Documented Argument 2nd Draft
Physician Assisted Suicide
The United States is often called “the Land of the Free,” however in most states, citizens do not even have the freedom to choose to do something that everyone must eventually do; to have the right to die. With advances in today’s medicine and technology, the ability to sustain and prolong life is at an all time high. However, this also often means prolonging an inevitable death for many patients suffering from terminal diseases. For example, many patients suffering from Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) often turn to suicide rather than suffer through the effects of the final stages of the disease, such as blindness, dementia, and emaciation (Worsnop). Terminally ill patients should be allowed to make their own decisions pertaining to their death. One option is Physician Assisted Suicide, which has been a very controversial topic for many decades, and continues to be an increasingly popular debate. Assisted suicide is defined as someone providing an individual with the information, guidance and means to take his or her own life with the intention that they will be used for this purpose. When it is a doctor who helps another person to end his or her life it is called Physician Assisted Suicide. Physician Assisted Suicide should be legalized in all states because patients should be allowed the right to die on their own terms, it is immoral to keep someone alive against their will, and because it has proven effective in the three states that have already legalized it.
There are many arguments in favor of legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide. The first and most obvious is that it takes into consideration the patient’s decision. In the case of many patients that are terminally ill, the disease they suffer from has taken away the right to control what they are capable of doing, medical decisions and even their own body. Legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide would allow the patient to regain control and decide how far they are willing to let their terminal illness take them. Physician Assisted Suicide could also save the patient’s family from large medical costs that would be needed to keep the patient alive. Allowing the patient to decide when they want to die could also save their family from having to make tough medical decisions that could be needed if the patient’s illness leads them to a state where they are unable to speak and make decisions for themselves. This proves especially true for elderly patients who worry “over the prospect of becoming a financial and emotional burden on their children” (Worsnop)
The main argument against Physician Assisted Suicide is that it is essentially killing which is something that is considered morally wrong. However, what this argument doesn’t show is that the patient’s illness can cause them to suffer a lot for a long time. To be fair to all patients, similar cases should be treated alike. Many terminally ill patients are allowed to shorten their suffering by refusing life sustaining treatment. In many cases however, refusal of treatment will not quicken the dying process, which leaves assisted suicide as a favorable option over suffering for an extended period of time (Hosseini, 6). Forcing a patient to stay alive and suffer when they have no chance of survival should also be seen as morally wrong. In an article by Rod MacLeod in the Global Journal of Health Science, the author states that “assistance to hasten death is ethically permissible because competent individuals have a right to request and receive assisted death . . . in qualified circumstances” (MacLeod, 6). Physician Assisted suicide can help to stop the suffering of patients at their request. Physician Assisted Suicide is never an option forced upon a patient; it is something that only the patient can request for his or herself.
Requests for Physician assisted suicide first became a very public controversy in the 1990’s because of a doctor named Jack Kevorkian. Kevorkian first drew national attention in 1990 when he hooked up a 54-year-old Alzheimer’s patient to his homemade suicide machine and watched as she pushed a button to release the lethal drugs. Kevorkian claimed to have helped over 130 terminally and chronically ill patients take their own lives. He was tried four times in the death of ill people before he was finally convicted of second degree murder in 1999 for giving a fatal injection to a man named Thomas Youk, a 52-year-old man who had Lou Gehrig’s disease (Schneider).
As a result of the amount of publicity over the Kevorkian trials, hospice care and physicians became more sympathetic to their patients and more willing to prescribe medication to relieve their pain. This pushed many states to begin the fight to legalize physician assisted suicide. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that there is not a constitutional right to assist in a suicide; however they allow each individual state the right to decide whether or not to legalize Physician Assisted Suicide (Hosseini, 2). Oregon was the first state that successfully legalized Physician Assisted Suicide when their “Death with Dignity” Act passed in 1997.
This Death with Dignity Act has shown to be so successful in Oregon because it has numerous restrictions which ensure that only terminally ill patients who have no chance of survival are eligible. These restrictions include: the patient being eighteen years of age or older, they must have decision making capacity, must have a terminal illness which will lead to death in at least six months, the patient must make one written and two oral requests for the medication to end his or her life, and at least two doctors must confirm the diagnosis. Author Rod MacLeod states that “Evidence from Oregon’s first year of legalized [Physician Assisted Suicide] … shows [that] many terminally ill patients worried about their loss of autonomy and loss of bodily functions … [suggesting] that controlling the time of death was important to them” (MacLeod, 7). Because the patients are the only ones who can make this decision for themselves, it allows them to have “death with dignity” by allowing them to decide their own fate. Since the passing of Oregon’s law, both Washington and Montana have passed similar laws. (Oregon’s Death with Dignity Law and Euthanasia in the Netherlands: Factual Disputes)
Overall, Physician Assisted Suicide should be legalized because it could help the patient by allowing them to make their own decisions pertaining to their death, and because it has been effective in the three states that have legalized it. It allows patients to regain the control which the terminal illness may have taken from them. Oregon has had Physician Assisted Suicide legalized for almost 20 years and has not seen any negative effects of legalizing it. Legalizing it would not force anyone to partake in the action, but simply gives those who are in need the right to die.
