People have a right to Death with Dignity Assisted by the Medical Professionals
This claim gives a discourse to an issue of policy because it brings to attention the question of compassion and necessity and medical ethics. The petition earnestly persuades the general audience to take a keen initiative on the issue of whether to allow a patient to die in dignity. That those in the medical profession have a duty to assist patients to die in the manner, they so wish, especially if they are suffering a terminal disease. A substantiation issue is as well subtly implanted in this claim in the sense that assisting a patient to die can be seen as a form of Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS). An issue of evaluation partly comes into this claim because a physician makes available a lethal substance to a terminal patient, who takes the lethal substance by themselves. If the patient is not capable of doing it themselves, the physician does it upon their request which involves administering the lethal substance to the patient hence terminating their lives.
As regards to rhetorical appeal, ethos, in particular, the organization that is best fit to make this claim is the World Federation of Right to Die Societies, as it promotes the access to voluntary euthanasia as well as holding regular meetings regarding death and dying. In terms of the logical appeal, particularly logos, points out the moral significance of the difference between active and passive euthanasia, even though questioned continuously by people who are keen on ethics. Pathos elicits sympathy due to the existence of an inactive form of euthanasia in the light that nothing is done to contribute to the patient’s death actively, but nothing is also done to prevent the dying process either, and that it is permitted to terminate life-support, both of which are actions that directly cause the patient’s death.
To support the arguers claim for euthanasia as a form of death with dignity is the hypothetical example of a prominent person who suffers from a terminal illness with no prospects of relief or cure. The patient continually requests for their life to be terminated. Performing Physician Assisted Suicide on them is the morally right path to take besides being the solution that is most humane and respectful to them and their kin.
The enabling assumption would be that the medical professionals are primarily tasked with relieving suffering rather than just promoting health, or prolonging life. It is a person’s right to die with dignity; hence it is the duty of the medical professionals to assist in that regard.
Oppositions on this claim might include the value that almost all cultures and religious traditions place on human life — values such as prohibiting murder which makes it more of a common law element and not statutory law.