Bailey McGill Mrs. McIntosh English 047 (7) Research Paper 11 January 2012 Physician-Assisted Suicide Physician-assisted suicide is a highly debated topic in today’s society. The ethics, the legalities, and the decision whether or not it should be are the main problem places. Physician-assisted suicide can occur when a physician provides a terminally ill patient with a lethal dosage of medication in order for the patient or a third party to end the patient’s life. The debate grows stronger when people question whether the physician should be allowed to provide the patient with these lethal medications. However, there are many pros and cons to each side of the argument.
This essay will argue that Huttmann made a wise decision and did not commit a crime. She made a very difficult decision to free Mac of his misery and live with a peaceful conscience. During the 80's euthanasia was not a common procedure for hospitals. There are patients like Mac who are very ill and transformed from a strong, young person in to a skeleton trapped in a hospital bed. When people are very sick and have to lay in bed for months without showing a bit of progress, as in the majority of the cancer cases, they are in agony.“The Doctor believed that life must be extended as long they have the means and knowledge to do it” (Huttmann 114).
Community physicians have been around almost as long in some capacity, dealing with these sufferings with the technology available. Helping people deal with their suffering is a high calling, and how far this calling is taken is the topic of this work. How far should a physician go to ease suffering? Physician assisted suicide is a method for doctors to manage a voluntary patient death without administering the lethal medication. Doctors prescribe the medication and the patient administers their own death.
This man was left quadriplegic after a diving accident and had been bedridden for almost 30 years. He fought a losing battle with government: he never received permission for euthanasia, and in January 1998, with the help of one of his friends he took poison. Another possible reason for the justifying of euthanasia is the lack of space in hospitals for those who can be cured and saved. It is bitter to own up, but this problem exists in many countries. Those who want to live have no chance to get the proper treatment while those who want to die cannot give their place to them.
Ewart was an American who had gotten a disease that causes his organs to shrink for a long time. He chose to die by euthanasia, to end his pain of his own accord finally. He said that Motoneuron disease made him tired and he had no will to live. If he was in so much pain by the disease, he would still want to live, but there were too much pain. From Steven Ertelt’s article, we knew that Ewart said, if he chose to live, he would suffer illness, but it did not mean he could cure the disease and have a new life (2008).
A physician may provide sleeping pills and information about the lethal dose, with the full knowledge of the patient’s expectation for the outcome. How does a patient arrive at such a decision? One possibility is a patient who is terminal and does not want to face weeks or months enduring extreme pain. Another possibility is the duress of family members. Certain debilitating illness is too painful to endure and causes a person to reassess their passion for life.
should physician assisted suicide be legalized? A current event Critical thinking and computer logic February 13, 2012 Should physician assisted suicide be legalized How to handle end of life care is a decision fraught with ethical, moral and legal issues that have plagued us for generations. End of life care is a uniquely personal journey that can only be experienced once. While many of us have witnessed, and even supported someone making the journey, we are an outsider who at best struggles for understanding and acceptance of what the dying person wants, and needs. On one side of the coin we have individuals who believe that your right to self determine is second to the sanctity of life.
Eventually some people and their families might be forced to put financial concerns above the needs of a loved one. Doctors or insurance companies could try to convince some people to opt for assisted suicide rather than the more expensive treatment. This would be an injustice to all humankind. A history professor at San Francisco State University argued that assisted suicide would lead to inequities and would not be limited to those with a terminal illness. “Given the way the U.S. healthcare system is getting increasingly unjust and even savage, I don't think this system could be trusted to implement such a system equitably, or confine it to people who are immediately terminally ill"(Mohler).
Nevertheless, the technologies also prolong the dying processes, leading some people to question whether modern medicine is forcing patients to live in unnecessary pain when there is no chance they will be cured. “Passive euthanasia—disconnecting a respirator or removing a feeding tube has become an accepted solution to this dilemma. Active euthanasia perhaps an overdose of pills or a deadly injection of morphine remains controversial “(McDougall,
While most initiatives have previously focused on medical staff, some now offer training to a wider range of healthcare professionals (Blok et al, 1999). Over the course of a career, a busy clinician may disclose unfavorable medical information to patients and families many thousands of times. Breaking bad news to patients is inherently aversive, described as “hitting the patient over the head” or “dropping a bomb”. Breaking bad news can be particularly stressful when the clinician is inexperienced, the patient is young, or there are limited prospects for successful treatment. Bad news must be told because of the following reasons: Patients Want the Truth Ethical and Legal Imperatives Clinical Outcomes However, breaking bad news is also a complex communication task.