Creative Title: Assisted Suicide: How Far Would You Go? Specific Purpose: To inform my audience about assisted suicides. Central Idea: Assisted suicide can be looked upon from three different angles, and three different perspectives. INTRODUCTION I. Matthew Donnelly loved life. But Matthew Donnelly wanted to die. He was terminally ill and he was going through so much of suffering that he begged for the doctors to just end his life. Assisted suicide could have put him out of his misery. But does that justify the need for assisted suicide? II. I’ve done a bit of research on assisted suicide and also on the people who both support and also disagree with assisted suicide. III. So today I’m going to be share with you guys the two different …show more content…
Views against assisted suicide B. View supporting assisted suicide (TRANSITION: Nobody can deny that assisted suicide is a relatively new issue.) BODY : And just like other recent topics, it has been criticized and resisted by …show more content…
She believed it would create a potential for misuse. The pressure to end one 's life could become a dangerous trend, especially in a world where medical cost is off the charts. 1. Decision-making ability on matters of life and death would then also rest on the doctors. a. The doctors also then decide who they encourage or discourage on the prospects of recovery. b. But what if they doctor decides based on his short staff and lack of resources? He’d be more likely to lean towards the no hope factor even when the odds are not clear. Do we want that? B. As she and her husband were devout Catholics, they also believed that it was wrong to take away someone’s life and also agreed with the church that doctors should never hasten death. 1. In fact, most religions condemn killing and therefore oppose assisted suicide firmly. a. For example Christians and Buddhists share the same belief that life is precious and sacred and to take one’s life is a great sin. b. On the other end, Muslims believe that, in Islamic tradition, end-of-life suffering is seen as a way to purify previous sins so that by the time you meet God, you do so in a more pure
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
People who are involved in these can suffer just as much as the patient. The choices bear on the good of the population, doctors are supposed to help your health, knowledge, and friendships. They are taught to save lives not to take them away. They are taught to act against anything that brings harm towards the person. To end someone’s life even for a better end shows what someone thinks of human life.
Assisted Suicide: A Controversial Topic Assisted suicide, also known as physician-assisted death (PAD), has been a topic of controversy for decades. While some argue that PAD should be legalized to grant terminally ill patients the right to die with dignity, others believe it goes against the sanctity of life. This essay will explore the arguments for and against assisted suicide and offer recommendations on how to approach the issue. PAD is Important
Lately, we have experienced a lot of situations as Mac and Huttmann situation. This problem is really controversial and, of course, everyone can relate to it. Barbara Huttmann is trying to show the audience that she is innocent by illustrating her struggle with Mac. Huttmann argues in this essay that the person should have the right to choose to live or die, only if they are suffering from a fatal illness. Huttmann illustrates her experiences with Mac in order to justify her act and convince people that mercy killing should be legal and she uses her compassionate tone and her vivid imagery to prove it.
What some people think though is that if we set regulations on the doctors, then the Assisted Suicides will be kept to only those who wish for it, but what if the doctors think a patient is better off dead than alive? What if the physician thinks that the patient is not worth saving or keeping alive? One person says “Of all the arguments against voluntary euthanasia, the most influential is the 'slippery slope': once we allow doctors to kill patients, we will not be able to limit the killing to those who want to die”
In the defense of Physician Assisted Suicide, a wide publicly talked about topic, it should be a choice every terminally ill patient receives. Physician Assisted suicide is when a patient is terminally ill and has no chances of recovering. The patient themselves can make the decision, with the help from their physician, to get lethally injected and end their life reducing and ending the pain. In America each state has a little over 3,000 patients that are terminally ill contact an advocacy group known as the Compassion and Choices to try to reduce end-of- life suffering and perhaps hasten their death. Physician Assisted Suicide shouldn’t be looked at as suicide, but as ending the pain and suffering from an individual whose life is going to be taken away anyway.
Physician assisted suicide, although legal in some states, should remain illegal because it goes against religious and moral beliefs. “In physician assisted suicide, the physician provides the necessary means or information and the patient performs the act” (Endlink). Supporters of assisted-suicide laws believe that mentally competent people who are in misery and have no chance of long-term survival, should have the right to die if and when they choose. I agree that people should have the right to refuse life-saving treatments, written in the patient bill of rights.
Virtuous physicians always asses the decision making capacity and the competence of their patients to make sure they have adequate capacity to make their own decisions, especially for patients who refuse specific treatment, have mental illness, or have specific factors that impair their ability to make decision( _1). What make a patient competent to make a decision? , and do depressed people lose their competence and their decisional capacity? . Depression is a common side effect of cancer (2), and cancer treatment require a lot of important decisions that patients need to make which are very significant in determining their future, and respecting patient will is fundamental in term of autonomy, but what if the patient refuse the treatment, if the doctor consider him as non-autonomous he also will think about his duty in non-maleficence and about his responsibility in supporting and respecting patient wishes.
Or, this is due to the fact that unless she interferes and puts an end to his life, that his life will be so horrible he’d be better off dead. Hence, the main reason that the person who carries out the act of euthanasia is that they want to accommodate the one whose death is imminent. “It is important to emphasize the motive of benefiting the person who is assisted to die because well-being is a key value in relation to the morality of euthanasia.” (Young) This is also clear as day in many cases of physician-assisted suicide.
Assisted suicide is a rather controversial issue in contemporary society. When a terminally ill patient formally requests to be euthanized by a board certified physician, an ethical dilemma arises. Can someone ethically end the life of another human being, even if the patient will die in less than six months? Unlike traditional suicide, euthanasia included multiple individuals including the patient, doctor, and witnesses, where each party involved has a set of legal responsibilities. In order to understand this quandary and eventually reach a conclusion, each party involved must have their responsibilities analyzed and the underlying guidelines of moral ethics must be investigated.
Everyone’s view of euthanasia is different. Some think it is best for what the patients want and give them that, others have their religious values to speak out against assisted death. Religions like Christianity and Catholics believe that assisted suicide violates the sanctity of life. The Mormon communities believe “Euthanasia is condemned. Anyone who takes part in euthanasia, including assisted suicide, is regarded as having violated the commandments of God” (Religion and Spirituality 1).
Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is the act of permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured patients. This is never suggested by the caretaker rather than requested by the patient or their family. Few areas such as the Netherlands have already legalized this practice. This debate, as split as a fork in the road, is over whether or not this approach should be legalized worldwide on stances regarding religion, ethics, and self choice. I see this as being extremely unethical on both religious and social morality levels.
What would you do if you were dying from the great pain? It is not surprising that there are many people in the world have to encounter with the end of life every single day. Some people died young and some passed away when they reach their aged. But because of the terminal illness, someone decided to cut the last breath of their life with dignity and called it as the euthanasia. It turned out that it has two sides about the point of view towards the euthanasia issue in a positive and negative ways.
But that was a lie. She suffered from torturous cancer and she died with pain and discomfort, no matter how much pain killer was given to her. What solution could be offered to the suffering woman and to her loving husband? What if I told you that there is a way in which no one would have to suffer to death? A way that helps people die with dignity and, a way that provides a peaceful, smooth death?