Physician-Assisted Suicide
Is physician-assisted suicide, with regards to the elderly or the terminally ill just? Should we allow the assisted death of individuals based on these variables? In this paper, we will seek to expound this question as well as apply it to the ethical theory of utilitarianism. There are two doctrines that can be used to evaluate this issue on whether it is entirely ethical or unethical. On one side of the argument, physician-assisted suicide is deemed as a way of relieving the suffering of others before an inevitable death. At the other end of this intense discussion, this form of practice is regarded as a slippery slope, could lead to euthanasia. Currently, there are only six states in the U.S., which have already …show more content…
Quoting William Brennan, Supreme Court Justice, he posited that, "An ignoble end steeped in decay is abhorrent. A quiet, proud death, bodily integrity intact, is a matter of extreme confidence” in the Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. The limitations of medicine is another reason why the physician-assisted suicide should be legalized. This practice is far from being about suicide. Suicide is seen to respond to personal disintegration, while physician-assisted practice precludes it. Noticeably, it is nothing less of medical arrogance to claim that hospice and palliative care cab sufficiently deal with the end of every individual’s life. In fact, hospice can impose a hard, authoritarian, paternalistic view depicting that the hospice way of dying is the only ethical way ("Physician-Assisted Suicide: Yes or No? The Great Debate", …show more content…
For instance, the Oregon law requires the elderly or the terminally ill to make two requests orally and one written request. In particular, there should be a mandatory 15-day waiting period between the two oral requests and an additionally two-day lapse between receiving medication and the making of the decision (Lachman, 2010). Additionally, the Oregon requires medical practitioners to provide palliative care as an alternative option. Asides from the above, among others, procedural steps, there lies other several inherent regulations, which are subject to personal opinion. For instance, patients need to be diagnosed with less than half a year to live as well as be declared of impaired judgment (Lachman, 2010). Whether or not the elderly or the terminally ill person meets these criteria is dependent on the health specialists charged with the obligation of making the assessments. It is tough to determine how long a person has left to live accurately in addition to comprehending a person’s motivations and state of mind regarding the physician-assisted suicide (Snyder et al.,
Is physician-assisted suicide, with regards to the elderly or the terminally ill just? Should we allow the assisted death of individuals based on these variables? In this paper, we will seek to expound this question as well as apply it to the ethical theory of utilitarianism. There are two doctrines that can be used to evaluate this issue on whether it is entirely ethical or unethical. On one side of the argument, physician-assisted suicide is deemed as a way of relieving the suffering of others before an inevitable death. At the other end of this intense discussion, this form of practice is regarded as a slippery slope, could lead to euthanasia. Currently, there are only six states in the U.S., which have already …show more content…
Quoting William Brennan, Supreme Court Justice, he posited that, "An ignoble end steeped in decay is abhorrent. A quiet, proud death, bodily integrity intact, is a matter of extreme confidence” in the Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. The limitations of medicine is another reason why the physician-assisted suicide should be legalized. This practice is far from being about suicide. Suicide is seen to respond to personal disintegration, while physician-assisted practice precludes it. Noticeably, it is nothing less of medical arrogance to claim that hospice and palliative care cab sufficiently deal with the end of every individual’s life. In fact, hospice can impose a hard, authoritarian, paternalistic view depicting that the hospice way of dying is the only ethical way ("Physician-Assisted Suicide: Yes or No? The Great Debate", …show more content…
For instance, the Oregon law requires the elderly or the terminally ill to make two requests orally and one written request. In particular, there should be a mandatory 15-day waiting period between the two oral requests and an additionally two-day lapse between receiving medication and the making of the decision (Lachman, 2010). Additionally, the Oregon requires medical practitioners to provide palliative care as an alternative option. Asides from the above, among others, procedural steps, there lies other several inherent regulations, which are subject to personal opinion. For instance, patients need to be diagnosed with less than half a year to live as well as be declared of impaired judgment (Lachman, 2010). Whether or not the elderly or the terminally ill person meets these criteria is dependent on the health specialists charged with the obligation of making the assessments. It is tough to determine how long a person has left to live accurately in addition to comprehending a person’s motivations and state of mind regarding the physician-assisted suicide (Snyder et al.,