Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The morality of suicide
Ethical dilemma suicide
Ethical dilemma suicide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The morality of suicide
To commit suicide is not a crime, but to condone, and assist in it is. Why is it, that if one wishes to end his or her own life, should not be helped to do so if they are unable to in a honorable manner? If suicide is honorable anyways. I do not believe that suicide is good, or right, but if one wishes to end their life, why should they not receive assistance? Why should we force upon them, an extended life in which they would only suffer? I am rather indifferent on this subject, as the morality of choosing the fate of another cannot fall of the side of right, or wrong. It is solely based upon the circumstances, and position one is put in.
Many people around the world today suffer from many forms of disease, and handicaps. From cancer and tumors; to total paralysis and AIDS. Medicine and technology as so far advanced, that many many patients that contract ailments that were once considered a death penalty, now face new hope. While such things as AIDS, and paralysis are not curable, people can be assured a longer, and possibly happier life than they would have a few decades ago; but...
There has been some ethical issues surrounding the development and use of technology, that would consist of some advancements, such as “when in vitro fertilization is applied in medical practice and leads to the production of spare embryos, the moral question is what to do with these embryos” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). As for ethical dilemmas that comes into play with “gene mapping of humans, genetic cloning, stem cell research, and others areas of growing interest to scientist” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). “Life support technology raises serious ethical issues, especially in medical decisions regarding continuation or cessation of mechanical support, particularly when a patient exists in a permanent vegetative state” (Shi & Singh, 2008, p. 182). Health care budgets are limited throughout this world, making it hard for advancements yet even harder to develop the advancements with restraints. Which brings us back to the “social, ethical, and legal constraints, public and private insurers face the problem deciding whether or not to cover novel treatments” 188. Similarly what was mentioned before the decisions about “new reproductive techniques such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection in vitro fertilization (ICSIIVF), new molecular genetics predictive tests for hereditary breast cancer, and the newer drugs such as sildenafil (Viagra) for sexual dysfunction” (Giacomini, 2005).
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
In the end, morals are the only argument surrounding the subject of assisted suicide. There is no real way of determining what is right and what is wrong. It all comes down to your own morals and beliefs regarding human life. Each of us is given our own life and throughout it, we all make our own decisions regarding our wellbeing. We can choose to smoke cigarettes, consume alcohol, speed in cars, and put our lives in danger every day. This is our right as human beings. We chose to live our lives the way we want to live them, why should we not be able to choose how we die?
Terminally ill patients should have the legal option of physician-assisted suicide. Terminally ill patients deserve the right to control their own death. Legalizing assisted suicide would relive families of the burdens of caring for a terminally ill relative. Doctors should not be prosecuted for assisting in the suicide of a terminally ill patient. We as a society must protect life, but we must also recognize the right to a humane death. When a person is near death, in unbearable pain, they have the right to ask a physician to assist in ending their lives.
If an individual wants to end their life, due to age, illness, or any other reason, they should be allowed to decide for themselves what they want. As a culture, we generally look down on suicide, and even disapprove the thought of someone wanting to die. It is often delineated as being selfish, and often leads to preventative course of action to prevent suicide. However, if someone believes that he or she has a moral right to die, and someone else agrees or disagrees, then begins an ethical dilemma. In my personal opinion, if someone wants to die, he or she should be allowed to commit suicide, or be assisted in death. There are implementations, such as not allowing anyone not of a set legal age to commit suicide or seek out an assisted death. If someone has a utilitarian approach to his or her death, believing that they have no further purpose in life, who
Only people who have witnessed or experienced a terminal illness know how much it impacts a person’s life and their families. According to the Cancer Facts and Figures, in 2015, there was an estimate of 1,658,370 people who were diagnosed with cancer and 589,430 of those diagnosed with cancer had died (American Cancer Society). Medication evolves every day, yet there is little to do for cancer patients. They can go through various treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy, however some patients these treatments are unbearable. In four states, physician assisted suicide is legal, many other states are debating on the issue at hand. States that have not legalized assisted suicide is due to it being considered murder and can result in imprisonment and doctor license revoked. There has been recent debates involving whether or not physician assisted suicide should be legalized because it is considered murder. Legalizing assisted suicide does not only provide an option to terminally ill patients, but gives others an option. Although some argue that physician assisted suicide should not be legalized, proponents argue that physician assisted suicide should allow options for the patients that are not suffering.
