The Ability to Die With Dignity Since November of 1994, physician assisted suicide (PAS) has been a hot topic among the U.S. when it was legalized in the state of Oregon, and barely at that. After the final votes were casted it was legalized based on a 49% to 51% ratio in assisted suicides favor. While both are referenced as “dying with dignity” PAS and euthanasia are often confused, the medical definition for assisted suicide is “suicide by a patient facilitated by means or information (as a drug prescription or indication of the lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information” whereas euthanasia “requires action from someone other than the person who’s life is being ended” according
…show more content…
Unnatural death in any shape or form would be against these religions because the Bible states that everything is done in accordance to God’s will, knowing this, ending a life prematurely to God’s timing would be an abomination. Though they concur on this view of PAS, Catholics seem to have much stronger views on the topic. Catholics believe this disrespects the divine law and offends the dignity of a person rather that protecting it. While Christians practice that all sin is equal in the eyes of The Lord, Catholics disagree. They believe that abortion, euthanasia, murder, and assisted suicide are weighted much heavier than other moral issues. Making the person preforming these sins unworthy of taking to the Father or receiving Holy …show more content…
While many philosophers, such as Immanuel Kant and James Rachels, believe that suicide in any form is undignified and immoral. Whereas Joel Feinburg teaches a different message, he says that every action is and should be bases on the best interest for one’s self. So we can assume that if the participant feels that this is his or hers best interest, under Feinburgs rules this would be moral. Another way I can understand morally justifying this would be for your family. Not all families have massive amounts of dispensable income. On average the expenses for the last few months of life are approximately $10,000-$15,000, and this is just an estimate, numbers could be significantly higher. Whereas the expense for PAS is roughly $30-$50. This is such a significant difference, that if a person chose to terminate their life early for the sake of sparing not only pain, but cost for their family, how can we see this as immoral? Personally, I cannot. I see this as a heroic action. To add to this, while the majority of the population is against both euthanasia and PAS, cigarettes are legal and easily acceptable in all 50 states. The argument is that ending your life sooner than is natural is unethical, against religion, and wrong over all. Does the use of cigarettes not also shorten one’s life? Is this a secret being kept from us by any means? No, is not. The effects of not only cigarette abuse, but use as a whole are
Unnatural death in any shape or form would be against these religions because the Bible states that everything is done in accordance to God’s will, knowing this, ending a life prematurely to God’s timing would be an abomination. Though they concur on this view of PAS, Catholics seem to have much stronger views on the topic. Catholics believe this disrespects the divine law and offends the dignity of a person rather that protecting it. While Christians practice that all sin is equal in the eyes of The Lord, Catholics disagree. They believe that abortion, euthanasia, murder, and assisted suicide are weighted much heavier than other moral issues. Making the person preforming these sins unworthy of taking to the Father or receiving Holy …show more content…
While many philosophers, such as Immanuel Kant and James Rachels, believe that suicide in any form is undignified and immoral. Whereas Joel Feinburg teaches a different message, he says that every action is and should be bases on the best interest for one’s self. So we can assume that if the participant feels that this is his or hers best interest, under Feinburgs rules this would be moral. Another way I can understand morally justifying this would be for your family. Not all families have massive amounts of dispensable income. On average the expenses for the last few months of life are approximately $10,000-$15,000, and this is just an estimate, numbers could be significantly higher. Whereas the expense for PAS is roughly $30-$50. This is such a significant difference, that if a person chose to terminate their life early for the sake of sparing not only pain, but cost for their family, how can we see this as immoral? Personally, I cannot. I see this as a heroic action. To add to this, while the majority of the population is against both euthanasia and PAS, cigarettes are legal and easily acceptable in all 50 states. The argument is that ending your life sooner than is natural is unethical, against religion, and wrong over all. Does the use of cigarettes not also shorten one’s life? Is this a secret being kept from us by any means? No, is not. The effects of not only cigarette abuse, but use as a whole are