The Ethical Issues Of Physician Assisted Suicide

The Ethical Issues Of Physician Assisted Suicide
Physician Assisted Suicide
Physician Assisted Suicide Is it Right or Wrong? The ethical issues of physician–assisted suicide are
both emotional and controversial, as it ranks right up there with abortion. Some argue physician
assisted suicide is ethically permissible for a dying person who has choosing to escape the
unbearable suffering at the end of life. Furthermore, it is the physician's duty to alleviate the patients
suffering, which at times justifies providing aid–in –dying. These arguments rely a great deal on the
respect for individual autonomy, which recognizes the rights of competent people to choose the
timing and manner of their death, when faced with terminal illness.
Others have argued that physician assisted suicide is not ethically permissible, because it contradicts
the traditional duty of physician's to preserve life and to do no harm. Furthermore, many argue that
if physician assisted suicide is legalized, abuses would take place, because as social forces condone
the practice, it will lead to "slippery slope" that forces (PAS) on the disabled, elderly, and the poor,
instead of providing more complex and expensive palliative care. While these arguments continue
with no end in sight, more and more of the terminally ill cry out in agony, for the right to end their
own suffering.
While the main issue that surrounds physician–assisted suicide is pain control, for the terminally ill,
proponents are still unwilling to compromise. However, if both proponents and
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Physician Assisted Suicide Is A Controversial Topic
One may have heard of suicide, but not physician–assisted suicide. The two are very different in
terms of the act of taking one's own life. For instance, physician–assisted suicide is done with help
from another person, usually a physician; where the doctor is willing to assist with either the means
of how to take one's own life or the actual act itself. This can either be by prescribing lethal doses of
drugs to these patients who want to take their own life or by counseling these patients on what drugs
they should take. Essentially, it is giving a painless death to someone who is suffering from an
incurable illness (MedicineNet Inc. 2015).
Physician–assisted suicide is a very controversial topic. Many people feel very strongly about letting
people have free will and others feel very strongly about showing these people compassion instead
of the help of ending their life (Cable News Network (CNN) 2015). Currently the United States has
three states that legalized physician assisted suicide. These three states include Oregon, Washington,
and Vermont (Cable News Network (CNN) 2015). All three of these states allow a competent adult
who has a terminal illness to choose to end their life with the help of a physician (Death with
Dignirty National Center 2015). The people who qualify for this must have at least six months or
less to live (Cable News Network (CNN) 2015).
Oregon first legalized physician assisted suicide in nineteen ninety–four and it became into effect in

When talking about doctors, death and incurable diseases, one of the most controversial topic that
comes up is Physician assisted suicide. Webster's dictionary define it as, "suicide by a patient
facilitated by means or information (as a drug prescription or indication of the lethal dosage)
provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information."
Most of us have experienced the pain of seeing our loved ones dying in a hospital since doctors and
modern medicine can only help us so much. Physician assisted suicide not only helps alleviates the
never ending pain, but patient also dies with dignity. On the other hand, people who oppose it, have
strong religious and ethical beliefs. They think that Physician assisted suicide demeans the human
value and violates doctor's Hippocratic Oath. After researching a lot about this topic, I decided that
taking a moderate stance would be the best option because even though I agree that PAS (Physician
assisted suicide) goes against medical ethics and religious beliefs I also believe that sometimes PAS
is the best option available for people who are fatally sick and want to die with dignity and peace. In
this paper I will discuss the history of physician assisted suicide, why is it important to have this
option available and how should we limit PAS to make a compromise with people who are against
it.
Physician assisted suicide has been around for a long time but it first got noticed and became a part

Persuasive Speech : Physician Assisted Suicide
Cheyenne Jamison
4/19/17
Persuasive Speech Outline
Topic: Physician Assisted Suicide
Specific Purpose: To persuade the audience to favor the legalization of Physician Assisted Suicide.
Thesis: Physician Assisted Suicide is sometimes misunderstood due to how it is termed, but this is
something that needs to be deeply evaluated and legalized in all 50 states.
I. Introduction:
A. Attention Material/Credibility Material: The John Hopkins News–Letter said in 2014 "What
would you do if you only had a month to live? This hypothetical question for most healthy
individuals is the unfortunate reality for many terminally ill patients. Death is as inevitable for those
who are healthy as a horse as it is for those battling incurable diseases; the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
36).
b. John Frank quotes the American Medical Association saying "Allowing physician assisted suicide
would cause more harm than good. Physician– assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with
the physician's role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious
societal risks" (Frank, 36).
i. I personally disagree with the American Medical Associations statement about physician assisted
suicide. I believe that a physician's role is to help a patient to the best of their ability, which also
means to do all they can to relieve a patient's pain and suffering. ii. As the John Hopkins News–
Letter states "we sometimes forget that death can also mean the end of suffering, or the ultimate
source of closure" (News–Letter, 1).
Transition: Now that we have talked about what physician assisted suicide is I will go on to talk
about where it is legalized.
B. Physician assisted suicide is legalized in a small amount of U.S. states, but there are many states
that are working on getting it legalized.
1. Physician assisted suicide was legalized in Oregon in 1995, being the first U.S. state to legalize
physician assisted suicide (Quill, Timothy & Sussman, Bernard).
a. Since the legalization of physician assisted suicide in Oregon 4 other U.S. states have legalized
physician assisted suicide (Carter, 2015).
i.

Physician-Assisted Suicide Essay
Is the role of a medical professional to ensure the well–being of their patients, or to assist them in
ending their lives? Many people may believe that physicians would never perform the latter, but in
actuality one practice does so. Physician assisted suicide is the intentional ending of one's life
brought on by lethal substances prescribed by a doctor. In the majority of cases, the patient is
terminally ill and simply does not desire to live any longer. Their physician provides the medication
necessary to end their life. Many supporters aver that this practice is merely an act of compassion as
terminally ill persons may suffer extreme pain that eradicates any will to live. They also assert that
the decision to die is of the patient's ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
According to Joe Messerli, "Assisting in suicides would be a violation of that oath, and it would lead
to a weakening of doctor–patient trust" (3). If doctors violate the oath, especially the above stated
portions, patients may be inclined to question what other standards of medicine are being breached.
Assisted suicides contravene medical ethics, as evidenced by the multiple violations of the
Hippocratic Oath.
Furthermore, the practice of assisted suicide has a significant possibility of being abused. Assisted
suicides are designed to allow those who are seriously ill and suffer from extreme pain to easily end
their lives (Braddock and Tenelli 1). Those who lack support from members of their family or
friends may feel worthless and hence may desire to end their lives (Pretzer 2). If the patient has no
loved ones to confide to and receive support from, they may feel as if no one cares and therefore no
reason to live exists. Since assisted suicides are unregulated, doctors may allow patients wishing to
die for subordinate reasons, such as the one previously stated, instead of suffering reasons to commit
suicide. Moreover, "Patients who want to die for psychological or emotional reasons could convince
doctors to help them end their lives" (Messerli 3). As stated before, assisted suicides are not meant
to allow those with emotional or mental problems to end their lives. If someone has such problems,
they should

