Patient's Life Through Assisted Suicide example essay topic

The purpose of this paper is to show the many sides and issues that deal with the subject of euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide. A questionnaire has been answered by 20 people over the age of 25. The results have been compared to the results taken from a similar study on doctors in Manitoba. Review of the Manitoba Survey: The original study was prepared by Neil Searles, who is a university law student. This study looks at the use of doctor assisted suicide which has rarely been looked at in Canada before.

Legally and professionally euthanasia is prohibited, but doctors still, on occasion, perform it. The penalty for euthanasia is a maximum 14 year sentence. It is known that physicians, in rare occasions, perform the act but it is usually impossible to prosecute because of lack of evidence. The method used to collect the study was a 33 item questionnaire. The issues that were looked at include: Ethical opinions; pain management; policy opinions; and prevalence of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. There were 400 physicians that were randomly selected from the total of 2200 licensed members of the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Several groups of doctors were left out of the study because they are not directly involved with the issue. Since the act of euthanasia is illegal, all responses were kept anonymous and a list of names was not kept. The results of the survey are generally the same as in other studies which show that the medical community is divided on the subject. From the 400 physicians, 122 returned the questionnaire, 10 were returned blank, 1 was lost by the physician, and one was excluded due to administrative complications. The usable response rate was 28.1%. 16% of the physicians had practiced medicine for less than 6 years, 18% had been practicing for 6 to 10 years, 16% had been practicing for 11 to 15 years, 21% had been practicing for 16 to 20 years, and 32% had practiced for 21 years or more.

The charts below are the different types of questions used in the study. The respondents were to answer a 1 to 4 Likert scale where 1 = Strongly disagree and 4 = Strongly agree. Overall agreement is based on a score of 3 or 4, the number in the brackets is the mean. Ethical opinions: Proposition Overall Agreement (mean) 95% Confidence Interval Number of Physicians Responding There is no ethical difference between not starting a life support procedure and stopping it once it has been started. 52 (2.58) 43-61 n = 112 Allowing a patient to die by forgoing or stopping treatment is ethically different from assisting in her or his suicide. 88 (3.50) 82-94 n = 112 Pain and Suffering: Proposition Overall Agreement (mean) 95% Confidence Scale Number of Physicians Responding The provision of pain medication is not made less appropriate where it will certainly hasten Death.

95 (3.65) 91 - 99 n = 111 The provision of pain medication is not made less appropriate where it will certainly hasten death. 83 (3.28) 76 - 91 n = 108 The pain and suffering endured by some terminally ill patients, by continuing nutrition and hydration, can outweigh the benefits of prolonging life. 91 (3.47) 86 - 96 n = 107 There is no point in legalizing assisted suicide or euthanasia because a patient can always refuse hydration and nutrition. 34 (2.13) 25 - 43 n = 109 Some pain or suffering cannot be treated adequately without rendering a patient unconscious. 71 (2.18) 63 - 78 n = 112 Requests for assisted suicide or euthanasia may often come from people who are rational and thinking clearly.

90 (3.33) 84 - 96 n = 110 Policy Opinions: Proposition Overall Agreement (mean) 95% Confidence Interval Number of Physicians Responding Allowing euthanasia would cause people to have less faith in physicians. 61 (2.79) 52 - 70 n = 111 If assisted suicide and euthanasia are legalized, physicians will be less likely to pursue palliation where a patient desires either assisted suicide or euthanasia 62 (2.59) 53-71 n = 111 All competent patients should have the right to refuse medical treatment even if that refusal may lead to death. 95 (3.70) 91-99 n = 111 When a person has an incurable disease that causes great suffering, doctors should be allowed by law to help end the patient's life through assisted suicide or euthanasia, it the patient has provided valid consent. 60 (2.61) 51-69 n = 111 A physician that provides a patient, suffering from an illness like acute leukemia, with a lethal dose of barbiturates, should not be charged with committing a criminal act. 62 (2.91) 53-71 n = 110 A physician that provides a patient, suffering from an illness like acute leukemia, with a lethal dose of barbiturates, should not face charges of professional misconduct. 61 (2.84) 52-70 n = 110 Prospect of legalizing physician assisted suicide and euthanasia: Proposition Overall Agreement (mean) 95% Confidence Interval Number of Physicians Responding I believe active euthanasia is presently performed in limited circumstances by some physicians.

