This document provides a critique of Lisa Oll-Adikankwu's persuasive essay against assisted suicide. The critique notes that Lisa has well-researched sources from both sides of the issue and clear writing. It suggests integrating evidence from multiple sources per paragraph rather than just citing one at the end. It also recommends providing credentials for sources and using more direct quotes to reinforce key points. The critique offers a counterargument to one of Lisa's statements about terminally ill patients' capacity to make decisions.

1. Lorryn Tardy – critique to my persuasive essay
For this assignment I’ll be workshopping the work of Lisa Oll-
Adikankwu. Lisa has chosen the topic of Assisted Suicide; she
is against the practice and argues that it should be considered
unethical and universally illegal.
Lisa appears to have a good understanding of the topic. Her
sources are well researched and discuss a variety of key points
from seemingly unbiased sources. Her sources are current, peer
reviewed and based on statistical data.
Lisa’s summaries are well written, clear and concise. One thing
I noticed is that the majority of her writing plan is summarized
and cited at the end of each paragraph. I might suggest that she
integrate more synthesis of the different sources, by combining
evidence from more than one source per paragraph and using
more in text citations or direct quotes to reinforce her key
points.
I think that basic credentialing information could be provided
for Lisa’s sources, this is something that looking back, I need to
add as well. I think this could easily be done with just a simple
“(Authors name, and their title, i.e. author, statistician,
physician etc.…)”, when the source is introduced into the paper
might provide a reinforced credibility of the source.
As far as connection of sources, as previously mentioned, I
think that in order to illustrate a stronger argument, using
multiple sources to reinforce a single key point would solidify
Lisa’s argument. I feel that more evidence provided from a
variety of different sources, will provide the reader with a
stronger sense of credibility and less room for bias that could be
argued if the point is only credited to one source.

2. One area that stuck out to me for counter argument, being that
my paper is in favor of this issue, is in paragraph two where
Lisa states that “physicians are not supposed to kill patients or
help them kill themselves, and terminally ill patients are not in
a position of making rational decisions about their lives.” I’d
like to offer my argument for this particular statement. In states
where assisted suicide (or as I prefer to refer to it, assisted
dying) is legal, there are several criteria that a patient has to
meet in order to be considered a candidate. These criteria
include second, even third opinions to determine that death is
imminent, as well psychological evaluation(s) and an extensive
informed consent process that is a collaborative effort between
the patient, the patient’s family, physicians, psychologists and
nurses. It is a process that takes weeks to months. Patients that
wish to be a candidate, should initiate the process as soon as
they have been diagnosed by seeking a second opinion. As an
emergency room nurse, I have been present for a substantial
amount of diagnoses that are ‘likely’ terminal. Many of these
patients presented to the emergency for a common ailment and
have no indication that they don’t have the capacity to make
such a decision. Receiving a terminal diagnosis does not
automatically mean that the patient is all of a sudden
incompetent or lacks the capacity to make a rational decision. It
is at this stage in the diagnoses that patients should be informed
of all options, including assisted dying. Once all criterion has
been met and approved, the physician prescribes the medication
for the patient to have on hand to self-administer when they feel
that they are ready, this is a means to avoid the often-
unavoidable suffering that comes with dying from a terminal
illness. Terminal illness deaths are not the same as dying a
natural death, which the majority of the time, can be medically
managed much easier to minimize suffering.
Lisa’s sources appear to be credible and relevant. I t appears to
me that the first source listed in her annotations ‘ The Case

