Debate: Should Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Made Legal?

[killer_race]

since im doing this for a project, thought i might bring it on here. =) heres some stuff i found supporting it

Source/Credit: Opposing Viewpoints Pamphlets: Is suicide an individual right?

| “What interest can the state possibly
| have in requiring the prolongation of
| a life that is all but ended?”

Quotes:

‘The physician plaintiffs alleged that they encountered, in the course of their medical practices, “mentally competent, terminally ill patients who request assistance in the voluntary self termination of life.”

In 1914, Judge Benjamin Cardozo wrote that, under New York law, “[e]very human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.”

1981, the Eichner case involved a terminally-ill, 83 year old patient who’s guardian ultimately was authorized to withdraw the patient’s respirator. The Court of Appeals determined that the guardian had proved by clear and convincing evidence that the patient, prior to becoming incompetent due to illness, had consistently expressed his view that life should not be prolonged if there was no hope of recovery.

[t]he Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the liberty of physicians to practice medicine consistent with thief best professional judgment, including using their skills and powers to facilitate the exercise of the decision of competent, terminally ill adults to hasten inevitable death by prescribing suitable medications for the patient to self-administer for that purpose.

[e]very human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.



i think it should be made legal since a quick death is better than dying slowly of an illness. what do you guys think? =)

[sweet_cocoangel]

I have to disagree. Very simply put, I just don't think that a physician should play god, to end a life early, regardless of whether it is done according to the patient's wishes or not.

Further, think of the complications and uncertainty. How can the physician be sure that, at the exact moment of administration, it is truly the patient's wish to die? It is often the case that, at the crucial moment, the patient is no longer mentally competent to give clear directions. The risk is too great.

[lil~jo]

Life is not something to deal with....let death take its own toll...
We should not have the power to take someone elses life...the most we can do is make their living easier...and as least painful as possible.

[Peter.Lai]

Yes, it should definitely be made legal, the only reason (or so I believe) is because it infringes with the Charted of Rights and Freedom (in Canada, however I'm sure it also infringes with the charts of rights in your Country).

It infringes with the right to live (or so I think). Everyone 18+ should get a chance to control their own lives. If not 18+ then parents can decide.

Suffering is worse than death itself. I'm sure many people agree.
Now The only thing is to enact.

[nunya415]

I think that is shouldn't happen....its just not right...killing a life because they're sick?? They're going to die anyway...yeah but...human life is a precious thing...and shouldn't be wasted...

[soybeast]

Anyone ever read "Johnny Got His Gun" by Dalton Trumbo or seen the movie based on it? It's a bit of an extreme case but I think it would make you think a little differently as to whether patients should be able to end their life or not.

[KendoTiger]

No ~ it would put too much strain and doubt on the physician. They should legalize suicide in it's pure form. You kill yourself ~ don't rely on others to do it for you. Seriously, if you have the strength to give it up, you should have the strength to do it yourself. Anyways ~ I never understood why people say "its the coward's way out", you're just apathetic and say "screw the world, I dont give a fuck, I'm out". How is that "not dealing with it"? You simply don't care about dealing with it ~ it's not like it frightens you or anything.

Oh btw ~ I found out it's possible to stop thinking about suicide after someone makes you feel worse about life. If things get worse ~ you know that you still care about things ~ whatever they are.

[scarletwillow]

No ~ it would put too much strain and doubt on the physician. They should legalize suicide in it's pure form. You kill yourself ~ don't rely on others to do it for you. Seriously, if you have the strength to give it up, you should have the strength to do it yourself. Anyways ~ I never understood why people say "its the coward's way out", you're just apathetic and say "screw the world, I dont give a fuck, I'm out". How is that "not dealing with it"? You simply don't care about dealing with it ~ it's not like it frightens you or anything.
Oh btw ~ I found out it's possible to stop thinking about suicide after someone makes you feel worse about life. If things get worse ~ you know that you still care about things ~ whatever they are.

Very, very interesting thoughts here. I have to agree; there should be no laws banning what someone wants to do with his own body; and in case he is unable to perform the deed, I think it should be legal for him to find other means to do so.

The point of it being physician-assisted, of course, is merely to give it a bit more legitimacy, and to keep it clean (fatal injection vs pistol to the head).

Physician-assisted suicide is nowhere NEAR playing God. If taking lives is playing God, tell that to every person in the armed forces.

