

I am interested in the subject of assisted suicide because it intrigues me how it is not legal across the U.S. I think people should be allowed to choose to die if they are in great pain and have been told they only have months or weeks to live. People do this to their pets when they are suffering so why not to themselves? Although I myself have never been in this sort of pain I know that there are many elderly people out there in tremendous pain, just waiting to die. My values towards human life don't really affect my research topic, I don't even know anybody who has taken part in assisted suicide, and it may even be against my religious beliefs but I still believe people should have the right to choose. I am qualified to write about this question because I will be doing extensive research on both sides of the controversy and will know the specific reasons why and why it shouldn't be legalized.

The first source I analyzed was an unbiased source that talked about what assisted suicide is and the constitutional aspects surrounding it. The source talks about Oregon and how assisted suicide is legal there. Oregon claims that the law is ethical and humane. If a person is in a pain they should be put out of their misery. The author also includes thoughts from the opponents of assisted suicide. They think assisted suicide "ruins the sanctity of life" meaning helping someone kill themselves ruins the purity and preciousness of life. There is also the potential for abuse if the practice becomes legal and widely used. Elderly may be pressured to induce it upon themselves or the law may slacken over time to the point where it becomes non-voluntary or involuntary euthanasia. The author of this source, George J. Annas is very credible. He is published in fields of bioethics, law, and public health. He also has his Juris Doctorate and Masters in Public Health from Harvard. He seems to be completely unbiased. His purpose is to inform the public not persuade them. 

The second source is from the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, an ethics center at Santa Clara University. The article begins with an account of an old man in excruciating pain stuck in a hospital who in the end has his brother shoot him. The brother was tried for murder. The article goes on to discuss why physician assisted suicide should be legal. Peoples' lives are being prolonged due to the increased technology so there are more people surviving, but suffering. The authors then talks about reasons why assisted suicide shouldn't be legalized. They talk about the morality of it and the corruption that could occur because of it. The major values and interests at stake are the citizens of the U.S. It is against many people's values to partake in assisted suicide and they would not be happy if it was legalized. However, many people would also gladly adopt this new law. This source is credible because it comes from Santa Clara University. The Ethics Center's staff consist of Ph.D. ethicists, lawyers, businesspeople, school principals, religious leaders, scientists, and journalists. Although the article starts off a little biased in the beginning when it describes the story of the suffering old man it is mostly unbiased. Its purpose is to inform and let readers choose their own side.

I found my final article from the Gale Resource Center. It is primarily about the opposing views towards assisted suicide. The article makes ties to abortion and how if abortion is legal, assisted suicide should also be legal. The author also addresses the fears people have and why they should overcome them. The major values and interests at stake are the people who are against assisted suicide and people who are suffering and in extreme pain. This source is credible because it is from an online database (Gale Resource Center) and is initially from Commonweal magazine which is very credible. The article may be a bit biased against assisted suicide because Commonweal is a liberal journal of opinion edited and managed by Catholics. Catholics are known to be against assisted suicide, however liberals are for assisted suicide so it is hard to say.

The issue of assisted suicide is definitely an arguable topic. There are many reasons for and many reasons against why it should be legal. A common argument for it is that people who are suffering and want to die should have the option to instead of just waiting in agony. The main arguments against this is that killing somebody is unethical and destroys the sanctity of life. Many of those of those oppose assisted suicide also think that assisted suicide could go down a downward slope and become corrupt to the point of non-voluntary (a doctor ordering your death without you really having a say) or involuntary (a doctor ordering for your death against your will) assisted suicide. The different perspectives of the sources do not really effect my position too much because, in my opinion, there is more reason to allow assisted suicide than to outlaw it. Citizens of the United States should be allowed the option to order a physician assisted suicide if they are terminally ill and are in an unbearable state of suffering. After researching I have decided to revise my research question to apply to anybody who is suffering, not just the elderly because young people can still be in similar situations.

I