Euthanasia And Physician Assisted Suicide
Abstract: Euthanasia and physician assisted–suicide are terms used to describe the process in which
a doctor of a sick or disabled individual engages in an activity which directly or indirectly leads to
their death. This behavior is engaged by the healthcare provider based on their humanistic desire to
end suffering and pain. This is an act that defies the oath each doctor is under and should not be
treated lightly, and very strict rules and guidelines should be enforced if an individual decides to
take this route with his or her life.
Suicide is, by definition, an act you perform by yourself. If you ask a friend, family member or
doctor to help you commit suicide, you immediately change the definition of suicide from a solitary
act with ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Legally, any doctor who writes out a prescription that he knows will be used for a suicide becomes
an "accessory before the fact of homicide." What this means is that the doctor is knowingly
participating in a homicide because his actions will result in the death of another person. The same
is true of a gun dealer who sells a pistol to someone he knows is about to commit suicide. The gun
dealer is an accessory before the fact of homicide. The vast majority of terminally ill people have
ample time and means to end their lives long before they become too incapacitated to need
assistance from a doctor or anyone else. There are all kinds of internet websites and books in the
public library about how to do it painlessly. Supporters of doctor–assisted suicide know this, which
is why they constantly point to a tiny minority of terminally ill people who are too sick to end their
lives themselves. These people are most often within days of a natural death, and they have the right
to refuse treatment and stop taking medicine at any time.
By the way, physician–assisted suicide laws never apply to people too handicapped to commit
suicide, such as Christopher Reeve or Terri Schiavo. (Anneser, Jox, Thurn, & Domenico Borasio,
2016) These laws apply only to the terminally ill. Once such laws are in place, a physician can no
longer tell a patient, "Where there's life, there's hope. We

Physician Assisted Suicides
Imagine suffering day to day with consistent hospital visits, numerous medications, and unbearable
pain for the next six months of your life, then being told that dying peacefully is not a granted
privilege. Then imagine not being able to die in a controlled and dignified process like you prefer to.
How would that affect the way you feel about death and the rest of your life you have left? Millions
of people suffering from terminal illnesses consider physician–assisted suicide, but their wishes are
rejected due to state and government beliefs. In fact, only five states out of fifty have a law
permitting citizens the right to participate in physician–assisted suicide. That leaves just only 10% of
the United States entitling critically ill patients to die with nobility. However, many citizens are
commencing to lean toward physician–assisted suicides once they ascertain they hold a terminal
illness. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
With self–interest, patients inquire a legal doctor about their privilege of a controlled death by oral
medication. Physician–Assisted Suicides allow "a competent adult resident of the state to obtain a
prescription from a physician for a lethal dose of medication, for the purpose of causing death
through self–administration" (Ganzini 77). Aid in dying is a term commonly used for physician–
assisted suicide. In other words, Physician–Assisted Suicides permit terminal patients and
physicians to work together to accommodate a licit planned death. Furthermore, with the permission
of AID, "a physician writes a prescription for the life–ending medication for a terminally ill,
mentally capacitated" (Orentlicher, Pope, and Rich

Physician Assisted Suicide: The Right to Choose
Did you know, about 57% of physicians today have received a request for physician assisted suicide
due to suffering from a terminally ill patient. Suffering has always been a part of human existence,
and these requests have been occurring since medicine has been around. Moreover, there are two
principles that all organized medicine agree upon. The first one is physicians have a responsibility to
relieve pain and suffering of dying patients in their care. The second one is physicians must respect
patients' competent decisions to decline life–sustaining treatment. Basically, these principles state
the patients over the age of 18 that are mentally stable have the right to choose to end their life if
they are suffering from pain. As of right ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A patient must meet the requirements in order to qualify for physician assisted suicide. The patient
must be "diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death within six months" (Fass, and Fass
846). Being a legal resident of a state that has legalized the procedure and being eighteen years old
are also requirements. Another qualification is being able to make and communicate health care
decisions. Along with those requirements, there are certain guidelines that must be followed during
the process of physician assisted suicide. First, the patient must make two oral requests for physician
assisted suicide at least fifteen days apart. A written request that has to be signed in front of two
witnesses must also be provided to the physician. The patient then has to be referred to a consulting
physician, so that he can confirm the diagnosis and prognosis and approve that the patient is capable
of making decisions related to health care. "The prescribing physician must notify the patient of
alternatives to suicide, including comfort care, hospice care, and pain management" (Fass, and Fass
846). It is expected of the physician to encourage the patient to tell their family. The physician has to
follow rules to dispense the medication after these steps. One rule is to be registered as a dispensing
practitioner and maintaining a current Drug Enforcement Administration certificate in order

Physician Assisted Death For The Terminally Ill
University Name
Name of The Institute
Course Title
A Report on
Physician assisted death for the terminally ill in US
Student Name
Introduction
In United States, Euthanasia is a highly controversial subject among politicians, legislators and
society members. Just the mention of this issue polarizes different groups on opposing ends as some
either support it and others want to keep it illegal and unlawful(Steck, Egger, Maessen, Reisch,
&Zwahlen, 2013). The main ideology that is discussed in the situation is whether an individual has a
right on his own life in cases of terminal illness where there is no way of recovering according to
medical professionals. The argument that is for the provision of assisted–death for terminally ill can
be understood by other names of Euthanasia which are– mercy–killing and dignity–death. These
names are given to the practice of physical assisted–death as it allows the terminally ill patients to
avoid the extreme pain, constant awareness of certain death and humiliating medical conditions that
are part of some terminal illnesses. In this report, the present state of Euthanasia has been evaluated
in context of United States. The goal is to look for the existing political and legislative environment
for and against Euthanasia and identify an appropriate solution.
Present State of Euthanasia
In most of the western countries, the legislators are no longer keeping the rights of people to decide
whether or not they want assisted–death if

Assisted Suicide Or Physician Aid For Dying ( Pad ) Is...
While many Americans assume "assisted suicide" or physician aid–in–dying (PAD) is unethical,
they may not be fully aware of what it is and how it helps people. Imagine a loved one of yours was
near the end of their life. The doctors predict only six months or less remain of their life and these
next six months will consist of excruciating pain and will be almost too unbearable to comprehend.
As the six months progress this person will lose the ability to eat. They will be forced to a diet of
flaky ice chips which will put them in a state of relentless hunger making their body weaker and
more painful than it had been before. They will also lose the ability to care for themselves and will
find themselves relying on family members or complete strangers at times to care for their most
private needs. After all this treatment, pain, embarrassment, and utter helplessness the patient will
feel as if they have lost their dignity, they will feel as if they are a burden to everyone around them
and will even become depressed in some cases. If the loved one lives in Washington State, Oregon,
or Vermont they will then be faced with two options regarding the next six hypothetical months they
can decide to take on the most unbearable six months of their life or they can resort to an alternative
called "Death with Dignity" in which they will be administered a dose of medication from their
physician that will take their life. The process is painless and can only be administered to patients

