Should We Legalize Physician Assisted Suicide?

Washington chose to enforce the ban as it is rationally related to a state interest, therefore related to the exercise of its police powers. In my opinion, Washington 's ban on physician assisted-suicide did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment 's Due Process Clause. Analyzing the guarantees of the Due Process Clause, the Court focused on two main aspects: the protection of our nation 's objective fundamental, historically rooted, rights and liberties; and the cautious definition of what constitutes a due process liberty interest. The Court held that the right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause since its practice has been, and continues to be, offensive to our national traditions and practices.

Doctors should have responsibility of helping the ill patients to get better physically. Physicians are the icon of peace and generous within the society since their job is to solve the physical pain of the patients. In allowing physician-assisted suicide, the duty of physicians is misread. Society and law are saying that physician’s duty is no longer helping patients, but they can also easily put an end to patient’s life. In the New York Times article “Doctor-Assisted Suicide Is Unethical and Dangerous”, Ira Byock states, “people who are poor, or old and frail, or simply have long-standing disabilities, may worry that when they become acutely ill, doctors might see their lives as not worth living and compassionately act to end their supposed misery”.

“Be smart, be strong, live honorably and with dignity, and just hold on” (Fray). Physician assisted suicide or better known as Death with Dignity isn’t your everyday topic or thought, but for the terminally ill it’s a constant want. The Death with Dignity isn’t something that all people or religions are in favor of and nor is the act passed in all states in the United States. Only three states in the U.S. today, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington offer their residents the option to have aid in dying as long as all the requirements are met. Death with Dignity doesn’t effect just the terminally ill person, but as well as family and friends around them creating many conflicting thoughts when opinion if Death with Dignity is truly moral and a choice

Should Medically Assisted Suicide Be Legalised? Although medicine in the 21st century has provided people with a variety of illnesses a chance at a “normal” life, there is still a handful of people whose suffering cannot be eradicated. Medically assisted suicide is “when a physician supplies the necessary means and information to facilitate a patient's choice to end his or her life.” [Lydia S. Dugale, Barron H. Lerner and Daniel Callahan, 2019, Pros and Cons of Physician Aid in Dying, PubMed].

The 10th amendment explicitly states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” (Annebergclassroom). Therefore, the states utilized this statement by justifying the argument that since there is no enumerated law in the constitution about specifically physician assisted suicide, then it should be up to the states to control the issue. Originally, the federal government used the 14th amendment - “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” (Law Cornell) - as a justification claiming that they should have power because they viewed assisted suicide as a right and a privilege; however, the states rebuttled by claiming that this was not applicable in the western culture, resulting the Supreme Court to allow states to override the federal government’s argument. A lot of their reasons for arguing over this cause is for the protection of public health. Since physician assisted suicide is has to do with public health, it resulted in both national and states to be concerned, resulting concurrent

For most people, the word suicide brings up negative emotions and images. They see people who could not battle their inner, or their outer demons any longer, and so took a drastic and permanent solution. However, what if your problem was permanent, unfixable, and suicide could be your only way out? Here is the idea of physician-assisted suicide, which is already legal in a few states in the United States, and in some other countries around the globe.

Most of these statements come from religious persons or the physicians themselves. They claim that not only is it morally unjust but it is considered murder, “Today, nearly all states prohibit assisted suicide and euthanasia. In Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio, assisting suicide is considered murder.” (Raed Gonzalez, J.D., LL.M candidate) For religious people assisted suicide goes against the laws of God.

Most people would never contemplate whether or not to end their family pet’s suffering, so why can’t people be as sympathetic to their family and friends? In today’s society, the legalization of physician-assisted suicide is one of the most debatable topics. The debates on physician-assisted suicide go back and forth between whether or not patients, specifically terminally ill patients, should have the right to die with the aid of doctors. Opponents believe physician-assisted suicide is morally and ethically wrong for patients to end their lives, and they believe it violates basic medical standards. However, proponents of physician-assisted suicide believe it is a humane and safe way for terminally ill patients to resolve their agony.

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 “the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma.” My issue relates to Amendment 9, which states,”The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” People debate over this issue for many reasons. Some believe doctors shouldn’t take a human’s life intentionally. Others believe a person in pain and suffering should have an easy way out.

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,?

The medical field is filled with opportunities and procedures that are used to help improve a patient’s standard of living and allow them to be as comfortable as possible. Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a method, if permitted by the government, that can be employed by physicians across the world as a way to ease a patient’s pain and suffering when all else fails. PAS is, “The voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician.”-Medicinenet.com. This procedure would be the patient’s decision and would allow the patient to end their lives in a more peaceful and comfortable way, rather than suffering until the illness takes over completely. Physician assisted suicide should be permitted by the government because it allows patients to end their suffering and to pass with dignity, save their families and the hospital money, and it allows doctors to preserve vital organs to save

Due to the fact that euthanasia allows doctors to assist in the killing of terminally ill patients. Although some believe that euthanasia goes against the hippocratic oath, others believes that it’s the patient choice. Some family member of the patient believe since the patient is the one suffering they have the right to choice whether they want euthanasia or not. Also, they should be able to choose where and when they want to die.

In this case, and many others worldwide, physician assisted suicide is morally permissible at all ages for anyone with a terminal illness with a prognosis of 6 months. This is supported by act based utilitarianism and the idea of maximizing pleasure and reducing pain and suffering on an individual circumstance. By allowing a terminal patient to die a less painful death, in control of the situation, and with dignity, the patient will have amplified

The Right to Die has been taking effect in many states and is rapidly spreading around the world. Patients who have life threatening conditions usually choose to die quickly with the help of their physicians. Many people question this right because of its inhumane authority. Euthanasia or assisted suicide are done by physicians to end the lives of their patients only in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, New Mexico and soon California that have the Right to Die so that patients don’t have to live with depression, cancer and immobility would rather die quick in peace.