3. Against Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia’ written by
Byrock in 2016, is potentially biased, although seems to be
based from peer reviewed sources. Although I feel this source is
biased, having an opposing view of this topic, I feel that it will
serve Lisa well and give her the information and evidence she
needs to formulate a strong argument. Her other two sources
appear to be less biased as they seem to provide data and
information from both sides of the issue.
Lisa’s writing mechanics are strong. Her writing plan is well
articulated and there weren’t any parts that were unclear or
confusing to me as I read it. There were not any spelling or
grammatical errors that were immediately evident to me.
Deliverable 7 - Analyzing and summarizing a Company’s
OperationsCompetencies
· Analyze the role of accounting in business operations.
· Apply the principles of accrual accounting and accounting
cycles.
· Appraise the financial health and performance of a company.
· Analyze cost behaviors and production costing methods.
· Employ accounting data for business analysis and prediction.
· Evaluate accounting-related legal and ethical business
implications.Scenario
The Vice President of Finance called you into a meeting to
discuss the overall vision and future of your company. He states
that he has always admired International Business Machines
(IBM) since he studied the company in college. The VP has not
followed the company as of late and would like you to prepare
an update as to how IBM is doing over last three years and the
top line outlook for next year. The VP would like you to use
similar techniques that you have used in writing your previous
reports.Instructions
Using the financial statements of International Business

4. Machines Corporation:
1. Prepare an income statement vertical and horizontal
analysis of International Business Machines Corporation using
three years of data. Use Mergent Online to download income
statement to Excel.
Be sure to search for International Business Machines Corp, and
choose the United States entity.
FAQ for accessing and downloading income statements
2. Using the line item descriptions from the income
statement, create a new tab and identify which expenses (costs)
are likely fixed, variable, product, and period costs.
3. Using Mergent Online, create a ratio analysis report showing
International Business Machines Corporation and its largest 4
competitors based on total revenue
Download the following ratios and peer average into Excel.
Format and arrange the data in a professional manner:
a. Current Ratio
b. Gross Margin
c. Inventory % of TA
d. Inventory Turnover
e. Debt/Equity Ratio
f. Net Current Assets % TA
g. Net PPE % TA
h. Net Profit Margin %
i. Operating Margin %
j. R + D % TR
k. ROA %
l. ROE %
m. ROI %
n. Selling and General Admin % TR
o. Total Asset Turnover
4. Using the historical income statement data, prepare a sales
(revenue) forecast for the upcoming year including your
assumptions, calculations, and rationale.

5. 5. Using the SEC.gov website, find articles on of International
Business Machines Corporation and comment in a Word
document on any recent accounting standards or ethical
considerations that affect the company.
Sheet1As Reported Annual Income StatementReport
Date12/31/1812/31/1712/31/1612/31/1512/31/1412/31/1312/31/
12ScaleThousandsThousandsThousandsThousandsThousandsTh
ousandsThousandsServices
revenue51,350,00050,709,00051,268,00049,911,00055,673,0005
7,655,00059,453,000Sales
revenue26,641,00026,715,00026,942,00029,967,00035,063,0004
0,049,00043,014,000Financing
revenue1,599,0001,715,0001,710,0001,864,0002,057,0002,047,
0002,040,000Total
revenue79,591,00079,139,00079,919,00081,741,00092,793,0009
9,751,000104,507,000Cost of
services34,059,00034,447,00034,021,00033,126,00036,034,000
37,564,00039,166,000Cost of
sales7,464,0007,256,0006,559,0006,920,0009,312,00012,572,00
013,956,000Cost of
financing1,132,0001,210,0001,044,0001,011,0001,040,0001,110
,0001,087,000Total
cost42,655,00042,913,00041,625,00041,057,00046,386,00051,2
46,00054,209,000Gross
profit36,936,00036,227,00038,294,00040,684,00046,407,00048,
505,00050,298,000Selling, general & administrative expense -
other16,438,00016,568,00016,971,00016,643,00018,532,00019,
187,00019,589,000Advertising & promotional
expense1,466,0001,445,0001,327,0001,290,0001,307,0001,294,
0001,339,000Workforce rebalancing
charges598,000199,0001,038,000587,0001,472,0001,064,00080
3,000Retirement-related costs-
959,000742,0001,052,000811,000995,000945,000Amortization

