Byock, I. (2016). The case against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. The Oxford handbook of ethics at the end of life, 366. The article is by Byock (2016) and it presents the case against physician-assisted suicide and euthanansia. It seems the source is arguing against allowing euthanasia and the physician assisted suicide. It presents the case that the euthanasia and suicide weakens the moral grounding as well as the structural integrity of the medical profession when it is allowed. This source is using evidence such as articles and peer reviewed sources to support the argument against euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. A counterargument for one of the provided sources could be that the euthanasia and physician assisted suicide has been used to alleviate suffering of various people who face pain in their lives. Personally, I believe the source is doing a good job of supporting its arguments because it has cited sources which are peer reviewed. At the same time, the authors have also cited each section with the source that has supported the argument. I think this source will be very helpful in supporting my argument because it has good points on why euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should not be allowed. Brueck, M. A., & Sulmasy, D. P. (2019). The genealogy of death: A chronology of US organizations promoting euthanasia and assisted suicide. Palliative & supportive care, 17(5), 604-608. The source is by Brueck (2019) and it looks at the organizations in the United States which promote assisted suicide and euthanasia. It seems the source is arguing that there are several organizations which continue to come up and exist over the years in the United States supporting euthanasia. The source is using evidence from peer reviewed sources such as journals and government registration documents. Official government websites and those of organizations are used as part of the material. A counterargument for one of the provided sources could be that these organizations have struggled to get euthanasia and assisted suicide legalized in the United States. Personally I believe the source the doing a good job in supporting its arguments because it has exhaustively looked at the genealogy of the organizations which have pushed for legalization of the two items over the years in the United States. I think this source will be very helpful in supporting my argument because it shows the organizations which have fought for the legalization but have failed over the years because of the approach and what they have stood for. Elmore, J., Wright, D. K., & Paradis, M. (2018). Nurses’ moral experiences of assisted death: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Nursing Ethics, 25(8), 955-972. The authors of this article look at the moral experiences of nurses when it comes to assisted death. It seems this source is arguing that the experiences and perspectives of nurses are underrepresented in the ethical discourses about ass ...

1. Byock, I. (2016). The case against physician-assisted suicide
and euthanasia. The Oxford
handbook of ethics at the end of life, 366.
The article is by Byock (2016) and it presents the case against
physician-assisted suicide and euthanansia. It seems the source
is arguing against allowing euthanasia and the physician
assisted suicide. It presents the case that the euthanasia and
suicide weakens the moral grounding as well as the structural
integrity of the medical profession when it is allowed. This
source is using evidence such as articles and peer reviewed
sources to support the argument against euthanasia and
physician assisted suicide. A counterargument for one of the
provided sources could be that the euthanasia and physician
assisted suicide has been used to alleviate suffering of various
people who face pain in their lives. Personally, I believe the
source is doing a good job of supporting its arguments because
it has cited sources which are peer reviewed. At the same time,
the authors have also cited each section with the source that has
supported the argument. I think this source will be very helpful
in supporting my argument because it has good points on why
euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should not be allowed.
Brueck, M. A., & Sulmasy, D. P. (2019). The genealogy of
death: A chronology of US
organizations promoting euthanasia and assisted
suicide. Palliative &
supportive care, 17(5), 604-608.
The source is by Brueck (2019) and it looks at the organizations
in the United States which promote assisted suicide and
euthanasia. It seems the source is arguing that there are several
organizations which continue to come up and exist over the
years in the United States supporting euthanasia. The source is
using evidence from peer reviewed sources such as journals and
government registration documents. Official government
websites and those of organizations are used as part of the

