Physician Assisted Suicide

Out of the fifty states in the United States, Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) is only legal in five, while the practice of euthanasia remains illegal in all. Physician Assisted Suicide is when the physician provides the patient with lethal means that can be used by the patient at any time of the patient’s own choosing. On the other hand, the practice of euthanasia requires that the physician is the one who administers the lethal substances to the patient. Despite this technical difference, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Euthanasia and PAS provide relief to both those in mental and those in physical pain. As seen in countries around the world that have legalized euthanasia, with the proper restrictions, providing this procedure

As medical procedures and techniques have become more advanced, doctors are able to do much more to try and save a patient's life (Warriach). In some cases, however, this process is only delaying the inevitable and causing the patient even more suffering. If euthanasia were legal, patients could willingly choose to end this long process of torment, specifically in terminal cases where both would lead to the same result: death. In a hospital, a patient's life gets dragged on despite the condition by medical tools and devices such as respirators (Warriach). The only way to cease the patient’s anguish is by ending all means of life support. If euthanasia were presented as an option, it would save the patient, along with their family, from immense pain and

Many regard PAS as allowing doctors to kill and claim that it is corrupting the practice of medicine (Anderson). They argue that allowing euthanasia or physician assisted suicide is going against everything the practice of medicine stands for and that once a doctor assists one person's suicide, they will eventually be doing the same for any patient, including those with curable conditions (Walsh). Those with an aversion to euthanasia claim that the physicians in countries that allow the practice, such as Switzerland and Belgium, have no boundaries on who should or should not be given the options of PAS or euthanasia. Those against euthanasia conclude their arguments simply by saying that there must be a limit to the phrase “by every means necessary”, implying that euthanasia is taking it too far (Anderson). Thus, the entire argument against euthanasia and PAS is that once they are legalized, there will be no stopping the numerous physician assisted deaths. However, those that argue against euthanasia and PAS make the claim that legalizing euthanasia and PAS will lead to many physician assisted deaths without providing evidence and explanations as to how this chain of reactions will occur. Because they commit the logical fallacy of slippery slope, the argument against euthanasia can easily be debunked by using countries that allow euthanasia, such as Switzerland