6. of acquired intangible
assets435,000496,000503,000304,000374,000370,000328,000St
ock-based
compensation361,000384,000401,000322,000350,000435,00049
8,000Bad debt
expense67,00055,00087,000231,000334,000156,00050,000Selli
ng, general & administrative
expense19,366,00020,107,00021,069,00020,430,00023,180,000
23,502,00023,553,000Research, development & engineering
expense5,379,0005,787,0005,751,0005,247,0005,437,0006,226,
0006,302,000Intellectual property & custom development
income1,026,0001,466,0001,631,000682,000742,000822,0001,0
74,000Foreign currency transaction gains (losses)427,000-
405,000116,000-414,000599,000260,000240,000Gains (losses)
on derivative instruments-434,000341,000-260,000853,000-
654,000-166,000-72,000Interest
income264,000144,000108,00072,00090,00074,000109,000Net
gains (losses) from securities & investment
assets101,00020,000-23,000-
47,00026,00029,00055,000Retirement-related income (costs)-
1,572,000------Other income63,000116,000-
85,000260,0001,878,000131,000511,000Other income &
expense1,152-
216,000145,000724,0001,938,000327,000843,000Interest
expense723,000615,000630,000468,000484,000402,000459,000
Total expense & other income-
25,594,00024,827,00025,964,00024,740,00026,421,00028,981,0
0028,396,000Income from continuing operations before income
taxes - U.S.
operations627,000560,0003,650,0005,915,0007,509,0006,857,0
009,668,000Income from continuing operations before income
taxes - non-U.S.
operations10,715,00010,840,0008,680,00010,030,00012,477,00
012,667,00012,234,000Income from continuing operations
before income
taxes11,342,00011,400,00012,330,00015,945,00019,986,00019,

7. 524,00021,902,000Provision for (benefit from) U.S. federal
income taxes - current-342,0002,388,000186,000-
321,0001,134,0001,406,0001,361,000Provision for (benefit
from) U.S. federal income taxes - deferred1,377,00077,000-
746,000553,000105,000-652,000403,000Total provision for
(benefit from) U.S. federal income taxes1,035,0002,465,000-
560,000232,0001,239,000754,0001,764,000Provision for
(benefit from) U.S. state & local income taxes -
current127,00055,000244,000128,000541,000178,000134,000Pr
ovision for (benefit from) U.S. state & local income taxes -
deferred-292,00028,000-44,000116,000-105,000-
321,000289,000Total provision for (benefit from) U.S. state &
local income taxes-165,00083,000200,000244,000436,000-
143,000423,000Provision for (benefit from) nopn-U.S. income
taxes -
current2,135,0003,891,000988,0002,101,0002,825,0003,067,000
3,006,000Provision for (benefit from) nopn-U.S. income taxes -
deferred-386,000-797,000-179,0004,000-266,000-
637,000105,000Total provision for (benefit from) nopn-U.S.
income
taxes1,749,0003,094,000809,0002,105,0002,559,0002,430,0003,
111,000Provision for (benefit from) income
taxes2,619,0005,642,000449,0002,581,0004,234,0003,041,0005,
298,000Income (loss) from continuing
operations8,723,0005,758,00011,881,00013,364,00015,751,000-
-Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax5,000-
5,000-9,000-174,000-3,729,000--Net income
(loss)8,728,0005,753,00011,872,00013,190,00012,022,00016,48
3,00016,604,000Weighted average shares outstanding -
basic912,048.07932,828.30955,422.53978,744.521,004,272.581,
103,042.161,142,508.52Weighted average shares outstanding -
diluted916,315.71937,385.63958,714.10982,700.271,010,000.48
1,094,486.601,155,449.32Year end shares
outstanding892,479.41922,179.23945,867.40965,728.73990,523
.761,054,390.941,117,367.68Earnings (loss) per share from
continuing operations - basic9.566.1712.4413.6615.68--

