Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Imagine receiving the news everyone dreads; your doctor brings you into their office and tells you You have cancer . In the documentary How to Die in Oregon this is exactly what happened to Cody Curtis. This film follows many patients and their families’ lives as they make the decision to end their lives peacefully through physician-assisted suicide. Curtis was diagnosed with liver cancer. After having what was supposed to be lifesaving surgery, the cancer returned, to no avail. This is when Curtis went to obtain the drugs that had the possibility to end her life if the time came when she could not stand the pain anymore. From there she lived her life day-to-day knowing she had the drugs, all while trying to make the best out of her remaining days. She stayed mostly positive because she knew she had the option to end her suffering when she felt like she had enough. During an interview in the documentary, Cody says, ‘It’s very comforting to know they (the drugs) are here, it’s my choice when to take them and whether to take them (How to Die in Oregon). Throughout the entire film, she is very open when discussing how conflicted she was, about whether she should take her own life or die naturally. This womans disease was terminal and her situation rendered her helpless but, she had a peaceful death surrounded by her husband and children. Some of Codys last words were telling her loved ones how simple dying can be when you have the option of controlling your own destiny. Her journey ended with her drifting away from the pain and suffering on her own terms instead of agonizing.
Currently, one in six Americans lives in a state where it is legal for doctors to prescribe a lethal dose of drugs to a patient (Patil 2015). According to Merriam- Websters dictionary, physician-assisted suicide is defined as The death of a patient with the help of another person (such as a doctor) to end suffering from a severe physical illness. Throughout the last few years, there has been an uproar from the media, about whether this practice is humane or not. In the past, many people thought this practice was inhumane and should never be legalized. But, in October of 1997, Oregon became the first State to sign the Death with Dignity Act. This act allowed terminally ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of lethal medications, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose (Patil 2). Today, there are five other states and Washington DC that have enacted the Death with Dignity Act including Colorado, Washington, Vermont, Montana, and, California. Terminally ill patients should be given the option to end their lives legally for it would give patients the right to die, the terminally ill would not have to suffer, and health care costs could be reduced. Each state in the United States needs to legalize physician-assisted suicide to allow terminally ill citizens to relieve their suffering and to respect their decisions.
physician-assisted suicide should become legal in every state due to the fact that it should be lawful to help those in dire need of assistance, to help relieve them of their pain. Included in the Bill of Rights of Patients is a persons right to be treated for illness and refuse treatment if this is the option they choose. If this is the case for all medical practices and hospitals in the United States, physician-assisted suicide should be included in patients rights. In the article My Life to Leave by nonprofit news organization Mother Jones, Kevin Drum describes the life of Brittany Maynard and how this young womans cancer diagnosis influenced Californias physician-assisted suicide legislation. Months after doctors said that Maynards brain tumor had no chance of getting better, and was only going to get worse, she moved to Oregon with the help of the nonprofit Compassion and Choices. This organization filmed a video of Maynard letting her tell her story and explaining how important having control over her cancer is in her right. In the video, she says The decision about how I end my dying process should be up to me and my family under a doctors care, how dare the government make decisions or limit options for terminally ill people like me (Drum 42). Brittanys video swept across America, she was even featured on the front cover of People magazine, her search for control resulted in a change of the tone in California. In 2015 California passed its own version of Oregons Death with Dignity Act, allowing about 12% more United States citizens to receive aid in dying. While it is certainly true that Brittany Maynard spoke for many terminally ill people, only five states including DC currently have a variation of Oregons Death with Dignity Act. This act requires the patients to orally request the life-ending medication at least 15 days apart, write a request to a doctor, and be witnessed by two people, the attending physicians must confirm the patients diagnosis and prognosis, the physician must also determine the patients competency and the psychological competency, alternative forms of care must be discussed, and the next of kin must be notified (Drum 36). Additionally, Brittanys story exposes the negative implications the 44 states that do not allow physician-assisted suicide have on terminally ill people. No one is entitled to tell these suffering people that they do not deserve the choice.
