Again, this is not a genuine choice, but a social issue, one that stems from how our society cares for its elders and for the poor, and whether minority groups can get good health care” (Lynn, 2006). People think that some people will be pressured into committing suicide instead of having other choices while they are dying. They think that people with no or poor health care will choose this just because they will cause less of a burden on their families. “A 1997 study conducted by the American Medical Association (AMA) found that more than half of Americans believe physician-assisted suicide should be legal. However, when people are told about alternatives to the technological treatments so many of us fear, and about the availability of pain control and hospice care, their support for physician-assisted suicide goes down to under one-fifth.
If I were terminally ill, I would not want to suffer just to suffer. What is the difference between having a patient, a human being, sedated until their death and a patient who commits suicide? It might sound a little cruel, but I personally don’t see what good a sedated patient does to society. I personally would not want to be in a vegetative state and have my family and friends witness me in that state. In addition, shouldn’t we choose how we would like to die just like we choose how we live?
The American Medical Association has generally argued against physician assisted suicide on the grounds that it undermines the integrity of the profession (Braddock & Tonelli 1998). Although patients can commit suicide without the aid of their physician it is still against the law and it can affect family members after they are gone. Opinions differ on the ethical consequences of trying to make physician assisted suicide the responsibility of doctors, but prior consideration of such ethically relevant consequences the question arises of whether the provision assisted suicide can logically be part of the doctor’s role (Fiona Randall & Robin Downie 2010). At the same time the state needs to monitor physician to see that they do not break the law and take it into their hands to participate in physician assisted suicide. A physician job description is to aim at the provision of treatments with health benefits in the patient’s best interest, and to avoid adverse outcomes (Fiona Randall & Robin Downie 2010).
This will be the topic addressed in this paper. Physician-assisted suicide has its proponents and its opponents. Among the opponents are some physicians who believe that doctors should not assist in suicides because to do
Physician assisted suicide is something I disagree with because It would violate the trust between a patient and a doctor, It opens the floodgates for other such abuses and generally such requests are made out of fear for the dying process. Historically, the fundamental goal of the doctor-patient relationship has been to comfort and to
On the other hand opponents of assisted suicide do not believe this is the only way to secure a good health alternative. Opponents believe that it is important to make a patient feel comfortable and help them improve their quality of life not end life just because it is an option or that they may feel they are a burden to loved ones. Assisted suicide can be performed by a physician or a person who is willing to help a patient end their life. This paper will focus on physician assisted suicide (PAS), this has been a controversial issue in many countries and have many different opinions on the ethics behind assisted suicide. To further examine the data the utilitarian ethics approach will be used.
Gordon Brown, former prime Minister, warned ‘frail and ill people would be under pressure to end their lives if the suicide laws were changed.’ It would also risk pressure on the vulnerable people in society who may feel their existence a burden to others. A survey showed that 70% of disabled people would feel more pressure to kill themselves if the suicide law was changed. There is also the issue of people’s wishes fluctuating. Would it be making it too easy for people to end their lives and be legally helped to end their lives? Assisted Suicide is one of those controversial topics where everyone has different opinions, and everyone thinks their opinion is right.
Libertarianism is the position I wish to defend, and thus will argue that, indeed, we do have free will. Libertarians believe that free will exists. Libertarians think the will is free when a choice can be made that is not determined or necessitated by prior
Do you believe that some people may have a problem with temptation and the enjoyment in exercising power over others? I would agree with this statement because many people who care for those with some sort of illness may try to control them when it comes to another part of their life; so I am sure that they will use the power to choice between assisted suicide or not. Allowing assisted suicide could put a patient that knows the end is near and wants to leave this world in a peaceful manner. I know that I am for assisted suicide but I do not think that assisted suicide should be given to an elderly person or anyone who feels like they are a burden on someone. We have society to blame for that, because that is all the world portrays.
So a physician’s decision to enter into this agreement with his patient is a difficult one at best. Therefore at this juncture the debate seems to indicate that physician-assisted suicide is driven by emotivism. This statement is made because although there is something to say about the position that it’s wrong, none of it is really based on concrete facts. Society surmises that there will be abuses of the practice. Because of the state of world today, one would say this is a given.