People who die of a prolonged illness or had a predictable steady decline due to a condition like
heart disease, diabetes, or Alzheimer's disease account for ninety percent of deaths each year (Girsh
45). Most of the people who died suffered greatly because of their disease. However, if euthanasia
or physician–assisted suicide was legal, the suffering could have been severely lessened. People who
oppose both options have many reasons why euthanasia or physician–assisted suicide should not be
legal. The Hippocratic Oath, the fear they could be abused by the poor, Nazi–styled teachings might
return, or people may feel coerced, and the right to die is not an actual right are a few examples of
what the people who oppose euthanasia or physician–assisted ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
However, in Oregon, the average user of the Death with Dignity Act holds onto the prescription they
receive from the doctor before they take it is around forty–two to forty–nine days (Friedman 78). If
a person was depressed, he or she would have most likely use the lethal prescription sooner than
forty days after they obtain it. Additionally, fifteen percent of the people who receive said
prescriptions chose to wait to use them according to The Oregon Department of Human Services
(Friedman 88). Similarly, one Safeguard is a mental evaluation makes certain the patient is of sound
mind (Brock 60). This ascertains those who only wish to die because they see no way out, other than
to not suffer, can not abuse the option of euthanasia or physician–assisted suicide. Besides, some of
the people choose to either die of natural causes or live week to week instead of using the prescribed
medication they obtained from the doctor (Friedman 81). Evidence exists to present the fact of just
having the lethal medication as an option gives people the peace of mind in their final days or
months (Friedman 80). Thus, the probability for any one person to be successfully coerced into
using physician–assisted suicide or euthanasia is extremely

Essay on Legalizing Physician-Assisted Suicide
Physician–assisted suicide should be a legal option, if requested, for terminally ill patients. For
decades the question has been asked and a clear answer has yet to surface. It was formed out of a
profound commitment to the idea that personal end–of–life decisions should be made solely
between a patient and a physician. Can someone's life be put into an answer? Shouldn't someone's
decision in life be just that; their decision? When someone has suffered from a car accident, or
battled long enough from cancer, shouldn't the option be available? Assisted suicide shouldn't be
seen as cheating death, but as a way to pay homage to the life once lived. As far as including the
mentally challenged in this equation, I am against it. The mentally ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Even so approximately 200,000 to 250,000 mentally ill patients died unwilling. In most cases
families were not contacted and received false notice from a letter sent through the mail. Before this
worldwide ordeal, the Romans and Ancient Greeks supported voluntary euthanasia since the 1800s.
America government was no big fan of the assisted suicide. It wasn't until the early 1900s that a
public survey was released showing that more than half of the Americas were in favor of assisted
suicide. This survey exploded great debates in courts, institutions, medical journals, etc. Jack
Kevorkian was known widely throughout America for his many assisted suicides. Numerous times
Kevorkian was tried for his participation, but the public support helped him escape (prolong) his
chances in jail. It wasn't until 1999 that Kevorkian was convicted to a 10–25 sentence in jail for first
degree murder of Thomas Youk. Thomas Youk suffered a severe disability and like many of
Kevorkian's patient he wanted to die. With the support from Youk's family, Kevorkian followed
through with his word, injecting a death substance. This ordeal was recorded and later broadcasted
on CBS 20/20. Some would argue that it was modern propaganda. I would agree with this. The
death caught on camera showed a pain–free way to die, almost becoming desirable to those who
watched (since nobody wants a painful death). Kevorkian

Physician Assisted Death Ethical Dilemma
Physician Assisted vs. Natural Death; Ethical Dilemma In our country the premise of physician
assisted death conjures images of suicidal madmen, hell bent on death and mayhem. The reality is,
that could not be farther from the truth. So why is there a stigma on assisting patients with taking
their own life? Others look at this as a dignified means to those suffering a terrible fate. There are
many issues that weight heavy on the difference between physician assisted and vs. natural death. Is
it cruel to let a terminal ill patient who will suffer horrendously until nature take its course? Would it
be more humane to allow a patient to pass peacefully without the suffering or enduring painful end?
This report will examine physician assisted death ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Over the years since the first approval of physician assisted suicide, the opposition has challenged
this ruling, but in stance to find common ground, the Washington State Medical Association created
13 panel physicians and of Life task force with a sole purpose to find that common ground.
According to the article Finding Common Ground, "By putting both issues on the table–but not
insisting they are causally linked–physicians came together to talk over a range of urgent clinical
concerns and search for common ground" (Back, Colley, & McGough, 1997). The future depends on
finding that common ground, though it will not be an easy path forward, the notion of physician
assisted suicide will still present a challenging fight. The ethical dilemma of this highly
controversial subject will continue to split our approach to the notion of assisted suicide. As we age,
we come to terms with our own mortality, how we choose to leave this world isn't always up us. For
those who suffer from a terminal fate, maybe they should have the choice, and those who understand
their current condition can provide them the dignity they deserve without repercussions. The only
way we as a society can move ahead, is to find a common

The Doctrine Of Physician Assisted Suicide
Although a majority of Americans consider suicide morally wrong, the public shows a broad support
for the idea of physician assisted suicide when considering terminal patients. However, even though
it is the same concept, the term "physician assisted suicide" is a somewhat negative implication for a
substantial amount of Americans, which is why the public is divided when asked about its moral
acceptance. Physician–assisted suicide is thought by many to be a form of euthanasia, however, it is
not. Euthanasia is when a doctor injects a patient with a lethal dosage of medication accelerating the
death process. During this process, the physician only prescribes a lethal dose of medication to a
patient. According to Dr. Brian Pollard, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
(Oregon health authority, 2015) Just a month later of November 1997, another state wide ballot
presented which asked Oregon voters to withdrawal the Death with Dignity Act. The ballot was
carried out, yet the voters still favored the act by a 60% margin, this allowed the Death with Dignity
Act to remain. Oregon then became the first state to allow this practice followed by Washington,
Vermont, and Montana. New Mexico has become significantly closer to becoming the fifth state
(Ganzini, 2015). DWDA allows terminally ill individuals to end their lives through the method of
self–administration of medications that cause death; these medications are prescribed by a physician
for this purpose. The law states that, in order to participate, the patient must have specific criteria's
to be able to participate in the program. The patient verbally voices two requests to willingly take
their own lives, this request must be at least 15 days apart and the patient must also provide a written
request to the physician followed by two witnesses including one that is not related to the
participant. Following this step the diagnosis and prognosis must then be confirmed by the primary
physician and consulting MD. This is also completed with an assessment determining whether the
patient is capable of making health care decisions for him/herself (Ganzini, 2015). The patient may

Imagine a cancer patient on a short rode to death. The pain this patient is experiencing is unreal and
unimaginable to most. The pain medicine that can be used does little to take the agony away. The
doctors can put the patient in an induced coma, but what kind of living is that? It is not living. The
patient does not want to go on. Is it so wrong to ask for a way out? With less than six months to live,
the patient's hope is gone. Many argue that euthanasia is not ethical, but is it really ethical to let
someone live in constant, horrifying pain and agony? While in some cases having the right to die
might result in patients giving up on life, physician–assisted suicide should be legalized in all fifty
states for terminally ill patients with worsening or unbearable pain.
What is physician–assisted suicide? "Suicide is the act of taking one's own life. In assisted suicide,
the means to end a patient's life is provided to the patient (i.e. medication or a weapon) with
knowledge of the patient's intention" (American Nurses Association). Physician–assisted suicide is
known by many names such as death with dignity, right to die, and of course, euthanasia. Euthanasia
is a much more in–depth term concerning the patient and the type of suicide.
Euthanasia, often called "mercy killing", is the act of putting to death someone suffering from a
painful and prolonged illness or injury. Euthanasia means that someone other than the patient
commits an action with the intent to

