Why Is Physician Assisted Suicide Morally Wrong

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.

The last argument that this paper will look at is the argument of double effect. In the context of terminal illness physician assisted suicide could instead be seen as a vital form of care for someone who is suffering, instead of the failure of medicine. Physician assisted suicide seems to oppose the pro-life view, but on closer examination, its purpose is instead to relieve suffering in imminently terminal cases where it is thought that no other treatment could reasonably hope to do the same. Even though traditionally the role of the doctor is seen as extending life, that role may also encompass the assistance in PAS.

Two major reasons for why doctor assisted suicides should be stopped

Running Header: Ethical Reasonings Ethical Reasonings for the Legalization of Physician Assisted Suicide The moral issue of whether or not Physician Assisted Suicide(PAS) should be allowed has been widely vocalized and debated throughout the world. Physician Assisted Suicide is an important issue because it concerns the fundamental morals of one 's life. There are a variety of opinions readily discussed about this issue. Most standpoints on this topic have to do with freedom.

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.

Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Right to Murder? Doctors spend over eight years attending college, studying and practicing how humans work and how to save them. So why should it be right for physicians to help out their patients in killing themselves? If a person chooses to end their life, they completely loose the possibility of a medical miracle of being able to live through whatever condition they have.

Once an individual reaches late adulthood, many physical, cognitive, and health changes occur. There is an increased vulnerability to disease and illness. This is something any person must be aware of when entering late adulthood. You are reaching the end of your life and you have to accept the possibility of developing health problems or illnesses that may be incurable. One of the most controversial issues in society today is the topic of physician-assisted suicide.

This legislation has faced criticism from persons that warn of abuse, loss of integrity to the profession of medicine, and a lack of respect for the sanctity of life (Starks PhD). Supporters point out that the act of physician assisted suicide is one that happens far more than the general public cares to think about; legislation decriminalizing this act allows the opportunity for transparency ensuring safety checks along the process, autonomy and compassion for the patient, as well as help for mentally ill persons seeking physician assisted suicide (Starks

Physician assisted suicide is by far one of the most controversial topics that has arose in the last decade. As such, there are many moral and ethical arguments both for and against the act of physician assisted suicide. Because of this, it is important to explore in detail the arguments made both in favor and against physician assisted suicide so that one can better grasp what exactly this sort of act entails. In his book “Understanding Assisted Suicide: Nine Issues to Consider”, Seattle University School of Law professor John B. Mitchell highlights many key points of why physician assisted suicide should be legalized.

I believe they should have to abide by the same laws because they are still humans that can make decisions. If there is someone that is believed to not be able to take care of themselves should be under full time supervision. This is so that they don 't lose control of themselves and some can help them through life. Do to the proper care not being given to Lennie he had to be killed for his actions.

Everybody has a right to make a choice. When a person goes to a restaurant, that person has the right to make choice of which entree to eat. However, sometimes a person might not be able to make a decision, such in case of person who is bed bound or a person with a terminal illness. I believe that Physician-assisted suicide should be available as an option for those who can and can’t make decisions for the following reasons cost and ending deterring quality of life.

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.

After researching both sides of the argument, it is clear that the benefits of physician-assisted suicide outweigh the disadvantages. The benefits of ending a patient’s pain and suffering, minimizing the emotional and financial effects on families, and preserving the right for patients to decide their own fate, supports the legalization of 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.