Physician Assistant Suicide

Introduction

Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is the action of deliberately murdering oneself with the help of a doctor who offers the means to do so. In most states, physician assistance aid has been legalized, thus allowing a doctor to provide medical support to people who want to end their lives. A doctor may therefore offer the patients with medications which are responsible for ending their lives. However, this has not been taken in the same way in different states, since some people highly oppose PAS as it might lead to suicides. There are different views regarding PAS with some people terming it as doctor’s aid in death, while others term it as the best method of ending one’s life. Due to that reason, this paper will provide an argument for the reason as to why PAS is wrong and it should not be legalized. 

Rationale     

Physician assistant suicide is a very critical issue which should not be taken lightly, since it may affect the lives of most patients’. Doctors may use it as a means of murdering innocent patients (Jeffrey, 33). On the other hand, some patient’s might commit suicide in order to avoid paying debts, thus leaving family members and the hospital with the burden of hospital bills. This is a move which needs to be looked at carefully, since it may have adverse impacts on the lives of innocent patients. The cause of a given death may not also be known, since a person other than a doctor may support a patient in committing suicide, and implicate the case on an innocent doctor, a fact which may be very hard to oppose. This is a matter which should therefore be taken seriously through understanding the implications of PAS and its advantages (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 56).

Argument     

Assisted suicide is very critical, and it may make doctors to use it as a means of murdering patients. Patients with huge hospital bills with no known relatives may be murdered as a means of ending the burden of incurring losses (Jeffrey, 33). Most hospitals tend to force the relatives of patients who may not be able to cater for the bills to move the patient to other hospitals. However, in a case whereby the relatives of the patient may not be around, doctors might be forced to end the patient’s life, and use assisted suicide as proof for enabling the patient to commit suicide (Carr, 40).

PAS cannot be regulated in anyway, and there are no measures which can be put in place to figure out if a patient commit suicide without the aid of the doctor or not (Paterson, 38). Doctors may therefore take matters into their own hands and use this as a means of murdering innocent patients who may not be able to foot hospital bills (Jeffrey, 34). Doctors will also have total power over the patients, making it hard for patients to do things according to their wish.      

PAS is a means of endangering the lives of the weak and the vulnerable, since they do not have the power and authority of going against any forms of attacks imposed on them. The rich, who might be having cases with the poor patients, might use this as a means of ending the cases through murdering the patients (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 56). Death of patients may never be investigated, since doctors will be using assisted suicide as a means of getting away with murder.

Committing suicide and assisted suicide are one and the same thing, thus legalizing assisted suicide is similar to legalizing suicide. Committing suicide is illegal, thus legalizing assisted suicide will be going against the dictates of the law. More people will therefore commit suicide through assisted suicide as a means of justifying the act (Jeffrey, 35). The rates of suicide will be on the rise, murderers will also use assisted suicide as a scapegoat when they assassinate other people. There will be no one to be blame for the deaths of most people a move which will make it hard to determine whether a person was murdered or whether the person died through assisted murder (Carr, 41).

Assisted murder could also lead to euthanasia, whereby patients who are suffering and are about to die, are murdered in order to reduce their pain. Most relatives of suffering patients’ would consequently murder their relatives in order to ease the pain they are going through. Nurses and doctors may also use assisted suicide as a means of reducing the pain which the patients are going through (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 57). In so doing, the number of patients in intensive care unit will be at risk of losing their lives. There will also be no reason for most patients to be allowed into ICU, since assisted suicide will be the best method of making it easier for the patients not to overcrowd in the intensive care units (Paterson, 39). 

Surgical patients will also be at very huge risks of losing their lives, since patients would use this as a means of assassinating the patients, particularly if the condition of the patient becomes complicated (Jeffrey, 36). Hospitals will not be trusted in anyway thus making most people to opt for other places rather than in hospitals if sick. The levels of healthcare provision will also drop, most people will be afraid of getting medication due to the fear of being murdered.