72 (2.87) 63-81 n = 106 I would never knowingly assist a suicide, with the law as it now stands. 83 (3.37) 72-90 n = 110 I would never knowingly assist a suicide, regardless of the state of the law. 52 (2.69) 53-61 n = 111 I would never participate in euthanasia, with the law as it now stands. 80 (3.35) 73-87 n = 110 I would never participate in euthanasia, regardless of the state of the law.

53 (2.70) 44-62 n = 111 In the study that I asked 20 people to fill out, I used the same scale, and basically the same questions. The results, are about the same as the results found in the professional study. The only difference between the professional study and my study was that my numbers averaged lower in all cases. This may be due to lack of knowledge due to a rural setting. All 20 people returned the questionnaire. A poll that was taken by the Gallup Organization in Canada during July 1995 proves that people are starting to see the advantages of euthanasia.

The first question that was asked was: "When a person has an incurable disease that is immediately life threatening and causes that person to experience great suffering, do you, or do you not think that competent doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life through mercy killing, if the patient has made a formal request in writing?" It is proven in this first question that the general public believes that cases of great pain and suffering deserve the right to choose euthanasia as an option to stop the pain. Three quarters of the people surveyed believed that the choice should be given to the patient. The second question was about non-immediate life threatening cases: "When a person has an incurable disease that is not immediately life-threatening but causes that person to experience great suffering, do you, or do you not think that competent doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life through mercy killing, if the patient has made a formal request in writing?" As you can see, when a case is not immediately life threatening, the general publics answer is mixed. The people who answered no may be thinking of treatment that has not been tried yet or treatment that may come in the future due to new technologies. Medical Advancements: During the last 20 years, technological advancement has increased more than the advancement of the whole time of man before that. People that have the no opinion on euthanasia may be thinking that the person may be saved by a sudden medical advancement.

It would be terrible for a member of your family to take a lethal dose of drugs, given to them by a doctor, to find the next day while reading a recent medical journal that a cure had been found a few days before. How would you feel? Short Essays For Euthanasia: Essay #1: Matthew Golden Growing up you saw your Grandfather as a loving, caring, strong, and fair man. Through the later years you began to see your once strong Grandfather become frail, weak, and sick.

Strokes and heart attacks take an immeasurable toll on your Grandpa's body. The numerous surgeries and countless pills he has taken in attempts to extend his plentiful life, just seem to extend his pain and suffering. Grandpa, confiding in you, has told you that he no longer wants to live. He tells you of the pain and suffering he has endured and in final asks you to help him take his own life.

The act of helping your Grandfather take his life is called 'Euthanasia. ' 'Euthanasia can basically be defined as the act of bringing about the death of a person in order to prevent his suffering' (Kluge 11). Of course you have two choices yes or no. If you choose to help your Grandfather you would then have to decide whether to be passive or active in relieving his pain.

'Active (also positive or direct) euthanasia, also known as mercy killing or causing to die, designates someone's doing something to another with the intention of shortening that person's life. If this is done to persons with their consent, it is called voluntary euthanasia. If it is done without their consent, it is called non-voluntary active euthanasia' (Gula 5). Something to consider are the laws involving the use of active euthanasia. The laws as of right now considers active euthanasia to be an act of homicide.

The law should be taken in account when making your decision but should not be the determining factor. You and your convictions should be the determining factor. 'The quintessence of voluntary euthanasia is personal choice and self-control, with sometimes a little help from one's friends' (Humphry 34). If you were to take the active route in relieving Grandfathers pain, for example, you might pour him a glass of antifreeze to drink or put cyanide on a part of his sandwich to eat.

If you still want to help your Grandpa but don't want to take an active part, you can be passive. 'Passive (also negative or indirect) euthanasia is also known as allowing to die. It designates the removing or withholding of life-supporting means, such as antibiotics, transfusions, respirators, dialysis and the like, because no reasonable hope of recovery exists for the dying person' (Gula 5). Right now, laws allow passive euthanasia. This form of euthanasia has been used in hospitals many times when it is evident that the patients quality of life has no way of improvement. With passive euthanasia, the person is not always in a vegetable state, which would be a non-voluntary act.