Physician Assisted Death Controversy
Over the past 18 years, the controversy of Physician assisted death (PAD) has swept the world.
Since 1997, four states in the united states have legalized PAD and several countries in Europe have
passed similar laws. PAD is slowly becoming more and more popular among Americans, but for
those people who are still highly opposed to the idea, why? Research has proven that PAD is not
considered abuse because physicians are required to give their patients informed consent. Many
terminally ill patients are requesting PAD and the choice to partake in the new phenomenon is
completely up to the patient, even after the pills are administered. The prerequisites are many and
the majority of people in fact do not qualify. on Lachman says "Physician–assisted ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
A patient has to judge his or her own quality of life, making the action of assessing if a patient's
quality of life is so low that they should be considered for PAD. Although dogs and humans are very
different creatures, anatomically and spiritually, PAD is the same concept of putting a dog to sleep.
Both beings are loved by others greatly and both experience a low quality of life when they are ill.
But why is it better to put dogs down when they are suffering, but it is not ethical for it to be done
when a human is suffering? 7.6 million companionship animals were put down last year (2014)
(ASPCA). The same idea and process are behind PAD. Physician Assisted Death is not abused by
physicians, despite what many people believe PAD is very uncommon, even in states where it is
legal. "Approximately 1 of 1,000 Oregonians obtain and use a lethal dose of medication; 17%
personally considered it as an option." (Lachman). But America is not the only place where is a
controversy. "85% of 218 nurses in Australia carried out the request the physician's request for
active euthanasia" (Lachman), and "10,000 citizens of the Netherlands, where PAD is legal,

The debate of Physician Assisted Suicide
Over the years the medical field has developed many miraculous ideas and procedures. From organ
transfers to blood transfusions, tons of lives have been saved. A doctor's whole purpose is to help
those dying to live. Yet, doctors have developed PAS, Physician Assisted Suicide, also known as
Physician Assisted Death, and not to be mixed up with Euthanasia. Physician Assisted Suicide is
morally wrong, gives doctors too much power, and it opens a door for those less critical patients to
receive treatment too.
"He started at a time when it was hardly talked about and got people thinking about the issue."
(Philip Nitschke, Exit International) The debate of Physician Assisted Suicide has been going on
since over 2000 years ago during the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
If anyone can ask for assisted suicide, then that means that the doctor could make the decision to
give anyone who asks for the treatment the lethal dosage of drugs. This could lead to the idea that
anyone who wants to commit suicide doesn't have to make the decision for themselves. If they ask a
power–hungry doctor for their opinion, then it could lead to a death, when there could have been an
intervention.
Assisting in taking a life is unmoral. There are so many people just so broken and hurting that they
think suicide is the answer. It's not easy to overcome either. It's like an anchor that pulls you into the
darkness, and just keeps pulling you deeper and deeper. No matter how much you fight, pull,
scream, and cry, you can't get free. It's a feeling of total emptiness and worthlessness. Even once
you're over it, the thought still pops up, and it's a continuous fight. But, with love and hope, suicide
can be overcome, for, in the bible it says that, through Christ we are over–comers, and his love is
above all else.
Finally, there has been questioning of whether or not critically ill patients should be allowed to be
physician assisted in committing suicide. They are miserable, and seemingly becoming a shell of the
person they used to be. Wanting to end life because you're not the person you used to be is
understandable in most eyes. Then, there is the idea that people have the right to die

Physician Assisted Suicide And The Rights Of Patients
Physician–assisted suicide needs to be recognized by the federal government to show terminally ill
patients that their right to autonomy is not being ignored. The Bill of Rights of Patients was
constructed to outline just this. According to the American Cancer Society, "the American Hospital
Association drafted a Patients' Bill of Rights to inform patients of what they could reasonably expect
while in the hospital." One of the notes stated in the Bill of Rights of Patients is the right to
autonomy. The right to autonomy specifically states that "patients have the right and ability to make
their own choices and decisions about [the] medical care and treatment that they receive" (US
Legal). If this right to autonomy is ignored what rights do terminally ill patients have? The answer is
little to none. Physician–assisted suicide and the right to autonomy go hand in hand. The more
knowledge that people have, the greater their ability to make educated and insightful decisions about
the medical choices that are accessible to them and their families. Physician– assisted suicide should
be like any other treatment someone can ask for, and the right to autonomy protects this doctor–
patient agreement.
Physician–assisted suicide should be readily available to all terminally ill patients to illustrate to
them that their tremendous pain and suffering does not have to be prolonged.
Everyone should be able to choose when and how they want to die, and they should be able to do so
with

Essay on Physician-Assisted Suicide
Suicide is one person's personal decision; physician–assisted suicide is a patient who is not capable
of carrying the task out themselves asking a physician for access to lethal medication. What people
may fail to see however is that the physician is not the only healthcare personnel involved; it may
include, but is not limited to, a physician, nurse, and pharmacist. This may conflict with the
healthcare worker's own morals and there are cases in which the patient suffers from depression, or
the patient is not receiving proper palliative care. Allowing physician–assisted suicide causes the
physician to become entangled in an ethical and moral discrepancy and has too many other issues
surrounding it for it to be legal. Physician–assisted ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Physician–assisted suicide was first made legal in the state of Oregon. (Hendin) In cases of
euthanasia, physicians often give lethal doses of a medication to terminate a patient's life because
they're experiencing intolerable pain. Patients who wish to use the Death with Dignity law in
Oregon must be eighteen or older, must be a resident of Oregon, and they must be able to make their
own health care decisions. (Sharp 53) However, the law does not require the patient to be in
unmanageable pain, they must just have a prognosis of less than six months to live. (Sharp 54) This
law seems to be in place to kill patients more quickly to open up hospital space, instead of
compassionately ending someone's suffering.
Oregon's physicians are required by law to recommend hospice and palliative care, but are often not
qualified, therefore only thirteen percent of dying patients get to hear their alternatives. (Hendin)
Oregon also does not require a psychiatric evaluation when a patient makes a request for suicide.
(Hendin) Studies have shown that 13–77% of patients who request assisted suicide are suffering
from depression; however, psychiatrists believe that depression is a normal response to a severe
illness. (Boyd) Also, patients who are aware they are going to receive a psychological evaluation
which may allow them to commit suicide may lie during the evaluation so that they seem fine.

