Assisted Suicide: The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

In passive euthanasia ill people dead by withholding of common treatment, such as antibiotics. In active euthanasia ill people dead by using lethal substances deliberately, such as lethal injection. Each type subdivided into 3 subordinate types, included voluntary, involuntary and non-voluntary. In voluntary euthanasia ill people initiatively request for their own death. Involuntary euthanasia ill people wants to live but is killed anyway.

Certain laws and bills have been put in place to discourage people from suing doctors for problems that are completely out of the doctor’s hands. The AANS, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, states that a “Bill is common sense, proven, comprehensive medical liability reform that will help contain health care costs” (Kindy). Doctors are constantly afraid and fearful that they will get sued for reasons that they can not explain. No doctor is safe from lawsuit abuse (Pear). Lawmakers understand this and they wanted to begin to put regulations on

Today I will discuss the history and argumentation of assisted suicide. Assisted suicide, also known as euthanasia, is a hot-button issue that was brought into the light by Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Dr. Kevorkian was a controversial activist who tried to legalize assisted suicide under the argument that every- one deserves a humane death. There had been much debate on the issue, and our legislatures have explored what the practice entails and the moral implications of assisted suicide. However, it is still illegal in all of the United States.

It is performed by providing a lethal drug to be self-administered by the individual’s voluntary termination of one's own life. The choice to die must always be made by the individual. However, the doctor granting the lethal substance may or may not be held liable for the individual’s death depending on local laws. Suicide tourism is for those who actively seek assistance in dying to destinations where it is legal. Suicide Tourism in Switzerland CNN (2014) reported that in years 2008 to 2012, a total of 611 tourists ranging from 23 to 97 years old, went to Switzerland for assisted suicide.

Monday October 5th the governor of California, Jerry Brown, signed the “Right to Die” bill. This bill would allow doctors in California to prescribe lethal amounts of medications to end a terminally ill patient’s life. Brown signed this controversial bill after explaining that he did this based on his personal decision “of want he would want if ever faced with his own death.” Governor Brown wrote in his letter to addressing state law makers that he “is certain that he would find comfort in being able to consider the options afford by this bill”(Botelho). But the Californians Against Assisted Suicide (CAAS) called this bill flawed saying that lawmakers should first consider how this bill could affect the disadvantaged people of America. The

Another incident is where the woman moved to Oregon where euthanasia is legal to take advantage of Oregon’s death with Dignity Law. She died with a lethal dose of barbiturates. So this is also one argument that if

Halpanny and Newman 1998 wrote: In the final months of her life, Annie Lindsell’s struggle to be allowed to die with dignity became front page news, at the end of October 1997; she won a High Court action that allowed her doctor to administer potentially lethal pain-relieving drugs to prevent her from choking to death. This High Court victory opened up the debate on Euthanasia and the laws surrounding physician’s assisted suicide. Like Annie there are many people lying in our nation’s hospital simply waiting to die, since there are nothing humanly possible that can be done to save their lives. Many of them have a debilitating chronic disease that robs them of the simple tasks such as activities of daily living (bathing, eating, etc.) and ultimately their lives.

In his article ‘A Problem for the Idea of Voluntary Euthanasia’ Neil Campbell talks about the ethics behind the voluntary decision and thinks that voluntary euthanasia does not really exist. He argues against euthanasia and says that when those terminally ill patients take the decision of ending their lives, the decision was not freely chosen, but was the result of them undergoing excruciating pain. (Campbell, 1999, p. 242). His argument is presented in a way to support the opponents’ claim by denying that voluntary euthanasia exists and that it is all psychological and not

If a patient is in excruciating pain leading towards an inevitable death is it really a crime to fulfill their wishes and terminate their pain? Numerous suffering patients are watched by their friends and family who are longing to alleviate their loved one’s pain. Currently euthanasia is illegal in over half of the United States making the option of abolishing the patient’s pain impossible. Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is a medical practice that gives a patient the option to end their life in a relatively painless and humane way out of empathy for the patient’s friends and family. Due to a terminally ill patients suffering and almost inevitable chance of living, euthanasia should be made legal in all states and countries.

Euthanasia is when a physician administers a lethal injection to a terminally ill patient. Assisted suicide is when a terminally ill patient takes physician provided medication to help the patient commit suicide (Euthanasia 1). These are illegal in several states throughout the United States. Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide should be legal In every state of our nation. Would you ever say that your life belongs to another person?

Dr. Glucksberg and his acquaintances thought that the right to assist in a mentally competent patient?s suicide was protected by the 14th Amendment and that it was one of their liberties protected by the Constitution (Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997). Was banning physician assisted- suicide unconstitutional according to the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause by denying deathly ill, competent people the right to end their suffering? This was the constitutional question that was asked. This question correlated with the fourteenth amendment and the due process clause (ITT Chicago- Kent College of Law, 2015). When the question was contemplated whether or not the ban was constitutional or not, the debating started with was the option to even assist with suicide ?deeply rooted in this Nation?s history and tradition,?

This ruling includes and is not limited to doctors. 3. Facts Washington State has a law on the books which states it is a crime to assist another person to attempt suicide. Dr Harold Glucksberg, a Washington physician, along with other Washington physicians brought suit against the State of Washington, alleging arguing Dr Glucksberg would frequently treat terminally-ill patients, and would have assisted those patients in ending their lives if not for the state’s ban on assisted suicide. Glucksberg brought suit in before

Prosecutors gave him this charge because this was one of the only times Kevorkian administered the lethal drugs himself (as opposed to the patient pressing the button on the Thanatron to release the deadly drugs). Kevorkian injected Thomas Youk himself because he believed it was more humane that way. Because Kevorkian literally injected Thomas Youk to kill him (Hansen), prosecutors believed that it was murder and not suicide. To show that it was murder and not suicide, the video of the assisted suicide was played in the court room for the jury to see. Kevorkian believed it was a mercy killing and not murder.

Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia has been one of the most debated subjects in the past years. There are resilient advocates on both sides of the debate for and against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Advocates of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide believe it is a person’s right to die when faced with terminal illness rather than suffer through to an unpleasant demise. Whereas, opponents contend that euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide is not only equivalent of murder, but it is ethically and morally incorrect. I oppose physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia for various reasons.

It is believed that once practicing physician-assisted suicides becomes an acceptable concept in society, the next steps will easily be taken toward unethical actions such as involuntary euthanasia. Edmund D. Pellegrino, MD, Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Medical Ethics at Georgetown University claims that our healthcare system is too obsessed with costs and principles of utility. He defies the belief that the slippery slope effect is no more than a prediction, by reminding the outlooks and inclinations of our society. Furthermore, he believes there comes a day that incompetent patients and those in coma won’t be asked for their permission to use euthanasia. The Netherlands is another example of such misuse.