8. Earnings (loss) per share from discontinued operations -
basic0.010-0.01-0.18-3.71--Net earnings (loss) per share -
basic9.576.1712.4313.4811.9715.0614.53Earnings (loss) per
share from continuing operations -
diluted9.516.1412.3913.615.59--Earnings (loss) per share from
discontinued operations - diluted0.010-0.01-0.18-3.69--Net
earnings (loss) per share -
diluted9.526.1412.3813.4211.914.9414.37Dividends per share
of common stock6.21-----3.3Total number of
employees350,600366,600380,300377,757379,592431,212434,2
46Number of common
stockholders395,480408,697425,272444,582458,306473,872488
,800Foreign currency translation adjustments-730,000152,000-
20,000-1,379,000---
Sheet1Assessment #5Financial DataIncome StatementAll
numbers in thousandsRevenue20182017201620152014Total
Revenue806,338766,083529,515450,557486,280Cost of
Revenue206,052187,289131,070102,571121,020Gross
Profit600,286578,794398,445347,986365,260Operating
ExpensesResearch
Development116,44599,20578,26969,79159,880Selling General
and Administrative262,699220,728166,110151,651383,240Total
Operating
Expenses379,144319,933244,379221,442443,120Operating
Income or Loss221,142258,861154,066126,544(77,860)Income
from Continuing OperationsTotal Other Income/Expenses
Net13,4327,6038,011418504Net
Income207,710251,258146,055126,126(78,364)Source:
Congressional Budget OfficeAssumptions specific to
CompanyCategoryAssumptionTotal RevenueManagement
projects revenue to continue same trend as previous 5 yearsCost
of RevenueManagement is implementing cost savings programs
that should reduce the cost of revenue to approximately 2016
levels as a percentageResearch DevelopmentManagement
believes that new products are the life blood of the company

9. and will continue with it current trend of R& D expensesSelling
General and AdministrativeManagement projects that all other
expense increases will be in line with Inflation
Summary Table 1.
CBO’s Projections of Key Economic Indicators for Calendar
Years 2018 to 2028
Annual Average
Actual,
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021–
2022
2023–
2028
Percentage Change From Fourth Quarter to Fourth Quarter
Gross Domestic Product
Reala

10. 2.6
3.3
2.4
1.8
1.5
1.7
Nominal 4.5 5.2 4.5 3.9 3.7 3.9
Inflation
PCE price index
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.1

11. 2.0
Core PCE price indexb 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0
Annual Average
Unemployment Rate (Percent) 4.4 3.8 3.3 3.6 4.4 4.8
Payroll Employment (Monthly change, in thousands)c 181
211 182 62 25 57
Interest Rates (Percent)
Three-month Treasury bills
0.9
1.9
2.9
3.6
3.7
2.8
Ten-year Treasury notes 2.3 3.0 3.7 4.1 4.1 3.7
Summary Table 1.

12. CBO’s Projections of Key Economic Indicators for Calendar
Years 2018 to 2028
Annual Average
Actual,
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021–
2022
2023–
2028
Percentage Change From Fourth Quarter to Fourth Quarter
Gross Domestic Product
Reala
2.6
3.3
2.4
1.8
1.5
1.7
Nominal 4.5 5.2 4.5 3.9 3.7 3.9
Inflation
PCE price index

13. 1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.0
Core PCE price indexb 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0
Annual Average
Unemployment Rate (Percent) 4.4 3.8 3.3 3.6 4.4 4.8
Payroll Employment (Monthly change, in thousands)c 181
211 182 62 25 57
Interest Rates (Percent)
Three-month Treasury bills
0.9
1.9
2.9
3.6
3.7
2.8
Ten-year Treasury notes 2.3 3.0 3.7 4.1 4.1 3.7
Running head: AN ARGUMENT AGAINST PHYSICIAN-

14. ASSISTED SUICIDE (PAS) 1
PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE (PAS) 6
An Argument against Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS)
An Argument against Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS)
The right of a terminally ill person to get assisted-suicide
remains contentious, with assisted-suicide drawing diverse
opinions across various States. Proponents argue on the basis
that it is a right for human beings while the opponents argue on
ethical reasons and religious perspectives. If one feels that there
is no quality of life left, is it legal to end life at that point? This
is a controversial question that has not been settled by many
across the United States because of the moral aspect attached to
it. I think that the life of a person should remain sacred and no