Physician-Assisted Suicide Case
Petitioners in this case are the State of Washington and its Attorney General. Respondents Harold
Glucksberg, Abigail Halperin, Thomas A. Preston, and Peter Shalit, are medical physicians who
practice in the State of Washington, along with three gravely ill, pseudonymous plaintiffs who have
since died and the non–profit organization that counsel people considering physician–assisted
suicide, Compassion in Dying, sued in the United States District Court, seeking a declaration that
Wash Rev. Code 9A.36.060(1) (1994) was unconstitutional. Washington vs. Glucksberg, 521 U.S.
702 (1997). The Washington State statute provided a person was guilty of the felony of promoting a
suicide attempt when the person knowingly caused or aided another person ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and began this case as they do in all Due–Process cases by
examining the nation's history, legal traditions and practices. (Casey, 505 at U. S. 833; Cruzan at 497
U. S. 261 and Moore vs. East Cleveland, 431 U. S. 494, 503 (1977). Anglo–American common law
has punished or disapproved of assisting suicide for seven centuries and rendering such assistance is
a crime in almost every state; such prohibitions have never contained exceptions for those who were
near death; the prohibitions in recent years were reexamined and, for the most part reaffirmed in a
number of states; and the President signed the Federal Assisted Suicide Funding Restriction Act of
1997, which prohibits the use of federal funds in support of physician–assisted suicide. (521 at U. S.
702). It has always been a crime in the State of Washington for an individual to knowingly cause or
aide another person to attempt suicide. (§ 9A.26.060(1). The Court held that § 9A.26.060(1) ban on
assisted suicide was not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and did not result in any
fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause. (521 at U. S. 702). Although many
liberties that are protected by the Due Process Clause revolve around personal autonomy, it does not
warrant the sweeping conclusion that any and all important, intimate, and personal decisions are so
protected. Id. The Court also held in order for Washington's ban to be constitutional, it had

A Research Study On Physician Assisted Suicide
Living Proof, Miss Evers Boys, and You Don't Know Jack are all movies based off of true events.
These three movies all faced ethical and unethical events. Living Proof has to do with a
compassionate research doctor that is trying to get a drug for breast cancer called Herceptin
approved through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This Film has some unethical and
ethical events take place like favoritism, the funding, and of course the process to get FDA approval.
Miss Evers Boys had several unethical events occur during the Tuskegee study. This study was to
see if black men had the same symptoms to syphilis as the white men did. In this film the providers
lied to their patients, broke confidentiality, and misrepresented theirself. You Don't Know Jack is a
film about physician assisted suicide. Is it ethical to be able to end your life at any given point and
time that you want? Should be allowed to legalized physician assisted suicide Jack is the physician
in this movie that believes very strong in people being able to have the assistants of a physician to
end their own life.
Living Proof is a great film in my opinion. Dr. Slamon is a very compassionate doctor and never
gave up on his research or his beliefs. He made a lot of sacrifices when it came to family time while
he was trying to development Herceptin and going through the process of getting it approved
through FDA. When trying to get something FDA approved it can be tricky due to so many
eligibility

Essay On Physician Assisted Suicide
Writing Project Worksheet
1. This paper will examine the Washington state policy of physician–assisted suicide.
2. State Info: (characteristics, size, culture, political culture, industries, features, etc. to explain state
support of policy)
Washington is a state in the northwestern United States with an estimated population of 7,288,000,
as of July 1, 2016. Washington's population is primarily white at 69% (not including Hispanics),
with Hispanics comprising 12.4%, Asians 8.6%, and African Americans 4.1% ("QuickFacts"). This
ethnic distribution does not appear to have any special characteristics that may greatly affect state
policy though the fact that there is a large majority of whites may be of some consequence. In
general, most of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This action, which took place but a few years after Washington's legalization of assisted suicide in
2008, demonstrates a continuing willingness to make very controversial changes. Overall,
Washington is a Democratic state in a historically liberal area of the United States with a major
industry involved in health. In addition, Washington has demonstrated a tendency to promote
controversial changes through its legalization of marijuana. These factors are all likely to have
contributed to Washington's policy on physician–assisted death.
3. Policy Info: (what is the policy, who passed it, when, how was it passed)
Washington legalized physician–assisted suicide through the Death with Dignity Act, which was
passed by an initiative on November 4, 2008 and became law on March 4, 2009. As the Death with
Dignity Act was an initiative (Initiative 1000), it was both proposed and voted into law by the
citizens of Washington. In particular, the initiative was filed and supported by former governor
Booth Gardner, who helped garner enough signatures for the initiative to be put on the ballot in
2008. The initiative passed with 1,715,219 votes or 57.82%, a significant margin ("Washington
Initiative 1000"). The act "allows terminally ill adults seeking to end their life to request lethal doses
of medication from medical and osteopathic physicians" ("Death with Dignity Act"), as long as they
are residents of Washington state who have fewer than six months to live. The

Persuasive Speech On Physician Assisted Suicide
Introduction
Attention getter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWxjDcLYKpU begin with video of Brittany's
story and play until 1:35
Following the video: the problem many people are facing is the inability to choose the way they
want to end their life
I personally have dealt with people in my life that battled terminal illness
I specifically remember my cousin Nathan noting that he was ready to enter the gates of heaven at
only 23 years old while he battled a rare form of bone cancer
Benefits of audience: perhaps you too know someone suffering indescribable pain that wishes to exit
,and maybe you don't feel too keen on the idea now, but after my speech you'll have a new idea of
physician assisted suicide
Thesis: today I'm going to talk to you ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Existing laws in the states that permit physician–assisted suicide require that patients have a
terminal illness (including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease, cancer, and many other
debilitating diseases). You must be of sound mind (competent to make decisions), and be expected
to die within six months of submitting your request. (Soo Borson is a professor of psychiatry and
behavioral sciences and psychosocial and community health nursing at the University of
Washington.)
C. The specific method in each state varies, but mainly involves a prescription from a licensed
physician approved by the state in which the patient is a resident.
PAS is very different than euthanasia because it is centralized around choice.
In PAS, the patient must self–administer the medications; the "assisted" portion attributes to a
physician providing the medications, but the patient decides whether and when to ingest the lethal
medication. Euthanasia occurs when a third party administers medication or acts directly to end the
patient's life. Euthanasia is illegal in every state, including Washington. (CNN).
Two of the costly effects of limiting this option is lack of respect for autonomy and refusing to grant
death upon those that wish for it.
Transition: I will first go into the lack of choice that's

Physician Assisted Suicide Essay
A poll in 1999 found that 52% of Americans though that Kevorkian should have been found guilty
on some charge, while only 27% said that he was not guilty. The survey also found that 45% of
Americans have a positive opinion of Kevorkian while 36% have an unfavorable one. After being
informed that Kevorkian does not have a license to practice medicine and that he supports the right
of doctors to help healthy patients die, his approval rating dropped to 19%, while his unfavorable
rating rose to 57%.
Public support for physician assisted suicide was confined to the limited situation where a terminally
ill patient would ask a doctor for help to commit suicide. Fifty four percent thought that doctors
should ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Thirty six states have statutes that explicitly criminalize assisted suicide: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa,
Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin. Eight states
criminalize it through common law: Alabama, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada,
Vermont, West Virginia. Three have abolished common law crimes and do not have statutes
criminalizing assisted suicide: North Carolina, Utah, Wyoming. In Ohio, the state's supreme court
ruled in Oct 1996 that assisted suicide is not a crime. In Virginia, there is no real clear case law on
assisted suicide, nor is there a statute criminalizing the act. However, there is a statute that imposes
civil sanctions on person assisting in suicide. Oregon permits physician assisted suicide.
Many of these states have challenged the laws throughout the recent years. In result, no state has
changed its ban on physician assisted suicide, however, South Carolina recently joined the list of
states that have