[jaychou_21]

The point of it being physician-assisted, of course, is merely to give it a bit more legitimacy, and to keep it clean (fatal injection vs pistol to the head).

Very well said. :wink2:

There should be no laws controlling our own death because none of us
can ever tell exactly when we will take our last breath.

Suicide is an individual right. We're entitled to our own bodies.
We can do it whenever we want. Whenever we need.
We need not demand a physician to do it for us if we are really eager
to face death much earlier than what God has planned for us.
Asking a physician to end your own life is an act of cowardice.
And so is wanting to die because you're suffering and you don't want to suffer anymore.

The issue concerning the legality of suicide is superficial.
It is just to give legitimacy to our own death,nothing more and nothing less.

[scarletwillow]

Very well said. :wink2:
There should be no laws controlling our own death because none of us
can ever tell exactly when we will take our last breath.
Suicide is an individual right. We're entitled to our own bodies.
We can do it whenever we want. Whenever we need.
We need not demand a physician to do it for us if we are really eager
to face death much earlier than what God has planned for us.
Asking a physician to end your own life is an act of cowardice.
And so is wanting to die because you're suffering and you don't want to suffer anymore.
The issue concerning the legality of suicide is superficial.
It is just to give legitimacy to our own death,nothing more and nothing less.


Cowardice is very much a socially constructed term.

We do not see Japanese samurai as being cowards when they commit ritual suicide, nor do we see rock stars as being so. For many, taking their own life is the ultimate sacrifice that requires the most amount of courage to perform.

[sweet_cocoangel]

Very, very interesting thoughts here. I have to agree; there should be no laws banning what someone wants to do with his own body; and in case he is unable to perform the deed, I think it should be legal for him to find other means to do so.
The point of it being physician-assisted, of course, is merely to give it a bit more legitimacy, and to keep it clean (fatal injection vs pistol to the head).
Physician-assisted suicide is nowhere NEAR playing God. If taking lives is playing God, tell that to every person in the armed forces.
Interesting take on the matter.
But who says that the people in the armed forces are NOT playing god? They may very well be in the same boat as the physicians.
Further, the issue of physician-assisted suicide is not merely a matter of legitimacy and method. Remember that what we are talking about here is the allowance of a person to take someone else's life. Regardless of what you believe about a person's right to his/her own body, there are other principles to consider. What about the fundamental principle that one does not have the right to interfere with the life of another?

[KendoTiger]

People interfere with other's lives all the time ~ even the bible is a type of interference. I'm assuming you're also against capitol punishment.

"Peace is built upon the suffering of millions, to satisfy the views of a few." or something like that. Basically, even something as defined as "peace" is built around a point of view, and even if beneficial for some, also carries a negative impact. People's lives function in much the same way, in pursuing our own happiness, even if in a benign way, we negatively impact others - it is something inherent in all living things.

Also, it is not up to the physician (in any circumstance so far created), in which the physician would have the right to decide to take the patient's life. They would basically assist (assisted-suicide) the patient by providing them the means to kill themselves, or administer the drugs under the patient's express permission.

Then again, what's to stop people who are suicidal from claiming the same right? At what point can you claim someone else is mentally incapable of making decisions for themselves? This is where any argument should lie.

"Playing God" typically refers to both taking and giving life (or the manipulation of it). It is usually not constricted to only the taking of life.

[sweet_cocoangel]

People interfere with other's lives all the time ~ even the bible is a type of interference. I'm assuming you're also against capitol punishment.
"Peace is built upon the suffering of millions, to satisfy the views of a few." or something like that. Basically, even something as defined as "peace" is built around a point of view, and even if beneficial for some, also carries a negative impact. People's lives function in much the same way, in pursuing our own happiness, even if in a benign way, we negatively impact others - it is something inherent in all living things.
Also, it is not up to the physician (in any circumstance so far created), in which the physician would have the right to decide to take the patient's life. They would basically assist (assisted-suicide) the patient by providing them the means to kill themselves, or administer the drugs under the patient's express permission.
Then again, what's to stop people who are suicidal from claiming the same right? At what point can you claim someone else is mentally incapable of making decisions for themselves? This is where any argument should lie.
"Playing God" typically refers to both taking and giving life (or the manipulation of it). It is usually not constricted to only the taking of life.
When speaking about interference, I am referring to the taking of a life. Our society recognizes that one has, to a certain extent, the right to do as he/she wishes with his/her body. At the same time, it also finds that the taking of another's life is wrong - hence our laws against murder. Is there not a conflict between the two principles here? Should this conflict be at least considered?
And from a legal perspective, I completely agree that the argument rests with the mental capability issue. If all patients made the decision to engage in the physical act of assisted suicide when they are considered mentally capable to do so, then perhaps the debate would be less heated. But this is often not the case. The 'suicide' usually does not occur until the patient is both physically and mentally incapable (at least in the eyes of the law) of engaging in the action. How, then, can the phsyician be sure he/she is acting with express permission of the patient? Permission is needed at the exact moment of the act; it may not be enough that such was given previously. Without permission, what distinguishes the phsyician from the murderer?

