Behalf Of The Legalization Of Assisted Suicide example essay topic

The Effects of Assisted Suicide Legalization While slowly experiencing an eventual death, the pain of a life-threatening disease is unbearable. The constant anguish of a helpless cancer patient, Richard, is driving away all sanity. As he lies there on the hospital bed near his family, Richard finally makes a grave decision. He decides to call upon a physician to end his pain. The doctor would give him medication which would lead to an inevitable death.

As he knows he is going to die within a few weeks anyway, Richard questions the doctor about the medication. "Just give me the word, and I will hand it over to you", the doctor says. "Let me add, however, that even though it may be an option, do you think it is morally right?" The doctor is obviously an honest, noble man who gives all of his patients his sincere opinion. That, in most cases, is not common in a doctor's character.

Richard is left with those words from the doctor and given time to talk about the situation with his family. After a long discussion, they realize that life is a privilege and should not be taken by choice, no matter how intense the pain is. Weeks later, at Richard's funeral, the family feels proud of him for enduring the agonizing experience and to die naturally. The choice of physician assisted suicide may be an irrelevant issue to some, but when it comes to terminally ill patients, it is definitely an observable option. These people must realize that taking a life, whether someone else's or their own, is dishonorable. Assisted suicide should be against the law in allstate's because it would have an affect on medical procedures, persuade doctors to make the wrong decisions, and change the morality of people around the country.

The people of this country are partially represented by the United States Supreme Court. In fact, the United States Supreme Court is going to become the final judge of this important issue because two United States Court of Appeals decisions have recently ruled laws forbidding physician-assisted suicide unconstitutional (Court 1). There is no doubt that the effect of the speculations by the highest court in this country on physician-assisted suicide will be as important as anyone has witnessed in along while. Physician-assisted suicide is one of the most controversial medical issues there is. Although a recent poll shows that 64 to 73 percent of Americans believe doctors should be admitted to end the lives of terminally ill patients under their permission, Americans may not realize what could actually happen if physician-assisted suicide becomes legal in all states (Solomon 1).

Not long ago, the American Medical Association voted strongly against physician-assisted suicide (Bergen 2). This decision is definitely a standing argument for all ethical Americans. Thousands of years of medical and moral tradition claiming that suicide is immoral show that the courts of the United States will most likely rule against assisted suicide because it would be a corrupt law. Whenever cases of physician-assisted suicide take place, they take a while to transact with. In America's history, long cases, such as legalizing assisted suicide, usually make bad laws. The opposition, Americans who are trying to speak on behalf of the legalization of assisted suicide, realize that it may be a long case, but they feel as if fighting for it is worth their purpose.

The "right-to-die" movement affirmed that death is sometimes an acceptable alternative to continued medical treatment. They believe that under certain exceptional conditions, a suffering patient may be suitable in wanting to end his life, and there is no logical explanation why he should not be able to seek the aid of a physician. However, the New England Journal of Medicine shows that thousands of physician-assisted suicides are undertaken because of family requests, not the patient's. Also, because individual self-boldness is so highly appreciated in our uplifting culture, the effort made to defend assisted suicide usually starts with a plead to the principle of freedom (Baha monde 1). Supporters argue that decisions about the end of life are among the most personal issues that anyone will ever face, that no one can possibly before qualified than that person to make such a decision. Also, the individual should have the freedom to decide when the consequence of further suffering exceeds the benefits of longer life (4).

Supporters urge everyone that they do care about the patient, and there is nothing more important than giving that patient a choice of whether they should be able to carry on. They believe that the doctor will be affected after the first doing; that will also help them in the future to share their open opinion with any patient that is contemplating on this procedure. However, neither the doctor nor the patient's family should be affected in a commendable way after something like this. Legalizing physician-assisted suicide may also alter the way the nation thinks about suicide as well as the patient's family in a bad way. It may look like an illegitimate issue at first, but it may slowly become accepted like many other issues.

After a period of time, people may see it as something depressed people do just as ill patients do. Legalizing assisted suicide will also change how physicians observe their life. They will have to worry about money spending problems such as if the patient does not choose to commit assisted suicide. Keeping a patient alive until the very end would cost much more money than an assisted suicide (Marker 3).