The United States is often called “the Land of the Free,” however in most states, citizens do not even have the freedom to choose to do something that everyone must eventually do; to have the right to die. With advances in today’s medicine and technology, the ability to sustain and prolong life is at an all time high. However, this also often means prolonging an inevitable death for many patients suffering from terminal diseases. For example, many patients suffering from Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) often turn to suicide rather than suffer through the effects of the final stages of the disease, such as blindness, dementia, and emaciation (Worsnop). Terminally ill patients should be allowed to make their own decisions pertaining to their death. One option is Physician Assisted Suicide, which has been a very controversial topic for many decades, and continues to be an increasingly popular debate. Assisted suicide is defined as someone providing an individual with the information, guidance and means to take his or her own life with the intention that they will be used for this purpose. When it is a doctor who helps another person to end his or her life it is called Physician Assisted Suicide. Physician Assisted Suicide should be legalized in all states because patients should be allowed the right to die on their own terms, it is immoral to keep someone alive against their will, and because it has proven effective in the three states that have already legalized it.
There are many arguments in favor of legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide. The first and most obvious is that it takes into consideration the patient’s decision. In the case of many patients that are terminally ill, the disease they suffer from has taken away the right to control what they are capable of doing, medical decisions and even their own body. Legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide would allow the patient to regain control and decide how far they are willing to let their terminal illness take them. Physician Assisted Suicide could also save the patient’s family from large medical costs that would be needed to keep the patient alive. Allowing the patient to decide when they want to die could also save their family from having to make tough medical decisions that could be needed if the patient’s illness leads them to a state where they are unable to speak and make decisions for themselves. This proves especially true for elderly patients who worry “over the prospect of becoming a financial and emotional burden on their children” (Worsnop)
The main argument against Physician Assisted Suicide is that it is essentially killing which is something that is considered morally wrong. However, what this argument doesn’t show is that the patient’s illness can cause them to suffer a lot for a long time. To be fair to all patients, similar cases should be treated alike. Many terminally ill patients are allowed to shorten their suffering by refusing life sustaining treatment. In many cases however, refusal of treatment will not quicken the dying process, which leaves assisted suicide as a favorable option over suffering for an extended period of time (Hosseini, 6). Forcing a patient to stay alive and suffer when they have no chance of survival should also be seen as morally wrong. In an article by Rod MacLeod in the Global Journal of Health Science, the author states that “assistance to hasten death is ethically permissible because competent individuals have a right to request and receive assisted death . . . in qualified circumstances” (MacLeod, 6). Physician Assisted suicide can help to stop the suffering of patients at their request. Physician Assisted Suicide is never an option forced upon a patient; it is something that only the patient can request for his or herself.
Requests for Physician assisted suicide first became a very public controversy in the 1990’s because of a doctor named Jack Kevorkian. Kevorkian first drew national attention in 1990 when he hooked up a 54-year-old Alzheimer’s patient to his homemade suicide machine and watched as she pushed a button to release the lethal drugs. Kevorkian claimed to have helped over 130 terminally and chronically ill patients take their own lives. He was tried four times in the death of ill people before he was finally convicted of second degree murder in 1999 for giving a fatal injection to a man named Thomas Youk, a 52-year-old man who had Lou Gehrig’s disease (Schneider).
As a result of the amount of publicity over the Kevorkian trials, hospice care and physicians became more sympathetic to their patients and more willing to prescribe medication to relieve their pain. This pushed many states to begin the fight to legalize physician assisted suicide. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that there is not a constitutional right to assist in a suicide; however they allow each individual state the right to decide whether or not to legalize Physician Assisted Suicide (Hosseini, 2). Oregon was the first state that successfully legalized Physician Assisted Suicide when their “Death with Dignity” Act passed in 1997.
This Death with Dignity Act has shown to be so successful in Oregon because it has numerous restrictions which ensure that only terminally ill patients who have no chance of survival are eligible. These restrictions include: the patient being eighteen years of age or older, they must have decision making capacity, must have a terminal illness which will lead to death in at least six months, the patient must make one written and two oral requests for the medication to end his or her life, and at least two doctors must confirm the diagnosis. Author Rod MacLeod states that “Evidence from Oregon’s first year of legalized [Physician Assisted Suicide] … shows [that] many terminally ill patients worried about their loss of autonomy and loss of bodily functions … [suggesting] that controlling the time of death was important to them” (MacLeod, 7). Because the patients are the only ones who can make this decision for themselves, it allows them to have “death with dignity” by allowing them to decide their own fate. Since the passing of Oregon’s law, both Washington and Montana have passed similar laws. (Oregon’s Death with Dignity Law and Euthanasia in the Netherlands: Factual Disputes)
Overall, Physician Assisted Suicide should be legalized because it could help the patient by allowing them to make their own decisions pertaining to their death, and because it has been effective in the three states that have legalized it. It allows patients to regain the control which the terminal illness may have taken from them. Oregon has had Physician Assisted Suicide legalized for almost 20 years and has not seen any negative effects of legalizing it. Legalizing it would not force anyone to partake in the action, but simply gives those who are in need the right to die.