Introduction
In this essay, I will argue that the distinction between a physician killing a patient, and letting a patient die, upon the untreatable patients request, regarding to physician assisted suicide is not an important distinction to make regarding morality; however, it is important in regards to how a physician killing a patient and letting a patient die is justified. I will argue this by first making a distinction, regarding to the moral justifications for physician assisted suicide, between a physician killing an untreatable patient and letting an untreatable patient die, and then argue that even though both are morally permissible, the distinction between letting die and killing is a very important distinction to make. When I am stating letting die as defined by Tom L. Beauchamp, I am referring to a person, in
…show more content…
This must be considered because a patient could live a better life if their mental illness is treated. However, if there is no mental illness or if the patient has an untreatable mental illness, then that patient might be better off dead. An untreatable patient’s desire to be killed by a physician should only be considered if it is to decrease the patient’s suffering; the idea of suffering was brought up by Hooker (Blackwell, 2014, p. 80). I will discuss two possibilities that can lead to a patient’s suffering. One, an untreatable patient can want to be killed by a physician because a patient does not want to suffer physically for the rest of their life and would like to die in the least painful way possible; the idea of suffering brought up by Hooker (Blackwell, 2014, p. 80). The second way a patient can suffer is mentally, or as Hooker stated emotionally on page 80, and I will discuss three possible ways a patient can suffer mentally (Blackwell, 2014). One way mental suffering can occur is from a severe untreatable mental illness. Another way it can be caused is by
Introduction People have moral and ethical values that assist them in making decisions about their healthcare on a daily basis. What if a person found out that they had a terminal illness and only had months to live? What if those few months would be filled with treatments, pain and suffering, tear filled family members, and high cost medical bills? Physician- assisted suicide remains a debated topic which causes physicians, nurses and those involved to take a look at what they value and what they are willing to do in order to carry out a patient’s wishes.
One main decision that could have been changed was lines 37-40. It was when the dad saw flood coming and was yelling to run. If he hadn’t seen the flood things would be different because then his family couldn’t have noticed until it was too late. Gertrude could have well been dead, along with most of her family. The other decision is when Maxwell McArchen jumps off the roof to help Gertrude.
In this case study I would speak to Frank as a pastor and a friend because we have a relationship that has developed over time when we have spent Saturdays together. Whether he is an active member or only attends church on Sundays I would still council him with the same respect that I would as someone who is very active in the church. I would be accountable to correct Frank because he is wrong. Frank knows he is wrong, but still needs to hear it. It would be my main focus for Frank to understand what he is putting at risk in destroying his marriage and also Trixxi’s.
he child's maternal grandmother stated Anna has a history of domestic violence, drug use, and suicidal ideation. The reporter stated Anna has been diagnosed as bipolar and is currently on suicide watch by local law enforcement. Tamara stated Anna was recently released from jail and had plans to spend time with the victim and the reporter while she gets back on track and pick up her medications. Anna left the home on 10/20/15 and has not returned and the reporter has received text messages from Anna stating plans to take her life and heard from others that at this time Anna may be suicidal and plans to come pick up Addyson. Tamara stated she's had custody of Addyson all her life and contacted her lawyer; Ms. Wright's lawyer told her there was
In the article “Physician-Assisted Death in the United States: Are the Existing “Last Resorts” Enough?” Timothy Quill, advocated for PAD writes, “Patients who are worried about future suffering and wonder what options would be available to them”(20). One example is, people who undergo surgery for various reasons. Everyone knows that there are risks associated with any surgery and there are those who want to know what options are available to them should they become incapacitated in any way. In the article “The Final Decision; Quadriplegic MP Stevenson Fletcher Champions Physician-Assisted Death”, author Andrew Duffy describes how a young man named Steven Fletcher felt after a car accident left him unable to paralyzed from the neck down.
One of the main objections to autonomy-based justifications of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) that Gill talks about is that many people believe it does not promote autonomy, but instead is actually taking it away (366). First, it is important to clarify what autonomy means. According to Gill, it is the ability of a person to make big decisions regarding their own life (369). Opponents of PAS argue that it takes away a person’s ability to make these big decisions and so it is intrinsically wrong for them to choose to take their own life.
Summary: Governor Jerry Brown has recently signed a bill which legalizes physician assisted suicide in the state of California. By doing so, California is following Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana in becoming the fifth state in the US to legalize such medicine (ProCon, n.p., n.d.). Drugs like this will only be offered to terminally ill patients, and will require the patient to reaffirm that they want the drug several times with waiting periods between each in order to be sure that this is something that he or she wants to do. It is also expected that many hospitals will refuse to offer this drug to patients because it could bring bad publicity and have a negative effect on patient relationships (Lovett & Perez-Pena, 2015). There are a lot of arguments against this bill, for example, people claim that terminally ill patients might be talked into accepting
Though, in this paper, I have addressed several points that Dennis Plaisted has presented on why we should not legalize physician assisted suicide due to the issues with autonomy that convince the public that the state does not care enough to preserve the lives of those with less than six months to live. I argued that the limits of who and when an ill patient may be allowed to receive PAS are present for the state to relieve the pain of the ill who wish to have control over their death, and that it is only an alternative option for those patients. I considered a counterargument to my criticism, which argues that the state and doctors shouldn’t allow for PAS, as it gives the impression that the state does not care about the lives of the terminally ill. Just as well, the reputation of doctors as healers would be compromised if they supported this form of treatment. However, I explained that the quality of life is more valuable than forcing someone who is ill to suffer until their natural death.
The debate on whether or not to legalize assisted suicide in every state has caused many uproars in the field of health care. Elements that factor into the controversy of this practice include ethicality, legality, and autonomy. Questions about the issue include: should the patient have the autonomy to select the system of assisted suicide, is it morally
Lee Johnson, who lived in Oregon, was a retired federal worker who began a subsequent career as a furniture maker. He then developed brain cancer. Although the disease was inevitably going to kill him, he took the necessary precautions intended to extend his life. However, his condition worsened and he became bedridden and endured blurred vision, soreness, and a lot of pain.
The first of many reasons that physician assisted suicide should be legalized across the whole nation is the fact that it is an option that is covered by many safeguards that ensure that the patients who receive the deadly prescription are those who are, in fact, terminally ill. One such example of these safeguards comes from the Oregon Death With Dignity Act which states: “Requests for [Death With Dignity Act] drugs must be confirmed by two witnesses and approved by two doctors. The patient must not be mentally ill. And most important of all, both doctors must agree that the patient has no more that six months to live.” (Drum).
Physician assisted suicide is when a physician provides the means required to commit suicide, including prescribing lethal amounts of harmful drugs to a patient. In the United States alone, there is great controversy about physician assisted suicide. The issue is whether physician assisted suicide is murder or an act of sympathy for the patient. The main point is that terminally ill patients should have a right to physician assisted suicide if it meets their needs and is done properly. Physician assisted suicide is an appropriate action for the terminally ill that want to end their life in peace before it ends at the hands of the terminal disease.
" NYLNorg. N.p., 13 July 2015. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. . "Four Problems with Physician-Assisted Suicide.
The Right to Die 1) Introduction a) Thesis statement: Physician assisted suicide offers patients a choice of getting out of their pain and misery, presents a way to help those who are already dead mentally because of how much a disease has taken over them, proves to be a great option in many states its legal in, and puts the family at ease knowing their love one is out of pain. i) The use of physician assisted death is used in many different countries and some states. ii) Many people who chose this option are fighting a terminal illness.
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.