During the 1900’s, the United States adopted the “standard to informed consent,” which required doctors to inform a patient about every possible outcome and treatment for an illness (Assisted). This included giving the option of death for those who are terminally-ill. The act of assisting a terminally ill patient kill themselves - usually “with a prescription of a fatal dose of a drug”(Assisted) - is Assisted Suicide, different from Euthanasia in which the physician actually administers the drug that kills the patient, whether it be passive - forgoing medical treatment - or active - the usage of lethal drugs to commit suicide (Suicide, Euthanasia…). Assisted Suicide is very different from normal suicide. Assisted suicide is giving and receiving
…show more content…
According to Tim Stanley, “[He] didn’t need an assisted death - he needed love. It is a shame to all of us that we didn’t give it, offering pointless annihilation instead.” In other words, Stanley believes that euthanasia and assisted suicide should be illegal, and instead of offering death as a solution, offering our love and support will “cure” them. Although I agree with Stanley up to a point, I cannot accept his overriding assumption that love can fix everything, even terminal illnesses. Anyone with terminal illnesses or anyone who has a loved one who is terminally ill should agree that it is the ill individual’s unspoken freedom to determine whether or not they end their suffering - even if it is psychological and emotional pain. Author and staff writer of the Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams, opposes Stanley’s viewpoints about Euthanasia. She covers the same case of Nathan Verhelst, but approaches it from a different angle. From her own experience with suicide, she claims, “Suffering exists on a continuum, and it’s impossible to gauge when it becomes unbearable for any individual.” She then continues to say that it is a more righteous and compassionate way to end someone’s life, rather than letting a family member find them on the floor covered in blood. She makes a valid point by acknowledging in her essay that if one hasn’t experienced suicide firsthand, then one won’t have a full understanding of why in some cases it is the right thing to do - not suicide itself, but assisted suicide and euthanasia. I agree that Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide should be allowed for Emotional Suffering, however, only if it is untreatable - which is very rare, but can happen in cases like the Nathan Verhelst
According to Tim Stanley, “[He] didn’t need an assisted death - he needed love. It is a shame to all of us that we didn’t give it, offering pointless annihilation instead.” In other words, Stanley believes that euthanasia and assisted suicide should be illegal, and instead of offering death as a solution, offering our love and support will “cure” them. Although I agree with Stanley up to a point, I cannot accept his overriding assumption that love can fix everything, even terminal illnesses. Anyone with terminal illnesses or anyone who has a loved one who is terminally ill should agree that it is the ill individual’s unspoken freedom to determine whether or not they end their suffering - even if it is psychological and emotional pain. Author and staff writer of the Salon, Mary Elizabeth Williams, opposes Stanley’s viewpoints about Euthanasia. She covers the same case of Nathan Verhelst, but approaches it from a different angle. From her own experience with suicide, she claims, “Suffering exists on a continuum, and it’s impossible to gauge when it becomes unbearable for any individual.” She then continues to say that it is a more righteous and compassionate way to end someone’s life, rather than letting a family member find them on the floor covered in blood. She makes a valid point by acknowledging in her essay that if one hasn’t experienced suicide firsthand, then one won’t have a full understanding of why in some cases it is the right thing to do - not suicide itself, but assisted suicide and euthanasia. I agree that Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide should be allowed for Emotional Suffering, however, only if it is untreatable - which is very rare, but can happen in cases like the Nathan Verhelst