The Legalization Of Physician Assisted Suicide
It is obvious discussing physician–assisted suicide is a very controversial issue that is discussed
daily by those who wish to die to avoid loss of dignity and also by those who think it is unethical.
For physician–assisted suicide to even be considered, the patient must be of sound mind when they
are requesting death with dignity. Physician–assisted suicide should be a legal option for people who
are unable to end their own lives. However, there should be safeguards to prevent any sort of abuse.
There should be the legalization of physician–assisted suicide, but not for active euthanasia. "It
should never be contemplated as a substitute for comprehensive comfort care or for working with
patients to resolve the physical, personal, and social challenges posed by the process of dying"
(Meier, D.E., p. 294). If an incurable patient who is suffering asks for specific help in physician–
assisted suicide, physicians should have the obligation to fully scrutinize the request. Not only is it
the seriousness of considering medicine as the placement of certain suicide an issue, it is a form of
direct killing. Medical advances are surely making it easier to reduce pain and suffering, so why
should there be policies devised and sanctioned by the state to kill those in pain and suffering?
An article in the journal of the American Medical Association by Ethics and Health Policy argues
that "allowing physicians to assist in the suicide of hopelessly ill patients will violate the nature of

Physician Assisted Euthanasia
Euthanasia or physician–assisted suicide (PAS) is one of the most controversial issues in health care.
Euthanasia is intentionally ending one's life to relieve persistent pain and suffering. Dr. Kevorkian,
an assisted suicide activist, was known for using unorthodox methods of terminating a life. As a
result, he made headlines in 90's. Dr. Kevorkian brought dignity to those suffering from unbearable
terminal diseases by terminating their life with a lethal dose of potassium chloride. (Schencker,
2015)
Oregon was the first state in 1994, Washington in 1997 and most recently Vermont in 2013, who
enacted Death with Dignity laws. This law allows "mentally competent, terminally–ill adult state
residents to voluntarily request and receive a prescription ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The Netherlands, Belgium, and Switzerland are among the jurisdictions where assisted suicide is
legal. Canada is now looking at ways to decriminalize physician–assisted suicide. The Canadian
Nurses Protective Society recently published an article regarding the matter. In Quebec, legislation
was passed that could classify physician–assisted suicide as part of the "continuum of care" in that
province (Nurse, 2015). As a result, lawmakers have set criteria for those seeing PAS, and
essentially deemed is a medical procedure opposed to criminalizing the act of ending one's life.
Although this is not in effect in Quebec, it is still illegal under federal law. Therefore bills have been
introduced to change the criminal code on assisted suicide and establish a way to monitor the system
and review statistics on assisted suicide (Nurse,

Should Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal?
The Right to Die Having the right to life, also gives one the right to death. Outrageously, physician
assisted suicide is illegal in all but five states in the U.S; including California, Montana, Oregon,
Washington, and Vermont; this law, violating rules of ethics, also defies morals. Some actions in the
past, including women not having voting rights, and experimentation on prisoners and the mentally
ill, also infringed upon ethics and morale. Women not being permitted to vote before the 19th
Amendment––Women's Suffrage Act––opposed the logic of equality, likewise, experiments on
prisoners and the mentally incompetent violated the 8th Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual
punishment ("CRS Annotated Constitution"). One cannot help but wonder, will physician assisted
suicide be legal in all states, a century from now? Because people in America are given the right to
LIFE, liberty, and property, they should also be given the choice of ending their pain more swiftly.
Preventing one with a terminal illness from physician assisted suicide, defies numerous ethical
violations along with principles. An ethical violation here is denying one their rights as a human.
Many regulations and strict guidelines are required when resorting to physician assisted suicide,
therefore, intensely thorough decisions are made when deciding to aid in this act. Some of those
regulations would be that one "must be at least 18 years of age, capable making health–care
decisions for

One of the most controversial end–of–life decisions is "physician–assisted suicide" (PAS). This
method of suicide involves a physician providing a patient, at his or her own request, with a lethal
dose of medication, which the patient self–administers. The ethical acceptability and the desirability
of legalization of this practice both continue to cause controversy (Raus, Sterckx, Mortier 1). Vaco v.
Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg were landmark decisions on the issue of physician–assisted
suicide and a supposed Constitutional right to commit suicide with another's assistance. In
Washingotn v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state of Washington's ban
on physician–assisted suicide was not unconstitutional. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The patient must be at least 18 years of age, a legal resident of Oregon, capable of making and
effectively communicating health care decisions, and diagnosed with an illness deemed terminal that
will result in death within six months. In order to receive the prescribed medication, the patient must
make two oral request to a physician for a lethal medication dose, at least 15 days apart, and provide
a written request – signed in front of two witnesses – to an attending physician, the primary doctor
responsible for the patient's care and treatment of the terminal illness (Fass, 846). When Oregon's
DWDA first became effective in 1997, physicians were not required to inform pharmacists of the
purpose of a lethal medication dose. The statute was amended in 1999 to require a pharmacist be
informed of the lethal dose of medication's intended use in advance. (Fass, 848) The attending
physician must refer the patient to a consulting physician to confirm the diagnosis and prognosis,
while also determining whether the person is capable for making health care decisions. If either
physician suspects the patient may be suffering from a psychiatric or psychological disorder that
could impair judgement, the individual must be referred

This paper evaluates current arguments for and against physician–assisted suicide (PAS) in the
United States using the legislature in Oregon as the primary example. This subject is extremely
controversial and there are logical and emotional arguments for either side. PAS is currently only
legal in Oregon, Washington State, Montana and Vermont. This issue is coming to the forefront of
politics as medical technology advances. It is essential to analyze both sides of the argument in order
to take a position on the legalization of physician–assisted suicide.
Ethical and Political Issues Surrounding Physician–Assisted Suicide in the United States
Currently, the United States is experiencing an intense debate over physician–assisted suicide ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Dr Ilora Finlay, president of the British Medical Association, contends, "Prognoses are notoriously
inaccurate. Even the most expert physicians have a 50/50 chance of being wrong over life
expectancy of 6 months" (Berry, 2015, p.3). She also states that, "Pathologists tell us postmortem,
about 1 in 20 persons are found to have died of something different from the condition they were
being treated for" (Berry, 2015, p.3). This argument is widespread because it allows people to
remain hopeful that the doctor may have made a misdiagnosis of terminal illness. This argument is
not likely to remain very powerful because Oregon's Death with Dignity Act requires confirmation
by a second doctor of a terminal diagnosis of the

