The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines euthanasia as the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering. There are many different types of euthanasia: voluntary, non-voluntary, and involuntary; euthanasia by action or by omission; and assisted suicide. This essay will focus solely on physician assisted suicide. Medicinenet.com defines assisted suicide as the voluntary termination of one's life by administration of lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance. Dr. Brian Pollard discusses in the article, “Human Rights and Euthanasia” the case of physician assisted suicide and the autonomy of both the patient and the physician. He lists many reasons as to why he is against physician
…show more content…
The physician may not see viable life in the patient and may need to empty the bed to make room for new patients. At this point, the physician makes the decision to terminate the patient against their silent will. At this point, who speaks for the patient? It would be easy for someone to view this as murder. Dr. Pollard also states that the views of the ones that are actually effected by euthanasia are not usually the ones that we hear. Most often we are hearing from the ones who have the power to stand up and speak. Ignoring the opinion of the sick and vulnerable is an infringement upon their human rights—to life and freedom. An elderly patient in a hospital bed does not have access to stand before Congress and give an address pertaining to why their life is valuable no matter the state of their life. The autonomy of the physician is also evaluated. Most often only the patient is discussed in the evaluation of the case for euthanasia. The physician also has rights as to perform the act they are being asked to perform. Physicians have a right to make the decision to agree with euthanasia or not. The physician has great moral and ethical decisions that need to be weighed. The physicians role as healer would ultimately be questioned. In the article from Margaret Somerville, “Would Euthanasia Damage Doctors” she examines the impact of euthanasia upon physicians and the medical community's
The physician may not see viable life in the patient and may need to empty the bed to make room for new patients. At this point, the physician makes the decision to terminate the patient against their silent will. At this point, who speaks for the patient? It would be easy for someone to view this as murder. Dr. Pollard also states that the views of the ones that are actually effected by euthanasia are not usually the ones that we hear. Most often we are hearing from the ones who have the power to stand up and speak. Ignoring the opinion of the sick and vulnerable is an infringement upon their human rights—to life and freedom. An elderly patient in a hospital bed does not have access to stand before Congress and give an address pertaining to why their life is valuable no matter the state of their life. The autonomy of the physician is also evaluated. Most often only the patient is discussed in the evaluation of the case for euthanasia. The physician also has rights as to perform the act they are being asked to perform. Physicians have a right to make the decision to agree with euthanasia or not. The physician has great moral and ethical decisions that need to be weighed. The physicians role as healer would ultimately be questioned. In the article from Margaret Somerville, “Would Euthanasia Damage Doctors” she examines the impact of euthanasia upon physicians and the medical community's