2. material. A counterargument for one of the provided sources
could be that these organizations have struggled to get
euthanasia and assisted suicide legalized in the United States.
Personally I believe the source the doing a good job in
supporting its arguments because it has exhaustively looked at
the genealogy of the organizations which have pushed for
legalization of the two items over the years in the United States.
I think this source will be very helpful in supporting my
argument because it shows the organizations which have fought
for the legalization but have failed over the years because of the
approach and what they have stood for.
Elmore, J., Wright, D. K., & Paradis, M. (2018). Nurses’
moral experiences of assisted
death: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Nursing
Ethics, 25(8), 955-972.
The authors of this article look at the moral experiences of
nurses when it comes to assisted death. It seems this source is
arguing that the experiences and perspectives of nurses are
underrepresented in the ethical discourses about assisted death.
The source is using six databases to support the argument:
CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, Joanna Briggs Institute,
PsycINFO, and Web of Science. A counterargument for one of
the provided sources could be that the views are not taken from
nurses on the ground working but using databases which might
not be reliable and valid. Personally, I believe the source is
doing a good job of supporting its arguments because it
represents the results which are 879 from these databases. The
databases are credible sources on medical data. I think this
source will be very helpful in supporting my argument because
it represents the views of the nurses who are actually working
with the patients till their last moments. The
Feedback for 2-2 Assignment: Writing Notes
I left a lot of notes on the doc and rubric, so I won't go deep

3. here, but it seems to me if your argument is to take into account
that this has been legal in a few states for a while now, it should
really focus on what has happened in those states that is a
negative consequence of the policy. I was trying to mentally
align the concerns you listed with the actual policy, and I wasn't
sure I was getting a compelling reason not to practice this, but a
list of concerns ABOUT its practice. Are you arguing for
abolishing the practice, or more stringent guidelines and things
that doctors should consider before even entertaining this as an
option?
Below are the areas of the paper with feedback to be revised.
Writing Plan: Argument
· Describes the argument to be addressed through the essay,
including how the argument is derived from major that is being
considered or field of work
Writing Plan: Key Points
· Determines key points and rationale that will be helpful in
supporting the validity of the argument.
· Mostly aligned with argument, but you mentioned one line
about unintended consequences that got me thinking. This is
already legal in some places. What exactly are the unintended
consequences? I mean, people who want to die, die. Is that it?
See note on doc.
Writing Plan: Audience
· Identifies audience and determines potential challenges
· Doctors? Or voters? I was a little confused.
Running head: PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE

4. 1
PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE
2
Physician-Assisted Suicide Persuasion
Physician-Assisted Suicide
The major I am pursuing is my Bachelors in Nursing, and with
my persuasive essay I intend to convince healthcare providers in
this persuasive essay that physician-assisted suicide (PAS) must
be considered illegal and it should not be practiced in any
hospital that values human life. I had to tell them while
observing the ethical aspects and value of a human soul
alongside the biblical worldview that physician assisted suicide
is killing regardless of how you stage or justify the act.
Doctors, before they start practicing their profession, make the
vow of helping patients and help with the progression of
medication. On the off chance that a patient is critically ill, they
can be made comfortable with drugs like morphine that are
deliberately given through IV or orally to help reduce or stop
any pain or misery the patient is experiencing.
There are several reasons that support my argument. Some of
them are positive while others are negative. But, since the