[sernshin]

aiyo....y want to so hard?? wana die just go to sum building and jump off....if still wana live....just live it normally

[KicKaNgeL]

i see this is something like mecry killing, eh? this debate has been going on for as long as i can remember.

i think it is up to the person and the physician, really. i mean, some physicians will not carry it out because it is against their principles, as physicians are supposed to cure, not kill. however, sometimes a quick death is better than suffering for a prolong period of time. perhaps it should only be done on a case-by-case basis. i mean, for example, if the person wants to do so even after consulting psychiatrist (since suicide is usually related to a psychological problem), then maybe the physician could do him the favour. because for some people, when they know that they are dying, they want to live life for as long as they possibly can. for others, it works the other way because they are afraid of suffering. for these people, some of them are actually afraid of committing suicide, i believe. they want to die a quick death and not have their brains splattered on the ground from jumping down a building (pun not intended). hence, for them, a death injection may possibly be a miracle injection that can save them from their suffering.

on hindsight, i believe that the decision lies in the hands of the patient. of course, to prevent certain circumstances (like lawsuits against the physician or whatsoever), they can include that the agreement should be written in black and white and the patient must be in the right state of mind while signing it. otherwise, it will be void.

to conclude, (after all the ramblings), i say that it should be made legal.

[wil69]

If a person is suffering from a terminal illness and cannot end their lives themselves but wish to escape the pain, I am pro-suicide. There is no way to save them and all they feel is pain. This type of suffering is just inhumane. The hardest part is who is supposed to make the call? family or physician? and who in the family makes the call?

Its just like that lady that was on life support and the husband wanted to pull the plug but the parents wanted to keep her on life support. I thought it was so sad that she had to starve to death because our laws prohibit assisted suicide. However, it was hard to tell if the lady was actually responding or braindead so its a case-by-case basis.

What I dont support is if a persons thinks his life is shitty and they just want to kill themselves for selfish reasons. Lots of people face low points in their lives and may feel the need to find an outlet, but suicide is NEVER the answer. A person who takes his/her own life isnt just not thinking straight, but also doesnt consider how their death will affect all the people who care about him/her. So w/ or w/o help that is sad too. They just need counseling and therapy, not a gun and a bullet.

[KendoTiger]

The Terry Schiavo case? Yeah ~ turns out her brain was destroyed, she wasn't responding :p

Still, its a tough case. Yeah, I'm still happy that the autopsy confirmed the husband's beliefs. I guess it was just the parent's wishful thinking o_O

*shrugs*

[hisashiluv14]

I'm not very sure of whether this is a law in the US or not, but I watch Grey's Anatomy and they have this group of patients labelled DNR - Do Not Resuscitate.

As the name suggests, these are patients that are very old, close to death, and have, I think, signed a form saying that they do not want to be resuscitated if their heartrate falls to zero. The show dealt with some interesting ethical issues, in the sense that the intern doctor's first instinct when faced with such a patient is to resuscitate. The more experienced doctors, though, say, This is the patient's wish; let him/her die.

Apart from some technicalities - both legal and medical - I don't see how the above scenario is any different from the act of pulling the plug on a comatose patient. The point here isn't the patient's mental capacity to be a party to the assisted suicide; rather, it is whether or not he was of lucid mind at the time he made the request to have the plug pulled on him if ever he's in a comatose state. Obviously, a patient that needs (forgive the bad choice of word; I'm in a hurry cos I haven't done my homework and it's 1 a.m.!) to have the plug pulled on him can't logically be mentally capable to give a last-minute reassurance to his doctor that yes, I want you to do this for me. So doctors rely on statements made by the patient when they are of clear mind, first and foremost, but if for some reason this statement needs to be clarified, the doctor goes to his immediate family members (sons, daughters, spouse) to confirm the patient's request.