Physician Assisted Suicide : A Controversial Subject
Physician–assisted suicide is a controversial subject all around the world. Although it is legal in
some countries and states, such as the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Oregon, Montana,
Washington, and Vermont it is not yet legal in most (Finlay, 2011). People travel from all around the
world to these locations to receive information. Physician–assisted suicide is when terminally ill and
mentally capable patients perform the final act themselves after being provided with the required
means and information. The elemental causes found for physician–assisted suicide include: terminal
cancer, mental and behavioral disorders, diseases of the nervous system, disease of the circulatory
system, and diseases of the musculoskeletal system ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Having the option to die with dignity requires many laws that need to be followed in order to go
through with it. It is illegal for a physician to assist a patient with suicide without meeting all
required criteria; if done, it could result in severe consequences. According to the Death with
Dignity National Center, the patient must me 18 years or older, currently a resident or in the process
of becoming one, capable of making and communicating health care decisions for themselves, and
diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death within six months (2015). If those criteria
are met, the process cannot start right away and there is more that needs to be done. The patient
needs to verbally request to the physician two times with a 15–day waiting period in between. A
written request to the physician is then required and needs to be witnessed by two individuals who
are not family members or primary caregivers, usually two other physicians. The patient is able to
abrogate their requests at any time and must be able to self–administer their own medication (Death
and Dignity National Center, 2015). These laws ensure that there is no chance that the patient is
forced to hasten their death. If at any time in the process that the

Emily Larson
English 102
Dr. Dietrich
Long Research Paper
Assisted Suicide In the medical field there are massive amounts of treatments for various diseases.
Some treatments are going to help the patient feel more comfortable; however, some are going to
counteract the problem, and others are going to help kill the patient. Physician assisted suicide is
defined by medterms.com as "the voluntary termination of one 's own life by administration of a
lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician." Any person wishing to undergo
assisted suicide in Oregon must be at least 18 years of age and have a terminal illness. This illness
must be within its final stages and leave the patient with less than six months to live. ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Ultimately physician assisted suicide goes against moral and ethical judgment that is placed within
the "hands" of a practicing physician. Moral behavior of a murderer is considered lacking in many
cases, but how are physicians who administer a lethal dosage of drugs any different? There are many
physicians who are participating in assisted suicide, but they all have lives within their hands. They
are responsible for the lives they have been entrusted with. In Norway any physician that helped
with assisted suicide was charged with "accessory to murder." In the United States there are many
laws regarding murder, but accessory to murder is also a charge. A person who is considered an
accessory to murder is "not typically present at the scene of the crime, but contributes to the success
of the crime before or after the fact." This statement creates a controversial wave within the country.
Those physicians who are prescribing deadly doses of medication are knowingly providing a means
to kill someone. Even though the physician does not administer the drugs themselves, the patient is
still being killed because of the physician's prescription. The immorality of prescribing lethal drugs
may be heavily felt by the prescribing physician after administration. Many physicians are affected
by the

The Ethics Of Physician Assisted Suicide
According to Mirror News, In October of 2014 a women named Charlotte Fitzmaurice Wise was
watching her daughter Nancy Fitzmaurice suffer from pain. She was born with Hydrocephalus and
septicaemia which made it impossible for her to walk, talk, eat or drink. She required around the
clock care and was fed through tubes. As time went on her health worsened and she would scream in
pain even though she was injected with morphine. Wise believed that her daughter was in
excruciating pain and deserved to be at peace. Wise submitted an application to end her daughter's
misery, and soon her application would be approved. She was able to relieve her daughter from pain,
and made it legal in the United Kingdom for a parent to end their critically ill child's life if they are
disable and can't speak for themselves.
People have been questioning the ethics of physician assisted suicide since the late 18th century.
According to medicinenet the definition of physician assisted suicide is "the voluntary termination
of one 's own life by administrating a lethal substance with the direct assistance of a physician." This
would typically come into play if/when a critically ill patient wants to end their suffering.
Confirming with the State–by–State Guide to Physician–Assisted Suicide, 5 states have
Paquin 2
Legalized physician assisted suicide. California, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington have made it
legal by legislation, and Maine has made it legal by a court ruling. The remaining 45 states

Physician–assisted suicide is a personal, divisive, and greatly debated issue in the United States of
America. The contentious nature of physician–assisted suicide makes it ideal to be solved by a
national referendum. The American Medical Association defines physician–assisted suicide as
"when a physician facilitates a patient's death by providing the necessary means and/ or information
to enable the patient to perform the life ending act." Only four states in the United States of America
have legalized physician–assisted suicide; however, a recent Gallup poll showed that fifty–one
percent of Americans supported legalizing physician–assisted suicide. The distinct divisions among
the American public on whether or not physician–assisted suicide ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The American public as a whole, however, is wise and acquires political knowledge from more
informed sources. James Surowiecki asserts in The Wisdom of Crowds that individuals can be
impolitic; however, groups can reach wise decisions. Surowiecki claims, "Even if most people
within a group are not especially well–informed or rational, it can still reach a collectively wise
decision." Surowiecki's argument illustrates that a national referendum would thwart the ill–
informed nature of the American voter as a national referendum is a collective decision. American
voters can be irrational and ill–informed; nevertheless, most American voters acquire their political
knowledge from more educated sources. The acquisition of political knowledge from more well–
informed sources undermines the irrational nature of the American voter. Martin Gilens argues in
"Two– Thirds Full? Citizen Competence and Democratic Governance" that cue taking enables ill–
informed citizens to make a decision on a controversial issue. Gilens contends, "Taking cues from
more knowledge elites or acquaintances is a sensible strategy for citizens who lack the ability or
inclination to gather the information needed to formulate a preference on a given policy issue." The
collective wisdom of the American public and cue taking enable American voters to overcome their
ignorance of politics and past political

Euthanasia And Physician Assisted Suicide
Being able to decide the fate of your own life is not an easy decision to make, and is not something
to be toyed with. However, when someone is in a desperate situation, and must choose before they
lose their mind (quite literally), death may be more appealing, instead of living, and being forced to
suffer. By legalizing euthanasia and physician–assisted suicide, we would provide "vulnerable"
patients with better overall protection and health care, give patients (who are excruciatingly
suffering and have no chance of recovery) the option to end their lives before they ever needed to go
through such an ordeal and giving them peace of mind, and spare the families of the patients the
emotional pain of watching their loved one slowly and painfully passing away. For these reasons, I
believe that euthanasia and Physician–Assisted Suicide should be legalized in Canada. Euthanasia
and physician–assisted suicide are two similar topics which are constantly countered with extremely
weak statements, such as "the argument that if we respect the liberty of some individuals to choose
assisted death we will thereby expose the ill and frail to an increased risk of abuse or exploitation"
(Schafer, "the case for legalization"), which is commonly known as the "slippery slope" debate.
However, several countries and select states in the United States who have legalized euthanasia have
not shown any signs of "slippery slopes". In fact, these areas have actually demonstrated that:
[R]ates of