5. benefits exceed the negative ones, this practice should be
dismissed. For one, we ought not, as a rule, give physicians the
privilege to help kill their patients. The entire history of
medication has been one of improved healing or, in terminal
cases, reduced pain; killing, which debases life to the point of
liquidation, is the exact inverse of good and mindful medical
care (Knaplund, 2010). To legalize suicide along these lines is
to weaponize the therapeutic system against the very individuals
to which it ought to be generally attentive. A second reason why
PAS may sound interesting is that individuals believe that
others ought to be put out of their misery in the event that they
are in pain. Rather than having the doctors take the easy way
out and simply recommend lethal drugs to the patient, I figure
physicians should search for better approaches to relieve the
pain. Another issue with allowing individuals to be prescribed
lethal dosages of medication is that the prognosis the physician
gave them could not be right. According to Brueck & Sulmasy
(2019), PAS is practiced legally in three states only in the
United States. Montana, Washington, and Oregon allow doctors
to perform PAS under the guidelines of the Death with Dignity
Act. The act contains stringent patient eligibility measures. For
example, the Oregon Death with Dignity Act (ODDA) allows
doctors to give a lethal dose of the drug to diagnosed fatally
sick patients. The patients understand that this medication when
taken will take their life within a couple of moments of taking
the medication. All together for an individual to acquire this
prescription as expressed before in the Death with Dignity Act,
they must have a prognosis of a half-year or less, in which a
patient would be considered Hospice or on Hospice care. Who is
to state that what the physician or doctors said is 100 percent
sure? It isn't, and that ought to be considered. Since we've
looked at the issues that emerge with PAS and why it ought to
be kept illegal, we should look at an alternative in contrast to
PAS and how we can keep this illegal.
This essay is meant for the doctors who oppose the fact that
physician-assisted suicide should not be declared illegal

6. because they are the key victims of assisting patients in killing
themselves. I had to remind them that it is just a few states that
legalize mercy killing, and majority of the states are against the
act and law is clear that on the off chance that a physician is
found guilty of murder indictments. So in addition to the fact
that PAS is a shameless act but unlawful. In this manner mercy
killing ought not to be allowed because it conflicts with the
ethical beliefs that human life is relevant (Elmore, Wright &
Paradis, 2018). My challenge is to reaffirm to physicians the
moral and ethical aspects of valuing human life even in critical
conditions.
To ensure proper completion of this essay, there will be need of
using various resources. One of the resources would be data
from various healthcare facility cases about physician-assisted
suicide. This data according to Brueck & Sulmasy (2019) will
assist in giving the proper demographic of the doctors and
patients who participates in this illegal act. Another important
resource would be conduction of interviews among patients to
enable get proper data and the feeling of those who choose
mercy killing using lethal drugs by the aid of physicians. This
will enable come up with a content loaded paper.
My goal in this persuasive essay is to assist individuals in
separating their private wishes for what we each may would like
to have access for ourselves sometime in the not so distant
future — an expectation that frequently neglects to see how
assisted suicide really works — and, rather, focus on the
significant risks we put ourselves into when we legalize PAS as
public policy in our society today. PAS would have many
unintended consequences.
These resources will greatly help in coming up with a valid
essay on PAS. For instance, data from various facilities will
help in confirming the assertion that People on both sides of the
PAS debate care about suffering people and want to prevent
intolerable suffering (Byock, 2016). PAS is more rampant to
terminally ill patients. This data will thus act as undisputable
evidence. The interview conducted among various groups of

7. people will give the patients, and doctors who want the act
legalized an opportunity to confess themselves that they support
the practice. These resources will help me from a stronger
foundation for the essay.
It is of great essentiality to persuade physicians who assist
patients to kill themselves when they are terminally ill that it is
against human right and it devalues the dignity of a person.
Certainly killing and assisted suicide will keep on being
popularized and authorized. But, we should oppose this
tenacious march of sanitized, commended demise. A civilized
culture doesn't murder the most fragile, most debilitated and
generally powerless of its people; we are better than this,
regardless of whether barely some states are definitely not.
References
Byock, I. (2016). The case against physician-assisted suicide
and euthanasia. The Oxford
handbook of ethics at the end of life, 366.
Brueck, M. A., & Sulmasy, D. P. (2019). The genealogy of
death: A chronology of US
organizations promoting euthanasia and assisted
suicide. Palliative & supportive care, 17(5), 604-608.
Elmore, J., Wright, D. K., & Paradis, M. (2018). Nurses’ moral
experiences of assisted death:
A meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Nursing Ethics, 25(8),
955-972.
Knaplund, K. S. (2010). Montana becomes third our state to
allow physician aid in
dying. American Bar Association Section of Real Property,
Trust, and Estate Law eReport, Forthcoming.