In short, assisted murder should not be legalized, as this could lead to more negative implications in the lives of both the rich and the poor, thus harming the nation in general.

In as much as assisted suicide is termed as bad and illegal, it has a lot of positive impacts at both the country and personal levels. Doctors and patients understand the benefits of assisted suicide, and that is the reason as to why they have been allowed to use such an act. The poor also see the benefit of assisted suicide because it is a means of dealing with their issues of huge hospital bills (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 57). According to the poor, assisted suicide allows them to deal with the issue of huge medical bills, particularly if their relatives have been unconscious for a period of more than two months, which makes it hard for such a patient to survive. Instead of making the patient to remain a live but in a comma for a period of more than three months (Carr, 41).

The right of a patient should also be granted, based on the pain which the patient is going through (Jeffrey, 37). There is no reason as to why a patient should be allowed to suffer, if the doctors can offer measures of ending the lives of such patients, according to their will. There are chronic diseases which might not be cured. The best way of dealing with such an issue is therefore to end the life of a person in order to relieve the pain, and to also ease the medical bill.

The right to end life has been allowed according to the laws of the US, and citizens must enjoy such privileges (Carr, 42). If a person is not impressed with the type of life which he or she is leading, then death should be the best method of relieving oneself. One should therefore consult a doctor after making the necessary preparations of burial and in the end murder him or herself. This would consequently allow the person to die peacefully enabling the family members and other people to be able to live peacefully thereafter the burial (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 58). 

People have the right to choose if they want to live or die. If a person desires to live or desires to die, then it should be upon oneself, and this should not be looked at negatively. This will be a means of ensuring maximum safety since most people will leave lives according to the way they want it (Jeffrey, 37). The government should not limit the way people want to live through rendering committing suicide as illegal, a move which will make it hard for the people to live freely as human beings. It is therefore the right of human beings to decide if they want to carry own their lives, or to die only if they will have put the right measures in place to ensure the safety of their families. This does not encourage death, but it allows people to choose the way they want to follow hence following the desires of their hearts (Carr, 45).       

Response to Opposing View Point

Assisted suicide should be looked at carefully, in order to ensure that each side of either the rich and the poor, or the doctors and the patients get to benefit from it (Jeffrey, 38). The law also needs to be carefully translated thus enabling people to understand what the law is about. In as much as both sides of the divide may either oppose or support assisted suicide, it needs to be understood to make sure that people do not understand it in the wrong way hence leading to poor utilization (Carr, 45). Patients and doctors should understand what it means by assisted suicide thus making it easier for them to enter into agreements which may not be binding. 

The right to live or die does not necessarily depend on a person, thus people should not be moved by their reactions and desires because committing suicide is not similar to assisted suicide. If one goes against the law then the person will be prosecuted, thus life should be lived in the right way possible (Kopelman, Loretta & Kenneth 59).

Conclusion

This argument has provided basic evidence on the reason as to why assisted suicide should not be permitted. In addition, the argument has also explained why the poor might suffer as compared to people of other social classes. The paper has also provided a counterargument whereby it was evident that people should be allowed to either live or die. This consequently means that whoever wants to die then he or she has the right to do according to one’s will. Finally the paper has provided a response to the opposing view point, where it stated that the lives of people does not necessarily depend on them, hence it is not one’s right to live or to die.

 

 

 

Works Cited   

Jeffrey, David. Against Physician Assisted Suicide: A Palliative Care Perspective. Oxford: Radcliffe Pub, 2009. Print.

Kopelman, Loretta M, and Kenneth A. Ville. Physician-assisted Suicide: What Are the Issues?Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2002. Internet resource.

Carr, Mark F. Physician-assisted Suicide: Religious Perspectives on Death with Dignity. Tucson, Ariz: Wheatmark, 2009. Print.

Paterson, Craig. Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: a Natural Law Ethics Approach. Ashgate Publishing Group, 2008. Print.

Dworkin, Ronald. Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. New York: Vintage Books, 1994. Internet resource.