15. one has the right to end except the creator, thus, in this
discussion, I will argue against physician-assisted suicide and
should not be legalized. Also, I will empty my arguments about
why I feel this act should not be legalized by presenting
research-based arguments to support this claim. As well, I will
discuss opposing arguments accompanied by examples.
Additionally, I will react and invalidate the counter-contention
dependent on my research carried to show why I feel that my
thesis is right.
Both the patient and the physician are involved in facilitating
the act of PAS since the patient out of goodwill accepts to take
lethal medicines that will result in death. In 1997, the state of
Oregon became the first state globally to legalize PAS under the
authorization of Doctor Jack Kevorkian who created the
procedure. Doctor Jack Kevorkian introduced PAS intending to
remove the suffering and pain of the chronically ill patient by
killing them mercifully. At some point, some patients requested
PAS after feeling their life is no longer bearable. I feel PAS
does not value life as a gift from God, and terminating one’s
life through PAS is unacceptable and should never at one point
become legal.
There exist a vast difference when a terminally ill person dies
naturally, and when any form of death assistance comes into
play. Various researches provide immense evidence showing
how those requesting for the PAS are ambivalent about it. As
indicated by Emanuel et al (2016), “once PAS is ratified legal,
it is anticipated that patients will undergo a period of subtle
stress when adapting bearing in mind their parents and friends
are suffering due to heavy medical bills that continue to count.”
The group that goes for the PAS believes that, once they die,
some stress-related issues will be alleviated.
Many reasons make people choose PAS despite them being
hesitant about it. Other than these reasons, Yang & Curlin
(2016) states “there exist many effective killing methods
available other than involving a physician in PAS services, plus,
looking for the doctor's help must, subsequently, be a hidden

16. "weep for help" and a sign that the patient at some level wants
to be talked out of self-killing.” In some cases, the patient’s
request for PAS does not mean he/she wants to die, but its due
to other underlying issues such as financial and psychological
problems pushing the patient to commit the act to get positive
solutions.
Currently, there is a great advancement in healthcare facilities
that modern technological tools are used in different ways to
alleviate pain in terminally ill patients. For what reason should
suicide be a choice so as to keep away from pain, in the event
that it can be controlled? For what reason supported by
proponents of PAS, the act should not be deemed as an
alternative to manage pain and a treatment option. “Pain can be
controlled and ethically acceptable approaches must be
complied with when managing pain because pain management
could be perhaps one of the significant methods in end-of-life
care” (O’Rourke, O’Rourke & Hudson, 2017). When a
terminally ill patient is experiencing extreme pain, he/she
should be assigned a physician who should expertly contain the
situation. Ending a life is not an excellent option to go for when
there are better alternatives available to use to manage pain.
The principles of medicine according to Sulmasy & Mueller
(2018) seek to fight for the moral and ethical rights of human
beings that PAS legalization is against. Hippocratic Oath does
not give physicians mandate to prescribe any lethal drug to on
request or advice as may endanger the life of a person. The life
of a patient must be protected by medical practitioners. On the
side of this view, specialists are considered to treat a patient
and legalizing the end of their lives will be a break of their
obligation and duty. One rule of morals, as I would like to
think, to consider when reacting to a patient's request for helped
suicide is the principle of self-governance, which is simply the
capacity to choose. The ethical principle of beneficence is the
extension of the principle of autonomy since an individual who
has control over life chooses what is right and what gives life
meaning (Sulmasy & Mueller, 2018). It is the mandate of