Patients not only lose their sense of autonomy they also feel as if they are being forced to suffer. physician-assisted suicide should be legalized because it will give terminally ill patients the option to die with dignity, it will prevent them from having to deal with the pain caused by their disease and it will give them peace knowing that they went on their own time, and they were not just waiting around, suffering. Terminally ill people should not have to suffer. Patients should be allowed to end their lives as part of their right to autonomy. It is ethical for a person to keep his or her dignity by putting a stop to their sufferings brought on by terminal illness. Suffering means more than pain; there are other physical and psychological burdens. These ill people see their loved ones suffering along with them and the emotional and physical tolls that come with these illnesses are straining. It is not always possible to relieve this suffering. Allowing terminally ill people to determine the timing and manner of their deaths is a compassionate response to unbearable suffering. The video Californians debate new right to die law by Associated Press, follows a terminally ill Californian. The video begins with a veteran who has cancer and all 20 or so prescription pills he has been prescribed to take daily to relieve some of his suffering. He lives his life knowing that is just a matter of time until his body betrays him and shuts down completely. His wife explains how much she has seen him suffer already and finds it more difficult as time goes on. The video also has input from a clinical professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego Dr. Lynette Cederquit. She says A lot of physicians really are unsure what the law mandates as far as those steps. So, getting everybody up to speed as to what should be done and making sure that we’re doing everything to address patient suffering if they brought this up to their physician (Californians debate new right to die law). A big proponent of the new Death with Dignity bill in California is to stop the suffering of the citizens that live in the state. Showing the lives of people who are suffering puts the importance of the liberating drug into perspective.
Next to pain and suffering, financial responsibilities are the second most important reason people want to die with physician assistance. Many Americans face limited healthcare options. In many cases, health care covers very small amounts of treatments that terminal diseases require. It will be far less costly to give a drug for assisted suicide than to care for a patient throughout the dying process. There is no denying that terminal illnesses are expensive, and many people suffering from one do not want to leave piles of bills for their families to deal with when they are inevitably gone. Private insurance companies pay for most of the visits to the doctor and drugs prescribed. Nevertheless, since the early stages of the aid-dying movement federal dollars cannot be used for physician-assisted suicide, this affects Medicare and the Department of Veterans Affairs, which provide healthcare to a large majority of Americans. However, in 2009 the drug cost less than $200 (procon.org). Just recently the cost of the drug went up the New York Times article Physician Aid in Dying Gains Acceptance in the U.S. Paula Span says Now, patients whose insurers will not cover aid in dying face paying $3,000 to $4,000 for the drug (Span). This is quite the price to pay for many average Americans, in relation to the average cancer treatment $3,000 is a rather small price to pay. According to the article As Drug Costs Soar, People Delay Or Skip Cancer Treatments found on National Public Radios website written by Liz Szabo cancer drug prices can cost up to $152,400 a year. Many patients see this as a way to save their families money in the long run. It is not uncommon for families to be left with medical debt after the one they loved has died.
This medical practice has become a largely controversial issue since there are so many pros and cons. People should care more about this topic, anything could happen at any time. The future is inevitable, and nobody knows what is to come. Many peoples opinions of this issue are based on their views on suicide and medical professionals moral viewpoints.
However, there is a difference between being suicidal and wanting to die. Those who are terminally ill do not want to die, rather because of their condition death is more of a reality than for people who are healthy, and ill people should be able to die on their terms. It may be hard to determine if it is truly rational [suicide] because it is hard to distinguish the real reason someone wants to end their life. No matter the situation, suicide is never an easy topic to be discussed. The fact that someone may even be thinking about ending their life, that person is most defiantly hurting. Whether it be mentally or physically; assisted suicide is never an easy decision. Suicide is frowned upon by many religions. In Joseph Kotva Jr.s article for the Christian Century he explains how Christianity views physician-assisted suicide those who aspire to the Christian virtues of love, hope, patience, hospitality, and gratitude will not look to leave their lives early via PAS or ask others to risk moral malformation by intending death (Kotva 31). This religion teaches its followers to stand with those who are terminally ill so that they do not feel as if their last hope to gain relief is through suicide. Its not fair for the religion to expect others to follow their beliefs. It can be very difficult to understand someones pain and suffering without going through it themselves. It is a basic right given by the First Amendment that all Americans have the right to worship or not worship as they please. So, while everyone is entitled to believe in what they choose, it is unfair to those who are suffering to have the morals of different religions take away their right to choose.
