physician-assisted death issues in the US

 physician-assisted death issues in the US

The issue of physician-assisted death is one of the controversial issues in the US. Some states in the US like Oregon have legalized physician-assisted death through state acts, while others hold that it remains illegal and unethical to engage in such actions. Morality is a critical factor when it comes to this issue. Proponents, primarily religion-based, believe that nobody should be allowed to terminate the life of another person. On the other hand, opposers have a strong belief that people going through suffering can request physicians to use medical aids to terminate their life.

Argument

Sulmasy and Mueller, in their article “Ethics and the legalization of physician-assisted suicide,” argue that it remains unethical for doctors to assist their patients to commit suicide. Most of the journal’s arguments are based on the physician code of conduct guidelines. The article argues that most patients, when in critical suffering, make decisions that are not in line with the ethical standards of physicians. Furthermore, the article indicates that doctors should stick to their primary responsibility in health care delivery, which is given, their patients quality health care.

The main argument, in this case, is that physicians ignore their central role, which is saving a life through helping their patients to engage in suicides. The authors state that doctor’s codes of conduct prohibit them from assisting patients to commit suicide. The article claims that patients are desperate when they are going through suffering. Thus, doctors should ignore or try to avoid the patient’s decisions, including medical aid, to commit suicide. Though the patient’s decision is crucial in health care provision, this case should be treated similarly to cases in which the patient breaches the principles of health care provision.

The authors use several principles and examples to support their arguments. The authors state that most patients do not receive the necessary care when it comes to life-threatening issues. The article incorporates reports to support their statements. In this case, the 1997 report “Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life” published by the Institute of life in the United States is used. The report argued that the reason why many patients make safe suicide decisions is that they have lost hope due to the low quality of care that they receive at the end of their life. The authors further support their claims with statistics on end of life care. They indicate that 90 percent of US adults do not have information on palliative care. When they are educated on the same, 90 percent of the adults are willing to receive palliative care. Second, the author raises the issue of the patient’s autonomy. He agrees that patients have the power to imply that physicians to terminate their life. However, physicians should try to balance independence with other medical ethics. The doctors should breach the autonomy principle for the best of the patient. The authors give an example in which breaching autonomy cannot be considered unethical. The example given is when a doctor advises against patient requested tests because they would cause harm to him or her.

Argument

Banovic, Turanjanin and Miloradivic Journal titled “An Ethical Review of Euthanasia and Physician-assisted Suicide” claim that it is moral for a doctor to help a patient to perform suicide considering his or her situations. The journal adds that there are sometimes when a patient’s condition is incurable, and by all means, the result will be death. In this case, a patient’s autonomy for physician-assisted death should be treated as moral.

In this journal, the main argument is that the patient’s autonomy should be respected in time when they make a decision on their life while in critical condition. Patients autonomy surpasses the other ethical principles and doctors cannot act against patients’ will. If the law permits physician-assisted death, then it is upon the physicians to work according to patients’ demands. The only case in which a physician cannot help a patient to commit aided suicide is when the law prohibits the same because it will be treated as murder.

The authors support their arguments through facts and examples. First, the author claims that there are situations that life may seem to be useless to the patient. A case of incurable diseases is widely referred to in the article. The authors claim that if a patient suffers from an illness that is incurable in nature, such as cancer, the patient’s autonomy to commit assisted suicide is ethical. In this case, death is the final product, and the patients do not have to continue suffering from such knowledge. Some diseases like cancer involve adverse treatment like chemotherapy, and some patients may be unable to endure the suffering. In such instances, the patients have the right to terminate their life. The authors further support their argument with research conducted on physicians working in different departments. As it is indicated, a good number of physicians believed that it is ethical to respect patients’ autonomy in assisting them to commit aided suicide when they are enduring severe pain or facing incurable disease.

There is much difference in reasoning between scholarly and non-scholarly sources, as it is evidenced in journals. Academic journals involve analyzation of data over reliable sources to conclude. In the two journals used in this paper, the authors’ conclusion is based on research from different articles and investigations. For instance, Sulmasy and Mueller continuously refer their arguments to the physician code of conduct principles. Likewise, Banovic, Turanjanin and Miloradivic conducted a research on different physicians before making conclusions. On the other hand, non-scholarly article arguments are based on authors’ conclusions without scholarly investigations. Another key difference is the audience to which the authors are addressing. Scholarly authors focus on aiding students and researchers with information about a particular issue. In contrast, non-scholarly authors focus on providing the general public with information about a specific subject, depending on their views. They consider one side of the story, and in most cases, the one they support.

Physician-assisted suicide will remain a controversial issue in the US, as states continue to pass laws on the same. Both sides have reasonable arguments over why physician-assisted suicide is ethical or unethical. Before conducting an aided suicide, physicians need to assess the patient’s reasons for the same because some patients might take advantage of committing suicides without satisfying reasons. This assignment is crucial in my future research because I have learnt to use scholarly journals as they are more reliable and accurate.