17. medical practitioners to understand how to handle assisted-
suicide requests from patients.
Another argument against assisted-suicide depends on the
reason that our society would begin down a "slippery slope" of
manhandling the privilege to euthanize patients (Kussmaul,
2017). Many individuals fear that once the killing is accepted
for the critically ill, it will turn out to be broadly practiced and
in the end lead to the use of habitual killing. In extraordinary
cases, some even accept that doctors will euthanize those that
can't bear the cost of clinical coverage just because it's too
genuinely and monetarily depleting. With the potential for a
presented danger of hurting patients through involuntary killing,
Dworkin's theory of paternalism would not allow the
legalization of euthanasia. At last, by not supporting assisted-
suicide, individuals are thus protected to their benefit from the
potential maltreatment of euthanizing patients involuntarily.
The possibility of society heading down a slippery slope if
assisted-suicide somehow managed to be legalized is
impossible.
Concerning this issue, the legalization of assisted-suicide
receives immense support from its proponents. Dying with
dignity is the right many people claim to be granted. As
indicated by Emanuel et al (2016), "many feel that demise with
poise, either alone or with others, is unquestionably desirable
over death without nobility, regardless of whether it be waiting
or rather unexpected". Many imagine that since they are in the
last phases of their lives, they ought to reserve the privilege for
all time to alleviate their pain and languishing.
Advocates of assisted-suicide believe that pain drugs don't
generally stop their agony and that their primary care physicians
are not providing them with satisfying pain management
methods. They feel that passing is the best way to for all time
free them of their difficult condition. As indicated by Yang &
Curlin (2016) "A large number of Americans with critical or
interminable agony related to their clinical issues are being
under-treated as doctors progressively neglect to give thorough

18. pain medication – either because of lacking training, individual
biases or fear of professionally prescribed medication misuse".
Many feel that passing is the main way out of their agony and
lean toward death as an option in contrast to the poor quality of
life.
Euthanasia doesn't generally go easily and on certain events,
there are excruciating outcomes that patients suffer from the
medications that are prescribed. Some side effects can include
outrageous perplexity, anxiety, and feelings of terror. As
indicated by Yang & Curlin (2016), "The body can oust the
medications through vomiting, or the individual may fall into a
prolix condition of unconsciousness instead of passing on
quickly". In the event that a patient encounters complications
from the medications given, it can make them languish over
days before they really bite the dust. Since drugs affect each
individual differently, there is no certain method to know
whether euthanasia will go as arranged.
In summary, I can discern why an individual would need to end
their agony and misery, however, I accept that aiding
somebody's demise is murder and in this manner, ought to
remain illegal. As per O’Rourke, O’Rourke & Hudson (2017)
"the Hippocratic Oath states, I will neither give a dangerous
medication to anyone whenever requested it nor will I make a
recommendation with this impact." What does this Hippocratic
Oath truly mean if a trusted doctor breaks his promise and aids
a patient's passing? In what capacity can trust be set up between
a specialist and his patient if his fundamental objective
conflicts with his promise to recuperate? At the point when
doctors break this promise, the promise amounts to nothing.
Passing with dignity can be practiced without the use of deadly
infusions of morphine to aid one's suicide. This kind of
"killing" ought to never be legalized under any situation. No
individual ought to ever reserve the option to take another
person's life, regardless of whether it is entreated.

19. References
Emanuel, E. J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., Urwin, J. W., &
Cohen, J. (2016). Attitudes and practices of euthanasia and
physician-assisted suicide in the United States, Canada, and
Europe. Jama, 316(1), 79-90.
Kussmaul, W. G. (2017). The slippery slope of the legalization
of physician-assisted suicide. Annals of internal
medicine, 167(8), 595-596.
O’Rourke, M. A., O’Rourke, M. C., & Hudson, M. F. (2017).
Reasons to reject physician-assisted suicide/physician aid in
dying.
Sulmasy, L. S., & Mueller, P. S. (2018). Ethics and the
legalization of physician-assisted suicide. Annals of internal
medicine, 168(11), 834-835.
Yang, Y. T., & Curlin, F. A. (2016). Why physicians should
oppose assisted suicide. Jama, 315(3), 247-248.