Assuming no complications are involved in the matter, in such a nice, perfect scenario the patient has autonomy. It doesn't matter if he won't be mentally there to give a final go-ahead to the doctor before the latter person pulls the plug. It is precisely because he WILL be incapable to do so that such decisions are based on his wishes when he's still of clear mind.

So the question is: Do we respect a sick man's wish, or do we impose our own morals on strangers with whom we'd never have contact? I'd go with the former anytime.

[ftlouiea]

Just wanted to point out the differences, before there are any confusions.

Mercy killing, in the sense of administering drugs to kill a patient who is in great pain, is illegal - excluding Holland. What is not illegal, and happens everyday is that life-supporteing treatment is withdrawn and the patient dies from natural causes. You should be aware of the difference between euthanasia (where a doctor or another person actively terminates a person's life) and physician-assisted suicide (where the doctor provides the patient with the means to commit suicide), and of the fact that many doctors see a moral distinction between the two.

[xWindwalkerx]

I didn't read any previous posts.

Euthanasia, mercy killing, should depend on each and every situation. Euthanasia, should rarely be taken lightly and quickly by patient or the doctor. For example, Im sure when we went to high school we all had moments of, "I can't take this anymore, Im going to kill myself. Bye World." or that time "He/She dumped me, I can't go on." But surprisingly, the next day, week, month you realized it isn't so bad and you could go on. This is exactly the issue with Euthanasia, patients are in so much pain that can't really realize whats going on, but the chance of recovery would be high and thus everything would work out. A situation which, Euthanasia would be ill-advised or in my personal belief should be banned. However, Euthanasia for serious untreatable illness should be treated on a case by case basis depending on each and every person.

Remember, I respect your Opinions. Respect mine, meet validity with reconginition, meet fiction with sword, meet idiocity with sagacious.

[soapie]

hmm. tough issue. thanks for posting about this.

i browsed the above posts and a lot of good points were brought up-so i'll try not to be repetitive.

personally i think it should be legal. if a patient gives his consent to have a procedure done to save his life (aka, surgery)...then does he not also have the right to have the consent to end his own life?

also-I wanted to address the issue of "playing God". If we say that physcians who assist in suicide are "playing God" by ending people's lives early... by all means, then physicians and health care providers play God every friggin day by all the life support that we give.

most people who are in ICU's would die without life support- they are merely living only by artificial ventilators, tubes in their stomaches to help them digest food, and special IV formulas designed to give them the nutrients they need. are we not playing God also, by extending life? in most parts of the world (in unindustrialized countries), these people would have already died by natural causes or by their own illness... or by committing their own suicide.

[jisho]

The problem some people have with legalizing physcian-assisted suicide is the doctor's abuse of the act. Some people feel the doctors become murderers and taking advantage of the situations. But there are regulations on doctors and patients just don't come up with the decision in a second and its done. The doctor must determine if the patient is in the right psychological state (not under the influence of drugs or in a heightened emotional state or depressed) and the patient would have time to think over the decision.

In Oregon we have the Death with Dignity Act which allows physician assisted suicide with some requirements:

1) 18 years of age or older,unless consent is given by a parent for children under the age of 18

2) a resident of Oregon,

3) informed consent must be given, the patient must be mentally capable of making the consent

4) diagnosed with a terminal illness that will lead to death within six months and is not basing his or her decision to die on depression or another mental disorder. Two physicians assist in verification.

Also, it is required by law that this must be verified by two physicians, as well as by two witnesses.

[Rurouni[X]]

wow
Scarletwidow you put up quite a debate
I think it should be legalized.
Cause if someone wants to terminate their life then they have every means and right to. Id they cannot do it themselves and are incapable then its also within their rights to aask for help from a physician.
The Physision should be able to feel comfortable that he can adminster this without being rrepremanded or blamed or sued.
For someone to actually contemplate taking their life then they are not either mentally fit or does not want to continue.
In this sence for aphysisian to terminate someone is reasonable.
And it also in some ways helps^^"