As cited before it can mean withholding certain 'life-supporting means'. If you choose to help your Grandfather by participating passively, he could ask that you not give him his 'life-supporting' pills that are used to extend his already painful life. Euthanasia, active or passive should not be confused with the act of suicide. Suicide is a selfish act used as a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Euthanasia, on the other hand, is a merciful solution to one's pain and agony that could not be achieved by prolonging the life and easing the pain of the person through modern medicine. This merciful act is unselfish and is done with respect, forsaking not the gift of life that was given to them.

A person with honorable convictions who has had a plentiful life and is now stricken with physical pain due to a terminal illness would not take his life irrationally, much thought goes into their decision. If a loved one ever asked you to help take their own life, it is of course your decision whether to help or not, keep in mind be a friend and respect their decision. Respect for death is as important as respect for the gift of life. Essay #2: Kahl a Clapp The dictionary describes euthanasia as 'a quiet and easy death, the means of procuring this or, the action of inducing a quiet and easy death. ' Euthanasia has a becomes a legal, medical, and ethical issue over which opinions are divided. I feel that if there is no hope for a cure for a terminally ill patient then if they want, let them out of their misery.

There are two different types of euthanasia. One is active euthanasia, which means that a physician or other medical personnel takes a deliberate action that will include death such as: administering an overdose of morphine, insulin, or barbiturates followed by an injection of curare. The second type is passive euthanasia, which is letting a patient die for lack of treatment that has begun. Some examples of passive euthanasia are taking patients off of a respirator or any other form of life-support and stopping the patients food supply (Compton's Encyc). Who decides if the patient should die? The United States leaves the decision up to the state which usually allows the physician to suggest the option of death to a patient's relatives.

Non-terminally ill patients have been put to death without their consent at the request of relatives or the insistence of the physician (Compton's Encyc). In Washington two physicians had different opinions on the subject of assisted suicide. One physician had gotten a call from a patient who had been diagnosed with AIDS and was talking about suicide and said he was now ready to die. He had lost 60 pounds and was in so much pain the doctor placed him on morphine. The physician went to his patient's apartment and showed him how to turn the morphine drip up to a deadly level. Six hours later he received a phone call and the patient was dead.

Another physician received the same request from an AIDS patient. Instead of helping the patient die the physician refused and put him on morphine, steroids, and physical therapy. Just before the patient died in the fall he said that he had a wonderful summer with his family (Courier). Opposers of euthanasia feel that a person should not have the right to end their life. They think that the patient may consider taking their life into their own hands and fail, and this may create a worse situation. Those against euthanasia say that it is wrong in the religious aspect since it is unnatural to take someone's life no matter what the situation may be.

Opposers also feel that 'life is a precious thing and it should only be taken by the hands of God' (Kearns). The technology of today has brought and is still bringing new cures everyday. With this modern technology, cures could be discovered for the patient and with suicide cures may come too late. Those against euthanasia believe that helping patients die contradicts the doctor's healing role. They also believe that the 'desire for suicide also reflects the failure of many doctors to adequately relieve pain and emotional suffering as death approaches' (Courier).

On the other side of this issue are the supporters of euthanasia. In 1976, the New Jersey Court ruled that doctors may disconnect a mechanical respirator that is keeping a comatose patient alive. Also in 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that people have a constitutional right to have life-sustaining treatment discontinued (Grolier Encyc). A person in a terminal coma may lack all reflexes even those needed to breathe. In these cases a respirator is needed to keep the patient alive. When in a coma for much longer than a month the condition is described as a persistent vegetative state and is usually considered irreversible (Grolier Encyc).

For this reason euthanasia should be legal. If the person has a living will to have the plugs pulled then it should be done. In cases of a vegetative state the patient's family should have the say in what happens to the patient. There is no reason to keep a terminally ill person on life-support when they want to end their pain and suffering.

Half of Americans support euthanasia and half of the medical profession would like to see it become a law and fifteen percent already practice in justifiable occasions (Grolier Encyc). In support of euthanasia I feel that everyone should have the freedom of choice and the final say over what happens to their body no matter what condition they are in. Main Argument For: The main argument for euthanasia is that people have watched one of their family members grow old and become extremely ill. The stress and worry on the family is extremely high. They know that there is no hope left for the ill member but there is nothing that they can do. I know how these people feel because I have witn...