Should Physician Assisted Suicide Or Euthanasia Be Allowed?
Should physician assisted suicidal or euthanasia be allowed? Euthanasia and physician assisted suicidal is when patients are assisted by providing access to drugs to help them die from an irrecoverable diseases or sickness. In my opinion it should be allowed in all countries and states. The government and doctors should respect others wish to die. If Euthanasia gets passed in all states the same rules should apply everywhere. There shouldn't have to be different rules at each county where some allow the family to decide for the patient or where the patient makes that decision. For example, they have to be in certain circumstances in order to be granted the permission of euthanasia. In Missouri, a written statement is required if it is their
…show more content…
Why should doctors, lawmakers, ethicists, or anyone else claim to know what is best for them? They don’t know what the person is going through, or how much they are suffering. The patients go through all the needle pokes, side effects, and weaknesses. It is their decision; they have the right to decide what to do with their life. Why have a person who is suffering lie in bed waiting to die? What is the good thing about that? They are not enjoying their life; they have a sudden hope of just dying. That intentionally becomes the thing they’d most wish upon anything. There have been many cases where families began to notice their loved ones suffering and fought for the right to remove them from life support. Although, the government began granting families wishes in 1990, only 4 out of 5 people would be granted the wish to die. In order for the government to consider patients for assisted suicide they wanted evidence from the patient. They wanted to make sure that this is what the patient desired. "Because it is impossible to know how much another person is suffering, only the dying patient can make such a serious decision. “If there was no proof of a patients wish to die the government would not grant the families wishes.”(Torr). This is why the most important requirement for euthanasia to be justified is that the dying patient specifically requests it" (Torr). "The central question …show more content…
The accident left her in a permanent coma with brain damage. She was able to move he eyes but the brain damage did not let her communicate or think. The doctors spoke to the family and told them they saw no hope for her. The family knew Nancy wouldn't want to be hooked up to machines for the rest of her life; therefore, "they requested that the hospital disconnects all life support, including feeding tubes, but medical personnel refused."(“Supreme”). The hospital explained to the family that by disconnecting her it would mean they would be "killing" her. "In 1988, the Cruzans sought help from the courts to try to carry out their daughter's wish."(Supreme). Early 1988, A judge, named Charles E. Teel, granted Cruzans right to remove the feeding tube. “However, in November of 1988, the Missouri Supreme Court reversed Teel’s ruling by a 4 to 3 vote.” (Yount). On December 6,1989, the family took the case to the U.S Supreme Court. This was one of the first cases of Euthanasia the court was presented with. Unfortunately, they over looked Missouris’ deny and agreed with them. The Cruzan family did not have sufficient evidence to back up their statement of whether Nancy would want euthanasia or not. The fact that Nancy was unable to communicate or move made it difficult for the family to gather enough evidence that Nancy did in fact want assisted-suicide if she ever became this
Why should doctors, lawmakers, ethicists, or anyone else claim to know what is best for them? They don’t know what the person is going through, or how much they are suffering. The patients go through all the needle pokes, side effects, and weaknesses. It is their decision; they have the right to decide what to do with their life. Why have a person who is suffering lie in bed waiting to die? What is the good thing about that? They are not enjoying their life; they have a sudden hope of just dying. That intentionally becomes the thing they’d most wish upon anything. There have been many cases where families began to notice their loved ones suffering and fought for the right to remove them from life support. Although, the government began granting families wishes in 1990, only 4 out of 5 people would be granted the wish to die. In order for the government to consider patients for assisted suicide they wanted evidence from the patient. They wanted to make sure that this is what the patient desired. "Because it is impossible to know how much another person is suffering, only the dying patient can make such a serious decision. “If there was no proof of a patients wish to die the government would not grant the families wishes.”(Torr). This is why the most important requirement for euthanasia to be justified is that the dying patient specifically requests it" (Torr). "The central question …show more content…
The accident left her in a permanent coma with brain damage. She was able to move he eyes but the brain damage did not let her communicate or think. The doctors spoke to the family and told them they saw no hope for her. The family knew Nancy wouldn't want to be hooked up to machines for the rest of her life; therefore, "they requested that the hospital disconnects all life support, including feeding tubes, but medical personnel refused."(“Supreme”). The hospital explained to the family that by disconnecting her it would mean they would be "killing" her. "In 1988, the Cruzans sought help from the courts to try to carry out their daughter's wish."(Supreme). Early 1988, A judge, named Charles E. Teel, granted Cruzans right to remove the feeding tube. “However, in November of 1988, the Missouri Supreme Court reversed Teel’s ruling by a 4 to 3 vote.” (Yount). On December 6,1989, the family took the case to the U.S Supreme Court. This was one of the first cases of Euthanasia the court was presented with. Unfortunately, they over looked Missouris’ deny and agreed with them. The Cruzan family did not have sufficient evidence to back up their statement of whether Nancy would want euthanasia or not. The fact that Nancy was unable to communicate or move made it difficult for the family to gather enough evidence that Nancy did in fact want assisted-suicide if she ever became this