The Pros And Cons Of Assisted Suicide

America land of the free? Americans have fought for and gained freedom for liberties that we believe we are entitled to. Freedom of speech, freedom of press, right to bear arms and to defend ourselves, yet we are not able to decide our own fate when it comes to our death? Even the poor animals are allowed to die when they are in unbearable pain. I remember when I was eight years old my Saint Bernard, Beethoven, was diagnosed with canine osteosarcoma. Even though he was administered with analgesics and treated with premium care, the time came when the veterinarian said that there was nothing else we could do. It was the first time I had witnessed so much pain in a being I loved. I was hurt by the thought of losing him and not having him with

However, it must also be recognized that even without physician assisted suicide being passed doctors still meddle in a patient’s life by having way worse alternatives to the way of death. For example, David J. Mayo, explains how there is options that are legal that still lead to the hastening of death; one of the examples would be to stop the feeding tubes. His father died of colon cancer at the age of 93 after self-starving himself (qtd. in Karaim 465). Although many people claim that if physician assisted suicide were to be legalized, it would invite abuse from the doctors and maybe even the family members, according to David J. Mayo, “…Oregon’s 15-year experience with legalized death with dignity provides such conclusive data: The threatened abuses simply have not materialized” (qtd. in Karaim 465). It is normal to think that abuse will occur if physician assisted suicide were to be legalized, but it is next to impossible. Obviously many people believe that if physician assisted suicide were to be legalized, it would target the poor or other vulnerable groups. However, Battin et al., “found no evidence that patients in the vulnerable groups were more likely to receive PAS” (qtd. in Lachman). Critics argue that patients might die just because the doctors or nurses in charge of them

A person who is terminally ill will be able to leave this world without having to go through the process of the intense suffering predicted by a doctor. Why should a human being have to suffer on his/her last days on earth? Would they be truly living, or would they be imprisoned in a hospital room for the remaining days depressed and not in control of their life like they used to? They lose their quality of life. Marc Siegel, a doctor, talks about the two roles of a doctor, to prolong life and to ease suffering. He explains how sometimes they conflict with each other, and how the number one priority is to respect a patient’s wishes. He says that they, “…when pain predominates, when the patient is in agony, when reducing morphine cannot bring back quality of life. When the only choice is pain or death, doctors routinely¬ – with their patients’ advance approval – help them choose death” (821). The terminally ill patient does not suffer at the moment of death like she would if she would let nature take its course. Not only would they have a painless death, they would be able to choose when, where, and with whom they want to die. They will be able to say all the goodbyes they want, they could leave this world having made peace with everyone, and they would have the opportunity to really enjoy their quality of life. They will have the opportunity to not go through all the excruciating mental