...t’s family should be able decide for the patient whether or not prolonging their life is moral.
The person has waived their right to life by consenting to suicide, there is no fear that would be caused if only those who are terminally ill and consent are killed, and the grief is inevitable anyways as death is imminent. They go on further to make an analogy with starving children [1]. This analogy does not hold, as the reason that assisted suicide is pursued is to relieve suffering, and is unrelated to the “value” that human life has. Finally, they argue that allowing assisted suicide will cause people to be pressured into committing suicide [1].
Lesser, H. (2010). Should it be legal to assist suicide?. Journal Of Evaluation In Clinical
However it can also make room for medical, legal and ethical dilemmas. Advances in medical technology enable individuals to delay the inevitable fate of death, overcome cancer, diabetes, and various traumatic injuries. Our advances in medical technologies now allow these individuals to do things on their own terms. The “terminally ill” state is described as having an incurable or irreversible condition that has a high probability of causing death within a relatively short time with or without treatment (Guest, p.3, 1998). A wide range of degenerative diseases can fall into either category, ranging from, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease and many forms of cancer. This control, however, lays assistance, whether direct or indirect, from a
Dougherty, Charles J. & Co. “Legalizing Euthanasia Would Harm Society.” Euthanasia- Opposing Viewpoints. Ed.
The authors of “Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong?" say that allowing people to assist in killing and destroying lives, along with devaluing human life, in a society that swears to protect and preserve all life, violates the fundamental moral society has to respect all human life. Once we devalue life, and say a certain quality of life isn’t worth living for a person, where will it stop? If assisted suicide is allowed for the terminally ill, society will start to accept and even presume that those with terminally ill conditions should end their life. The start of this divide assisted suicide can create is exemplified by Ben Mattlin. Mattlin has an incurable disease called spinal muscular atrophy. He was not expected to live into adulthood, yet has survived and now has two children of his own. “I could easily convince anyone that suicide is a rational option for me...and that scares me. Why shouldn’t I have the same barriers protecting me from moments of suicidal fantasies as everyone else has?” (Mattlin). This stresses the danger, as a society, that is posed to those with terminal conditions who want to live. Assisted suicide though seems to almost encourage ill people to end their lives. This is emphasized in the article “Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong?", explaining that if assisted suicide is legalized on the basis of compassion and mercy that society could start assisting “and
It is a big question that most people often struggle with to decide when it is consider appropriate to assist an individual with mercy killing. In 1993, Robert Latimer a Saskatchewan farmer took the life of his twelve-year old daughter Tracy in an act of mercy killing. Latimer’s daughter suffered from the most dreadful form of cerebral palsy. She was severely disabled and had a mind of a four month old baby. Tracy was confined to a wheelchair and had endured multiple operations. She couldn’t walk, talk, or feed herself and she was in constant pain. After Robert Latimer learned that his daughter needed to go through another round of surgery, he knew he had to do something to save her from going through more pain. Therefore, Mr. Latimer decided
One may wonder why in the end to choose euthanasia as a means to deliberately end their life. Some individuals live in excessive chronic pain, some due to poverty or lack of health-care coverage and cannot afford pain-killing medication. Others are denied adequate painkillers because of their physician's lack of knowledge and or inadequate training. They have a terminal illness where disease has adversely affected their quality of life to the point where they no longer wish to continue living. Some have lost their independence and must be cared for continually or simply they realize that they will be dying in the near future and simply want to have total control over the process. But whatever the case may be, the people who decide to commit suicide are unable to accomplish the act alone. They need assistance from their physician to assist the suicide and help them die under conditions in which they wish.
Advances in modern medical science in the near future are dependent upon the advances in methods and procedures that, by today’s standards, are considered to be taboo and dangerous. These methods will not only revolutionize the field of medicine, but they will be the forerunners to a whole new way of treating people. For these advances to take place, several key steps need to be taken both medically and politically. In this paper I will attempt to explain what methods and procedures will be the future of modern medicine, how these methods and procedures can benefit mankind, and finally what changes will be needed in the fields of medicine and politics. First, I’ll attempt to explain which methods and procedures will be the future of modern medicine.