There has been many controversies over whether physician assisted suicide should be legal or not. Many people believe that it is morally wrong and should be unconstitutional. Individuals who support physician assisted suicide argue that it cuts costs, ends pain and suffering, and is not morally wrong. Physician assisted suicide is a controversial procedure that should be accepted, legally and morally as it is cost saving, and eliminates suffering from individual’s lives. If legalized, physician assisted suicide has “potential cost savings” (Emanuel, 1998, p. 1). One may not think that actually legalizing a physician to inject someone with a lethal dose to kill them can be cost saving at all, but research shows that it is. It is proven
…show more content…
Many people, will argue the morals behind physician assisted suicide until they die. According to Lesser (2009), it is not illegal to commit suicide, therefore it should not be illegal to help someone commit suicide (1). Along the same lines, if a society approves of assisting suicide for those who are experiencing grave suffering or terminally ill, it should be legal to help them end their lives (Lesser, 2009, p.1). And while it is not a crime to commit suicide and does not harm anyone, the law legalizing assisted suicide would act in citizen’s best interests (Lesser, 2009, p. 2). If someone knowingly and willingly wants to end their lives, but needs the help and courage to actually do it, why should anyone stop them? By legalizing assisted suicide, those who have a deep desire to die will be able to receive what they want, thus the law is acting in their best interest. Saying that something is a moral right is as meaningful as saying something is a legal or political right (Lesser, 2009, p.1). If that is the case, legalized assisted suicide should not be an issue because it is on the same level as political and legal rights. Why is something a legal right but not a moral right? Morals are not defined by legality. Morals are decided by people individually, and instilled in individuals, and not everyone within a society holds the same morals (Battin, 1998, p. 67). So by legalizing assisted suicide, it would be available to those who need it and believe in it and the ones who do not, do not have to pay mind to it. The availability of assisted suicide under certain conditions, is “not obviously morally wrong” (Lesser, 2009, p.
Many people, will argue the morals behind physician assisted suicide until they die. According to Lesser (2009), it is not illegal to commit suicide, therefore it should not be illegal to help someone commit suicide (1). Along the same lines, if a society approves of assisting suicide for those who are experiencing grave suffering or terminally ill, it should be legal to help them end their lives (Lesser, 2009, p.1). And while it is not a crime to commit suicide and does not harm anyone, the law legalizing assisted suicide would act in citizen’s best interests (Lesser, 2009, p. 2). If someone knowingly and willingly wants to end their lives, but needs the help and courage to actually do it, why should anyone stop them? By legalizing assisted suicide, those who have a deep desire to die will be able to receive what they want, thus the law is acting in their best interest. Saying that something is a moral right is as meaningful as saying something is a legal or political right (Lesser, 2009, p.1). If that is the case, legalized assisted suicide should not be an issue because it is on the same level as political and legal rights. Why is something a legal right but not a moral right? Morals are not defined by legality. Morals are decided by people individually, and instilled in individuals, and not everyone within a society holds the same morals (Battin, 1998, p. 67). So by legalizing assisted suicide, it would be available to those who need it and believe in it and the ones who do not, do not have to pay mind to it. The availability of assisted suicide under certain conditions, is “not obviously morally wrong” (Lesser, 2009, p.