental dedication to preserving life. Works Cited Burke, James. The Day the Universe Changed. Back Bay Books, 2nd ed. 2001 Noble, Strauss, et al. Western Civilization, the Continuing Experiment. Houghton Mifflin: 4th ed. 2005 Peterson, Dr. Alan. "It's not all In our genes- social and political implications of human genome project." The New Statesman. 3 July 2000. 13.612: 5,1 Whittaker, Lori A. "The implications of the Human Genome Project for family practice." Journal of Family Practice. Sep. 1992.
There are many convincing and compelling arguments for and against Physician Assisted Suicide. There are numerous different aspects of this issue, including religious, legal and ethical issues. However, for the purpose of this paper, I will examine the ethical concerns of both sides. There are strong pro and con arguments regarding this, and I will make a case for both. It is definitely an issue that has been debated for years and will continue to be debated in years to come.
There are many legal and ethical issues when discussing the topic of physician-assisted suicide (PAS). The legal issues are those regarding numerous court cases over the past few decades, the debate over how the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution comes into play, and the legalization vs. illegalization of this practice. The 14th Amendment states, “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (U.S. Const. amend. XIV, §1). PAS in the past has been upheld as illegal due to the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the constitution, but in recent years this same 14th amendment is also part of the reasoning for legalizing PAS, “nor shall any State deprive any person of…liberty” (U.S. Const. amend. XIV, §1). The ethical issues surrounding this topic include a patient’s autonomy and dignity and if PAS should be legalized everywhere. This paper is an analysis of the PAS debate and explores these different issues using a specific case that went to the supreme courts called Washington et al. v. Glucksberg et al.
gotten to the point where they feel as if there is no point in living.
In the medical field, there has always been the question raised, “What is ethical?” There is a growing conflict between two important principles: autonomy and death being considered a medical treatment. Physician assisted suicide is defined as help from a medical professional,
One of the greatest dangers facing chronic and terminally ill patients is the grey area regarding PAS. In the Netherlands, there are strict criteria for the practice of PAS. Despite such stringencies, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (1992) found 28% of the PAS cases in the Netherlands did not meet the criteria. The evidence suggests some of the patient’s lives may have ended prematurely or involuntarily. This problem can be addressed via advance directives. These directives would be written by competent individuals explaining their decision to be aided in dying when they are no longer capable of making medical decisions. These interpretations are largely defined by ones morals, understanding of ethics, individual attitudes, religious and cultural values.
"With the stroke of a pen, California Gov. Jerry Brown made it legal for physicians in the state to prescribe lethal doses of medications if their terminally ill patients wish to end their lives. Brown signed the "End of Life Act" into law on Monday, and in doing so California joins four other states — Oregon, Washington, Vermont and Montana — where patients' right to choose doctor-assisted death is protected either by law or court order."
Susan Wolf spent years questioning the ethical and legal aspect of physician-assisted suicide. “As I have before, I oppose the legitimation of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.” However, life provided practical experience when her father became terminally ill with cancer and pneumonia. He became weak and dependent. He was left with three choices. He could stay in the ICU, go to the pulmonary care unit, or turn off the feeding tubes and IV hydration. Turning off the tubes was the most difficult choice, but it was the best choice he had. There was no point in prolonging his suffering because death was inevitable.
In this article, Dr. Braddock and Dr. Tonelli explain the difference between physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. Physician assisted suicide is “Practice in which a physician provides a competent, terminally ill patient with a prescription for a lethal dose of medication, upon the patient's request, which the patient intends to use to end his or her own life” (Braddock and Tonelli). The authors then describes that euthanasia is when the physician administers the lethal medication. They write this article with the intent to inform the public about this highly controversial subject. The Dr.’s explain the positive side in assisted suicide as, “Physician aid-in-dying is ethically justifiable” (Braddock and Tonelli). They write that people who are for assisted death are about respect, justice, compassion, individual liberty, and honesty for the sick and dying . The authors then explain that, on the other hand, “Physician assisted suicide is ethically impermissible” (Braddock and Tonelli). They give examples, that could have a negative impact on society, such as, religion, potential for abuse, false diagnosis or prognosis, and how it could been seen as a contradiction to the Hippocratic oath.
The two major components of Medicare, the Hospital Insurance Program (Part A of Medicare) and the supplementary Medical Insurance program (Part B) may be exhausted by the year 2025, another sad fact of the Medicare situation at hand (“Medicare’s Future”). The burden brought about by the unfair dealings of HMO’s is having an adverse affect on the Medicare system. With the incredibly large burden brought about by the large amount of patients that Medicare is handed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to fund the system in the way that is necessary for it to function effectively. Most elderly people over the age of 65 are eligible for Medicare, but for a quite disturbing reason they are not able to reap the benefits of the taxes they have paid. Medicare is a national health plan covering 40 mi...
A Double Edged Sword, Canada and the World Backgrounder v66 (Oct 2000) Human Genome Project (2000), Congressional Quarterly
The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
Physician-assisted suicide refers to the physician acting indirectly in the death of the patient -- providing the means for death. The ethics of PAS is a continually debated topic. The range of arguments in support and opposition of PAS are vast. Justice, compassion, the moral irrelevance of the difference between killing and letting die, individual liberty are many arguments for PAS. The distinction between killing and letting die, sanctity of life, "do no harm" principle of medicine, and the potential for abuse are some of the arguments in favor of making PAS illegal. However, self-determination, and ultimately respect for autonomy are relied on heavily as principle arguments in the PAS issue.
As the population of the United States ages and lifespan increases, the U.S. is being faced with challenges that could either hurt the country or benefit it if plans are executed correctly. By the year 2050, more than thirty-two million Americans will be over the age eighty and the share of the 80-plus generation will have doubled to 7.4 percent. Health care and aging population has become a great deal considering the impact it is having on the U.S. The United States is heading into another century with an outstanding percentage of people within the aging population. Today’s challenges involving health care and the aging populations are the employees of health professions being a major percentage of the aging population, the drive into debt, and prevention and postponement of disease and disability.
Euthanasia is the practice of knowingly ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. The voluntary end of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. 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". Assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Vermont, Washington and New Mexico. Legalization is debatable in Montana due to a court decision which leaves the issue in doubt.
Should a patient have the right to ask for a physician’s help to end his or her life? This question has raised great controversy for many years. The legalization of physician assisted suicide or active euthanasia is a complex issue and both sides have strong arguments. Supporters of active euthanasia often argue that active euthanasia is a good death, painless, quick, and ultimately is the patient’s choice. While it is understandable, though heart-rending, why a patient that is in severe pain and suffering that is incurable would choose euthanasia, it still does not outweigh the potential negative effects that the legalization of euthanasia may have. Active euthanasia should not be legalized because