Physician-Assisted Suicide: Ethical Dilemma SOC120 Professor Kristen Hester August 27, 2012 Physician-Assisted Suicide is a topic that has been the center of controversy for decades; however, is a scenario that goes back to the earliest of times. Moral arguments both for and against this issue arise, quite often passionately, whether a loved one should suffer with the pain and agony of an illness when medicine no longer holds hope for a cure or whether it is more dignified and humane to allow them to choose to die by an injection from a physician. With a certain criteria met, and not decided upon lightly, I will argue that Physician-Assisted Suicide is an option that every person should be able to consider, should the time come that
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.
Just maybe it should be a human right. Along if their decision is not acted out in public, nor does it put anyone else in danger. In his essay “The Right to Die,” Norman Cousins contended that the idea of someone committing suicide is often looked down upon by society. Even beyond the respect towards religion. Norman also suggested the need to reevaluate the true significance of being alive.
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).
Consequently, the provision of adequate suicide prevention and intervention services is both deemed favourable to the inmate, along with the institute where these services are being introduced to. Brown (1993) defines suicide as ‘the action or an act of intentionally killing oneself’ and attempted suicide is described as ‘a deliberate or ambivalent act of self-destruction or other life-threatening behaviour that does not result in death’. Liebling (2001) discusses how self-harm and suicide have been considered as two individual acts of behaviour with a low correlation with completed suicide. She disputes how the separation is ‘artificial’ and that the causes of self-harm, suicide and attempted suicide are similar and connected with feelings of one being, depressed, sad, in self-doubt and they pursuit to find relief. Liebling (1992, p.20) and Dooley (1990, pp.41–2) claim that half of all completed
One ethical issue that Kant can be applied to is euthanasia. This means “good death” and in general is the act of asking someone to help you to die. The case study I will discuss is voluntary euthanasia is where you actively take something to kill you. This is widely debated as it is illegal in most countries. Kant uses the categorical imperatives to determine whether or not this is right, to choose to die.
To this day, one of the biggest controversial topics that continue to spark endless discussions is the public approval of euthanasia. Euthanasia which is commonly known as “assisted suicide” is the deliberate action of ending a life to relieve continuous pain and suffering (Nordqvist, 2010). This has become a complicated global issue, as various cultures battle with the list of ethical, religious, and legal factors that play a major part in the act. Many see euthanasia as a benefit not only for the patient, but for the patient’s family as well. In this case, the practice is able to end one’s life in a peaceful manner, while a financial and emotional burden can also be lifted off of the family members.
Should euthanasia be allowed? Euthanasia is a way to relieve ill people’s pain and save them from a terrible illness. Most people choose to do euthanasia because they are terminal patients, and there is no hope to live. Now I will tell you a real story. Ewart was an American who had gotten a disease that causes his organs to shrink for a long time.
Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? Dion O. Hales SOC120 Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility Prof. Theodore Framan June 22, 2012 Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? While killing yourself is harder than having someone do it for you is that killing yourself requires firmer resolve, Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal? Because a patient's last will and last testament should be honored, a competent patient's request to terminate life-sustaining treatment, and it is our moral right to prevent a person from suffering if they suffer from a disease we cannot cure. First, Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?
Physician-assisted suicide, a suicide made possible by a physician providing a patient with the means to kill themselves, and euthanasia, the mercy killing of one individual by another, are highly controversial topics. Even countries which share a great deal of their philosophical and moral foundations, such as the United States and much of Western Europe, come to very different conclusions and create very different legislation in this area. However, I believe that there are some basic conclusions that argue both for and against PAS and euthanasia, and when they are weighed against each other there is a much stronger case for legalizing the practices than for banning them. To begin, though, it is important to point out that banning a practice