Patients suffering from terminal illnesses, battle feeling worthless and hopeless on a daily basis.
This is due to our jurisdiction forcing them to live. The number of people suffering continues to
increase. Although a doctor's position is to prolong life, euthanasia should be considered in certain
cases. Because of the advances in technology euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are now an
option for terminally ill patients who are going to suffer from an incurable and painful disease or are
in an irreversible coma. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be legalized because the
public supports it, it would only be used for patients who are terminally ill, and it alleviates
unnecessary suffering. The word euthanasia originates ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The oath is still used by physicians to treat the ill to the best of one's ability, to preserve a patient's
privacy, to teach the secrets of medicine to the next generation, and so on. The oath states, "I will
apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of
overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism." Euthanasia doesn't break the hippocratic oath because it's
not harming a patient if the patient is suffering while alive. Applying for the benefit of the sick no
matter what measures are required can mean ending a patient's life who is suffering from an
incurable disease. The main purpose of the oath is for a physician to swear to do no harm. Allowing
a suffering patient to live is doing more harm than letting them choose to end their life. Fifty five
percent of terminally ill patients will die in pain; legalizing Euthanasia will drop this staggering
number tremendously. Euthanasia also has a connection with abortion, which is legal. Abortion is
the killing of a foetus and euthanasia is the killing of a terminally ill patient. If abortion is legal and
accepted then euthanasia should be legalized and

Physician Assisted Suicide Analysis
Brittany Maynard was a 29–year old female who was diagnosed with brain cancer with less than six
months to live. She decided that instead of suffering, she wanted to follow through with Physician–
Assisted Suicide (PAS), according to Kayla Asbury in her story, The Right to Die: Benefits of
Physician–Assisted Suicide. If you were in the same situation Maynard was in, what would you do?
Would you suffer until your last dying breath, or would you put yourself out of that misery and ask
for PAS?
Physician–Assisted Suicide has been a very controversial topic for many years. The major spark of
the controversy was when Maynard lived in California when she was first diagnosed, but then
moved to Oregon to take her own life. According to the Merriam–Webster ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He believes that Physician–Assisted Suicide would take advantage of patients, it ruins medicine and
the relationships between patients and doctors, it's a violation of family values, and it deceives
human dignity (Anderson). However, when the patient is asking for assisted suicide, there is no
proof that performing PAS abuses patients. Along with the fact that there is a protocol that has to be
taken in order for the patient to receive the drugs to end their life. Next, it doesn't ruin the
relationship between the doctor and the patient because the patient would have to trust the doctor
enough to tell them about their feelings, along with the fact that the doctor doesn't force the patient
to take the medication. As well as the fact that PAS is the next step in medicine until researchers
have a breakthrough and cure cancers. No doubt, it could compromise families; however, in most
cases, the families are supportive through the process. In fact, Asbury states, "Physician–assisted
suicide also lessens suffering for the family and friends of terminally ill patients" (Asbury).
Meanwhile, those against PAS proclaim that PAS deceives dying with dignity, but what they don't
realize is that when the patient is dying, he or she wants to die in a way that everyone will remember
them in the way that the person was before they became sick. They want to be remembered in an

The Treatment Of Physician Assisted Suicide
Just imagine...the invitation arriving in the mail, it was no ordinary invite. The days of physical
misery and suffering that lead up to this final celebration of life were unbearable to watch. Having a
terminally ill family member is hard because you know the days, weeks and months are numbered.
Quality of life, what is that anyway? Each passing hour has the quality of life diminishing to
unimaginable physical pain and anguish. Watching someone you love slip away and turn into a shell
of who they once were is unbearable. This invitation is special. This special day and every precious
hour will give the loved ones a time to say goodbye just before they die with dignity in physician
assisted suicide. Terminally ill patients have the right to end their own lives using physician assisted
suicide (PAS) without repercussions of laws and people with opposing opinions.
According to an article from CNN.com, there are currently five states in the U.S. where physician–
assisted suicide is currently legal. In order to be eligible legally for PAS the patient must have six
months or less to live. In the states of Oregon, California, Vermont, Washington and Montana a
physician can prescribe medications to move along the death without being prosecuted for murder.
It is hard to know the correct statistics on just how many physician assisted suicides happen across
the U.S. Since it is illegal in the majority of the states it is not something that is reported because
those assisting

Physician Assisted Suicide Essay
In homes across the world, millions of victims are suffering from fatal and terminal illnesses.With
death knocking on their door, should these people have to endure pain and misery knowing what is
to come? The answers to these questions are very controversial. Furthermore, there is a greater
question to be answered–should these people have the right and option to end the relentless pain and
agony through physician assisted death? Physician–Assisted Suicide PAS is highly contentious
because it induces conflict of several moral and ethical questions such as who is the true director of
our lives. Is suicide an individual choice and should the highest priority to humans be alleviating
pain or do we suffer for a purpose? Is suicide a purely ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Secondly, the patient should be capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him
or herself. Thirdly, the patient must be diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death
within six months. Interested patients must also provide the request for termination in writing to the
physician. In addition, physicians are expected to inform patients to alternative means of care
including hospice care and other medications. Only after precautions evaluation, the laws then
permit patients to make the ultimate life ending decision. A pathologist from Michigan, Dr. Jack
Kevorkian was one of the first to participate in PAS (Strate, Zalman & Hunter, 2005, p. 25). There
are documented writings discussing the severity of his patients: "those who seek him out have
deteriorated by slow, painful degrees and wish to exit from their infernos on Earth before they
deteriorate cognitively and/or choke to death" (Zeldis's, 2005 p. 130). Many of his patients explain
how they feel their own body withdraw and turn on itself; and not even being able to eat or go to the
bathroom (Friend, Mary and Louanne, 2011, p. 116). stress that dignity and integrity are very
personal matters; it is probable that being dependent on others to perform basic activities of daily
living threaten a patient's dignity and thus determine when an explicit request for PAS is made.
Perhaps to deny someone the ability to limit their suffering is cruel. My main argument in support of
PAS bears the

The Rights Of Physician Assisted Suicide
The Right to Die
By:
Antony Makhlouf
Antony Makhlouf
PHR 102–006 Contemporary Moral Issues
Final Paper
The Right to Die Physician–assisted suicide, also known as euthanasia, has been a hot topic as of
late. If you do not know what this is, physician–assisted suicide is the taking of ones life. This
usually occurs when a patient is in a irreversible state, and must live through a tube. With multiple
cases occurring in the past, current and the more to occur the in the future, this looks to remain a hot
topic. Some of those cases include Terri Schiavo, and Scott Thomas, which have both resulted in
court cases and conversation all around the globe. Physician–assisted suicide is one of those topics
that can be looked at multiple ways, and have multiple different solutions. Someone could look and
justify it through the lens of Natural law and could bring up the doctrine of double effects, or the
preservation of human life. Another person could go against it by using utilitarianism and could
bring up how it maximizes the good, and produces the greatest overall good. Whether you find it to
be murder/suicide or just a smarter decision if you cannot life properly, you must realize this is an
issue that does need to be discussed more. Even with the attention it has gotten, it still is not
discussed politically, and is not up there with other popular topics in our media today. If someone is
in a state where he or she has to live off a tube is he or she really even alive?

The Ethical Issues Of Physician Assisted Suicide

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Elizabeth Temburu

More from Elizabeth Temburu (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Ethical Issues Of Physician Assisted Suicide