Eventually, physicians may encourage patients to favor suicide, and that would be a horrible thing. Not only would they be influencing patients to make the wrong decision, but they would not be allowing them to make a decision at all. Managed care may give many doctors financial motives to persuade ill patients to choose assisted suicide. There are also patients requesting physician-assisted suicide, and they are not sick or dying. Rather, they are extremely depressed individuals who should be taking anti-depressants and other medications prescribed by doctors. In fact, the Washington State Study concluded that 55% of all patients requesting suicide were diagnosed with severe depression (2).

Physicians can treat depression, but cannot cure death inflicted by oneself. After a suicide, there is no more medication. With such a declining quantity of lifelong personal family doctors in control of patients in managed care plans, would the doctor put all of the victim's feelings into effect, or would he just worry about how much money it would cost? The doctor's influence may be a large problem if assisted suicide became legal.

The case of influential tendencies from doctors have maybe rubbed off from politicians and other governmental leaders. In 1996, former Colorado governor Richard Lamm made some very controversial remarks regarding his opinion on assisted suicide. He expressed himself by publicly remarking that people who are terminally ill had a 'duty to die' and 'get out of the way' (Russell 1). In an editorial in the September 1995 issue of Weekly Standard, the voice of the GOP majority concluded:'s ick people are expensive.

The dead are a burden to no one. Years ago, the child had whooping cough and died. Now that child grows up to be avery expensive old man or woman. The only answer is some kind of rationing' (1). An admirable, righteous person has respect for all people that are living. Governor Lamm is not one of these people.

If he is supposed to be representing everyone who supports physician-assisted suicide respectively and maturely, he is not fulfilling his role. What Governor Lamm said was an awful thing to declare to the country, and sick people around the world should be extremely offended by this man. Some nurses may support Governor Lamm's outlook. A survey of registered nurses around the country found that 20 percent of the nurses had quickened the death of critically ill patients at least once in their careers (1). Some of the procedures were even done without the consent of the patient, their family, or the doctor (1). Encouraging physicians to help patients in making the end of their lives easier and less painful is much needed.

Evidently, many physicians already help patients die peacefully and with dignity, yet they must be thought that it is permissible, even mandatory, to properly treat pain and discomfort. Once pain relief has been achieved, most patients requesting physician-assisted suicide give in. No matter what the patient agrees to have done, there is no telling who will control what doctors do. If assisted suicide becomes legal in all states, patients who are critically sick will no longer be viewed as people who have emotions and sensitivity, but money-saving objects that will ensure the doctor's conceit. Families will never be able to agree with each other, nor should they. Will patients truly be given alternative options from physicians?

Most importantly, how will killing patients affect the physician's view of his or her role in the care of patients? Physician-assisted suicide is a complex, emotional medical problem. The Supreme Court has the duty to always keep the American people informed about the grave states some patients are in when an assisted suicide takes place. In addition, physicians have been quietly helping terminally ill patients die in peace and with dignity for many years.

As the years pass by, there seems to be an enormous ethical difference in making a patient more comfortable by injecting a pain reliever which could inadvertently cause the death of a patient and deliberately helping a patient kill himself. The most honorable doctors believed in the past and still do today that their intent in medicating their patients was to bring pain relief -- not death. Here lies the difference between what the doctor feels is the discriminating factor between a physician assisting suicide and performing an ethically defendable act. A patient may ask a doctor each month for more sleeping medication, and he may agree to an attempt to help his patient sleep.

Whether the patient chooses to save these capsules until he has enough to commit suicide is his decision. Obviously, the difference of morality and apathy shows how dependable a physician can be when he is encountered with a terminally ill patient who is dying gradually. Terminally ill patients throughout the country may need relief, medication, emotional sympathy, and most of all, comfort. The most important thing that matters when a patient is dying is how comfortable he is; death should not be a choice.

Death should remain an inevitable occurrence. The family of Richard, the man who died of his terrible disease, live on and are guilt-free of their last decision on earth with him. Physician-assisted suicide should not be a decision for anyone who is dying. Life should never be taken for granted.

Everyone should hold on to their life as long as they possibly can -- even if it may be painful. Suffering an eventual death without any regard of pain is a way of showing remarkable gratitude of life.