Another argument against physician-assisted suicide is that many physicians see it as unethical in their practice. There are some who think that there will be physicians that will take advantage of this practice. Haider Javed Warraich wrote With the right safeguards in place, assisted suicide can help give terminally ill patients a semblance of control over their lives as disease, disability, and the medical machine tries to wrest it away from them (Warraich). Doctors have the means to end their patients lives that are not considered physician-assisted suicide, theses muddy the waters of what goes against their do no harm oath. Patients can be prescribed opiates, anesthesia, and terminal sedation amongst many others. These can all end a patients life, and in fact, are commonly used to ease the end of life for patients who are in pain and can be comfortable during the dying process. The difference between these drugs and physician-assisted suicide is simple, the drugs are specifically administered by physicians while the opposite is true for physician-assisted suicide. When it comes to physician-assisted suicide after the patient goes through all measures necessary to obtain the drug the patient administers it themselves whenever and wherever they want. This stipulation is valid in all states with legalized physician-assisted suicide. So, even though the terminally ill patient goes through a doctor to get the drug it is out of the doctor’s control once they write the prescription. After doctors have worked with the patients and have attempted to minimize their symptoms, pain, and, side effects the only option left for physicians is to help their patients achieve their end-of-life goals by giving them the option of physician-assisted suicide.
When the sick and dying seek help and assistance in exercising their rights to die, it is a wish that should be respected. It all starts with a conversation. In our culture, we often find death to be a touchy subject. It is our duty to make this a common topic of discussion, given its importance. The only way a Death with Dignity Act can become law across America is if everyday people like you and I contact local legislators asking them to sponsor legislation that makes the medical practice of aid in dying accessible for the people of Nebraska. In 1997 Oregon was the only state to have a law like this and now, 20 years later five states also let their citizens die with dignity. If we make it a priority just imagine how many states will have Death with Dignity laws in five years.
There are people throughout the world that think this practice is inhumane and that it should not be legal. But, on the other hand, there is a large amount of the worlds population that is currently diagnosed with a terminal disease. Although, not every patient who is diagnosed with a terminal illness is going to be thinking of ending their life. If they [opposing viewers] were placed in a situation, where they had the option to go peacefully or to die at a later time, miserable and in an even worse condition; they may change their minds. physician-assisted suicide is by not any means an easy way out. It is just a simpler, more thoughtful practice that allows the patient to have control over what may or may not happen.
Works Cited
- Californians debate new right to die law. Associated Press, 2016. Associated Press Video Collection. EBSCOhost, http://ebscovideos.ebscohost.com/v/116288266/californians-debate-new-right-to-die-law.htm
- Drum, Kevin. ‘My Life to Leave. (Cover Story).’ Mother Jones, vol. 41, no. 1, Jan/Feb2016, pp. 26-60. EBSCOhost, http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=5&sid=f019823b-7c81-4a9a-b5b3-d35ccced96c9%40sessionmgr4010&hid=4208&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=111065999&db=a9h
- How to Die in Oregon. directed by Peter Richardson, Clearcut Productions, 2011. Netflix. Web. 15 April 2016.
- Kotva Jr., Joseph J. ‘Dying in Oregon.’ Christian Century, vol. 133, no. 8, 13 Apr. 2016, pp. 28-31. EBSCOhost, http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=9&sid=f019823b-7c81-4a9a-b5b3-d35ccced96c9%40sessionmgr4010&hid=4208&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=114455593&db=a9h
- Patil, Y. D. (2016). Euthanasia and Death with Dignity. Journal Of Krishna Institute Of Medical Sciences 5(3), 142-144.
- ‘Pros and Cons of Controversial Issues.’ ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2017.
- Span, Paula. Physician Aid in Dying Gains Acceptance in the U.S.. The New York Times. 16 Jan 17. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/16/health/physician-aid-in-dying.html?_r=0
- Szabo, Liz. As Drug Costs Soar, People Delay Or Skip Cancer Treatments. NPR, NPR, 15 Mar. 2017, www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/15/520110742/as-drug-costs-soar-people-delay-or-skip-cancer-treatments. Accessed 15 Apr. 2017.
- Warraich, Haider Javed. ‘Going beyond Do No Harm.’ New York Times, 05 Nov. 2016, p. A19. EBSCOhost, http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.leo.lib.unomaha.edu/ehost/detail/detail?sid=8804bf25-863d-4ce9-81a2-8a3120bcaa70%40sessionmgr4010&vid=0&hid=4208&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=119261005&db=a9h
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.