When debating who has the right to determine a person's death, it is always a controversial issue. Euthanasia is known as the practice of intentionally ending a life in hopes of freeing an individual from an incurable disease or unendurable suffering (Nordqvist). It can be done by either the request of a dying patient or by the consent of a person's legal guardian. Although our society influences the prolong treatment of medicine and care of all people, Euthanasia with special guidelines, should be added as an additional option because it allows dying patients to avoid a painful death, reduces financial burdens, and lessens family sufferance. Imagine seeing a loved one or a close friend suffer through a vicious illness both fatal and untreatable. Would it be morally acceptable to allow the person in pain to decide whether he or she wants to take away their own life? Sadly enough, in the United States, this choice does not exist, and if an act like this was performed by any doctor it would be considered a murder crime which could result in a prison sentence to up to 14 years or more (Nordqvist). Oregon and Washington D.C. are currently the only two states that allow assisted suicide, while euthanasia is illegal in every state ("Where it is legal in the U.S."). The difference between the two comes from the way they are both performed. When assisted suicide occurs the patient administers the recommended medication by the physician, however euthanasia occurs when the doctor himself directs the medication to the suffering patient, with the purpose of ending their life sooner (Diaconescu 474). In the supreme court case, People of the State of Michigan v. Jack Kevorkian, a patient named Thomas Youk was killed by his doctor throug... ... middle of paper ... ...ed in every state. Works Cited Diaconescu, Amelia Mihaela. "Euthanasia." Contemporary Readings In Law & Social Justice 4.2 (2012): 474-483. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. Humphry, Derek. "Euthanasia is Ethical" Euthanasia Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Carol Wekesser. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1995. Print. "Legal Precedents - Euthanasia - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. ProCon, 13 Apr. 2009. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. Nordqvist, Christian. "What Is Euthanasia (assisted Suicide)? What Is The Definition Of Assisted Suicide Or Euthanasia?" Medical News Today. MediLexicon International, 19 Mar. 2010. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. Tamkins, Theresa. "Medical Bills Prompt More than 60 Percent of U.S. Bankruptcies." CNN. Cable News Network, 5 June 2009. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. "Where It Is Legal in the U.S." Assisted Suicide. Wisconsin Right To Life, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013.
Assisted Suicide, also known as mercy killing, occurs when a physician provides the means (drugs or other agents) by which a person can take his or her own life. This assistance is one of the most debated issues today in society followed by abortion. Physicians are frequently faced with the question of whether or not assisted suicide is ethical or immoral. Although assisted suicide is currently illegal in almost all states in America, it is still often committed. Is assisted suicide ethical? Studies have found that the majority of Americans support assisted suicide. One must weigh both sides of the argument before they can decide.
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.
People knowing that their health will not improve and will arrive at their death should be given the right to an assisted suicide. Harmful or attempted suicides that result in severe damage can also be prevented by letting those with physical suffering end their life by the help of a physician. Even though assisted suicide is illegal in most states, it is generally ethical. Assisted suicide needs to only be administered and considered moral for someone who has a terminal diagnosis and wishes to die gracefully in order to relieve their pain. Suicide is not normally something that should be deemed acceptable, but since suicide with assistance can help the terminally ill, it needs to be seen as ethical for the sake of the less fortunate with a deadly
Markoff, Steven. “State by-State Guide to Physician Assisted Suicide” ProCon.org. 13 December 2013, 30 March 2014.
Hendin, H., Foley, K., & White, M. (1998). Physician-Assisted Suicide: Reflections on Oregon's First Case. Issues in Law & Medicine, 14(3), 243 - 270.
