In this project I am going to be talking about the case of assisted suicide. I have done plenty of research from scholarly and trust worthy websites, articles, books, (etc.) A patient who is suffering from an incurable disease, should have the right to end his or her suffering.
A point to make is that it’s unfair to let a fellow man suffer from something that you could get read of at any time. “The U.S Supreme Court ruled that physicians-assisted-suicide is not a protected liberty interest under the constitution.” This quote explains that that it’s not taken under the government as a protection scenario. “The American Medical Association suggest that passive euthanasia is accepted but not without controversy.” (CNN reporter?)An individual has the right to: not receive medical attention/medical treatment, turning off respirators, stopping food or water or no resuscitation. This basically means that they have the right to die but not be brought back to life …show more content…
I see these two things as the same, not entirely but they share some similarities. I think some people are thinking that this is what assisted suicide is, just a death penalty. It seems wrong but it isn’t at all. Those of who passed from being executed got what they deserved. Now we have someone who is struggling and has suffered enough, now don’t they get what they get what they deserve.
“Approximately 20,000 people have been legally executed in the united states in the past three-hundred and fifty years. And maybe the most relevant fact for the comparison of euthanasia and the death penalty are volunteers, for the death penalty some inmates on death row choose to waive their right to appeal their death sentence. This results in what some call “state-assisted suicide, now if the state can do it why can’t the average free man who just happens to be
A point to make is that it’s unfair to let a fellow man suffer from something that you could get read of at any time. “The U.S Supreme Court ruled that physicians-assisted-suicide is not a protected liberty interest under the constitution.” This quote explains that that it’s not taken under the government as a protection scenario. “The American Medical Association suggest that passive euthanasia is accepted but not without controversy.” (CNN reporter?)An individual has the right to: not receive medical attention/medical treatment, turning off respirators, stopping food or water or no resuscitation. This basically means that they have the right to die but not be brought back to life …show more content…
I see these two things as the same, not entirely but they share some similarities. I think some people are thinking that this is what assisted suicide is, just a death penalty. It seems wrong but it isn’t at all. Those of who passed from being executed got what they deserved. Now we have someone who is struggling and has suffered enough, now don’t they get what they get what they deserve.
“Approximately 20,000 people have been legally executed in the united states in the past three-hundred and fifty years. And maybe the most relevant fact for the comparison of euthanasia and the death penalty are volunteers, for the death penalty some inmates on death row choose to waive their right to appeal their death sentence. This results in what some call “state-assisted suicide, now if the state can do it why can’t the average free man who just happens to be