Assisted Suicide

Introduction

Is suicide immoral? Granted, it might cause pain to many individuals, but if it saves the person from a lifetime of pain, might this outweigh the pain the action causes? The concept of animal euthanasia inspired this thought. If a dog is in great pain, we put it down, yet regardless of how much pain a person is in, destroying their life is viewed as immoral. This could be justified in that a human life is worth more than the dog's life, but doesn't that also mean that the human's pain is more significant than that of the animal?

The World Medical Association considered it unethical and condemns both assisted suicide and euthanasia. On the other hand recommends palliative care.

Euthanasia is the deliberate act of ending a patient's life, though whether by choice or at the request of relatives, is unethical. This does not preclude the physician from respecting the patient's desire to let the natural process of death to follow its course in the terminal phase of their illness.

Description and Analysis

Physician-assisted suicide, also known as PAS, is a practice where a Physician or Doctor provides a patient with medication that the patient requested by choice to end their own life. Most people tend confuse Physician-assisted suicide with Euthanasia which is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependant person for their alleged benefit. The difference that people tend to overlook is that Euthanasia is an intentional act of killing that is forced upon a person and PAS is not. It usually is a normal reaction when people hear about PAS that they automatically think about suicide, but it should not be pushed into the same category. It is the patient's choice to make this decision and not the doctors. Physician-assisted suicide should be legal in all states because the right to a good death is a basic human freedom. The decision to use Physician-assisted suicide in dying allows us to act on death as a choice for those suffering with terminal illnesses (Rachels, pp.46).

Those who see euthanasia as a valid and worthy of death are based on the idea that man is master of his own life and as such has the inherent right to end it, especially if that life is only pain and suffering without room for improvement. Those who attack the euthanasia dispute the notion that man is master of his life. According to them life is a value in itself of divine origin that the only person given, does not possess. Other arguments suggest that the legalization of euthanasia gives rise to the relatives of a seriously ill death give obedience to material or monetary interest, makes doctors violate the Hippocratic oath and makes the State waives the duty to protect life people (Morrison, pp.31).

Arguments for Decriminalization or Legalization

1.End of suffering: If the pain is now well considered and often calmed effectively, particularly in palliative care services, there are still severe sufferings that are not in pain. Thus:

Progressive loss of ...