Envision being diagnosed with end stage cancer. You are only given a few months remaining to live. Your doctor informs you of all the frightening and painful experiences lying ahead of you. As your health beings to deteriorate, your family no longer recognizes the person that you once were. Would you choose the path to suffering tremendous amounts of pain, or would you want to die peacefully? Euthanasia is an assisted death option for those who are diagnosed with an incurable disease. It is the permissive right of voluntary suicide, to prevent those who are terminally ill from suffering in vain. Some terminally ill patients suffer a great deal of pain, and do not wish to prolong their suffering. Euthanasia ensures that a person with a degenerative disease can end their own life with the assistance of the medical community.
A recent poll founded by the Canadian Medical Association found that “only one in five doctors surveyed. . . said they would be willing to perform euthanasia if the practice were legalized. . . Twice as many – 42 percent – said they would refuse to do so” (Kirkey 1). Euthanasia is defined as giving a patient the right to die early with a physician’s assistance, and the legalization of this practice is being considered by lawmakers in many countries, including the United States. Accordingly, 42 percent of doctors in Canada are on the right side of this debate. Euthanasia should not be legalized because it violates society’s views that life is sacred, creates economic pressure for doctors, and for those countries that have legalized it, their laws are not specific enough to fully protect patients.
Currently, physician-assisted suicide or death is illegal in all states except Oregon, Vermont, Montana and Washington. Present law in other states express that suicide is not a crime, but assisting in suicide is. Supporters of legislation legalizing assisted suicide claim that the moral right to life should encompass the right to voluntary death. Opponents of assisted suicide claim that society has a moral and civic duty to preserve the lives of innocent persons. There is a slippery slope involving the legalizing assisted suicide. Concern that assisted suicide allowed on the basis of mercy or compassion, can and will lead to the urging of the death for morally unjustifiable reasons is understandable. However, legalization can serve to prevent the already existent practice of underground physician-assisted suicide if strict laws to ensure that the interests of the patients are primary are installed and enforced. When a patient asks for assistance in dying, their wishes should be respected as long as the patient is free from coercion and competent enough to give informed consent. The intent of this work is to examine the legalization of assisted suicide in Oregon and the Netherlands and to argue that assisted suicide is morally and ethically acceptable in theory despite some unintended consequences of its implementation.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
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.
Assisted suicide has become apparent in various places around the world such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Oregon and Washington (Humphry). The increasing legalization of assisted suicide creates an even bigger controversy because it disrespects the beliefs of many who are pro-life. But, the act of legalizing assisted suicide in countries and states shows that people are starting to be think more compassionately instead of binding strictly to the laws.
Although there are different forms, the practice of euthanasia is the process of ending an individual’s life. The different forms of euthanasia are Active and Passive euthanasia. There are also different ways that a physician may perform this type of procedure. This course of action may be taken in situations for speeding up the death, typically for medical patients who are severely ill. Some people, depending on their personal views may define it as putting someone out of their misery, where others would refer to euthanasia as being an assisted suicide. All forms of euthanasia are continuously spawning a wide variety of deviating ethical affairs. Issues pertaining to euthanasia include the legitimacy debate of assisted suicide, especially in the state of California.
Euthanasia is one of the most recent and controversial debates today (Brogden, 2001). As per the Canadian Medical Association, euthanasia refers to the process of purposely and intentionally performing an act that is overtly anticipated to end the person’s life (CMA, 1998)
Dying with dignity, mercy death, right to die, and assisted suicide are just a few of the common terms, which describe a person’s death by euthanasia. Euthanasia has and always will be a very sensitive and controversial topic. There are two common questions surrounding this dilemma. The first is when is it considered mercy? Is it when a person is facing a terminal illness? The second is when is considered murder? Is it when a person looking for an easy way out of suffering and pain? This paper will examine the ethical dilemma of euthanasia according to the Christian worldview and compare it to other options of resolving the dilemma.
Euthanasia is very controversial topic in the world today. Euthanasia, by definition, is the act of killing someone painlessly ,especially someone suffering from an incurable illness. Many people find euthanasia morally wrong, but others find people have control over thier own bodies and have a right to die. A solution to this problem is to have the patient consent to euthansia and have legal documentation of the consent.