The infamous Doctor Jack Kevorkian once said, “The patient decides when it’s best to go.” (Foley). Dr. Kevorkian is memorable for his stance and his illegal assistance of suicide with more than 130 terminally ill persons (McLellan). I find that that this quote best emulates the right side of the argument I intend to write about today. The general population is full of debate upon the subject of assisted suicide and is always trying to argue whether it is morally right to help administer physician-assisted suicide to a patient who is going to die within a short time frame. I don’t think it is a question of convention or morality, I think that the only question that should be asked is “Do you want to die on your own terms?” In only four states
…show more content…
It has been the base of many laws and rulings regarding the rights we have as citizens. However, the 9th amendment of the United States Constitution states that the it does not include all the rights a citizen has, and that if those rights were not listed, it does not mean that a citizen does not have those rights (U.S. Constitution IX). Since the right to physician-assisted suicide is not listed, or any right pertaining to one’s own physical health, it should not be dismissed as something that federal law is able to control. A person’s body and their own life is their right to control, not the federal government’s. Yes, doctors and physicians are legally obligated to aid a patient in the best interest of their health, and healing them to the best of their ability. On the other hand, according the the American Medical Association, who have formed a code of medical ethics, “A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient” (“Principles”). This line from the code states that although a doctor is required to follow the law, they should do what is in their ability to bypass it [legally] if such law interferes with the health of their patient. Bypassing a federal law when it is in the best interest of the patient is difficult, but it has been done before in the
It has been the base of many laws and rulings regarding the rights we have as citizens. However, the 9th amendment of the United States Constitution states that the it does not include all the rights a citizen has, and that if those rights were not listed, it does not mean that a citizen does not have those rights (U.S. Constitution IX). Since the right to physician-assisted suicide is not listed, or any right pertaining to one’s own physical health, it should not be dismissed as something that federal law is able to control. A person’s body and their own life is their right to control, not the federal government’s. Yes, doctors and physicians are legally obligated to aid a patient in the best interest of their health, and healing them to the best of their ability. On the other hand, according the the American Medical Association, who have formed a code of medical ethics, “A physician shall respect the law and also recognize a responsibility to seek changes in those requirements which are contrary to the best interests of the patient” (“Principles”). This line from the code states that although a doctor is required to follow the law, they should do what is in their ability to bypass it [legally] if such law interferes with the health of their patient. Bypassing a federal law when it is in the best interest of the patient is difficult, but it has been done before in the