
Currently legal in six states and many other countries around the world, Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) has been making a statement in many people’s lives and becoming a big topic of debate. PAS is defined as the, “deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable (persistent, unstoppable) suffering” (Nordqvist). There are two different types of assisted suicide; physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. Today, physician assisted suicide is supported more than euthanasia because the degree of involvement from the physician is less. While administering the act of euthanasia, the doctor gives the drug through an IV that slowly kills the patient. While PAS, on the other hand, the doctor turns over a pill to the patient that they can ingest on their own terms that will do the job. Although both methods are becoming a popular decision, there are many controversies discussing whether the practice of assisted suicide is ethical and helpful for our society. In 2014, a twenty-nine-year-old became an advocate for assisted suicide after being diagnosed with a deadly brain tumor only months after her wedding day. In hearing she only had a short six months to live and would endure a long, agonizing death, Brittany Maynard decided to take into consideration an alternate way of dying. After realizing her state had not passed a law legalizing physician assisted suicide, Brittany and her family moved to Oregon to follow through with her decision. From then on, there have been many petitions stating that all American citizens should have the write to pass peacefully within their own home if they are in a terminal state. Although some might disagree, physician assisted suicide has been proven to be ethical and increase the societies overall well-being by calming the fear of death. By not prolonging the dying process, physician’s today should be allowed to aid their patients by administering assisted suicide all across the United States. 

With many believing that physician assisted suicide and euthanasia is a life versus death situation, the passing of this law been a huge dispute. One of the main arguments against assisted suicide is the act being “viewed as diminishing the sanctity of life” (Starks). It is against almost every religious practice to carry out an act of suicide. Also, many say that doctors should not be put in this situation. When you become a physician you are required to take the Hippocratic Oath that discusses your practices as a doctor. In that oath it discusses how the, “primary aims of medical practice are curing or at least palliating, never killing” (Grayling). Therefore, some believe that the act of dispensing a pill or drug that will bring death upon a patient rather than a drug to help cure or alleviate symptoms, goes directly against their oath. But all in all, the biggest argument is that people fear that the passing of this law will turn into a “slippery slope.” Once many become more interested in this method of dying, they fear it will turn into an excuse to end a patient’s life that has the potential of surviving. There are numerous safeguards put in place so this doesn’t occur, but in the future, many believe these will diminish and that more vulnerable patients will gain access to the drug. This includes the elderly or those with mental illnesses that would want to take it because they don’t feel like holding on anymore. In other countries, it is shown that the act of assisted suicide has become so popular that not only this has occurred, but practically anyone of interest could easily get their hand on this drug. The fear of this occurring in America is the main cause of states denying legalization. 

In the Netherlands, the laws started out with just terminal illnesses but because of the popularity of the drug, the act of assisted suicide was on a rapid slope soon after. In no time, chronically ill patients, rather than just terminally ill, were being considered for the act. Once that was passed, any patient with mental suffering and mental illnesses were being considered. To now, anyone over 70 who is just “tired of living” (Pereira) is being considered for the drugs. However, America is unlike a lot of other countries. Yes, laws do get abused, but the way Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, California and DC have made their laws, there is almost no way around it. The safeguards put into place leave no possible room for abuse by any patient that has a survival rate. To be considered for physician assisted suicide or euthanasia, “All jurisdictions except for Switzerland require a consultation by a second physician to ensure that all criteria have been met before proceeding” (Pereira). These two physician’s both have to decide you have a prognosis of six months or less, that you would suffer severely from your illness due to your current health and your judgement is not distorted in anyway upon making the request. If any of these are not met, the patient will be denied consideration for the act of assisted suicide. Therefore, patients with depression and other mental illness would not be legal to permit these drugs too. In Oregon the law has been active for nearly twenty years. Since then, “a total of 1,545 people have received prescriptions under the Act, of whom 991, or 64% have died after taking the medications. One out of three patients receiving medications choose not to use them. And deaths under the Act represent less than one half of one percent of all deaths in the state” (Oregon). There has been no sign of abuse or a slippery slope in Oregon or any of the states, within the United States, that have permitted this. Also, in almost all cases, the prognosis of the patients was clear. There was no guessing if someone was eligible or not. These safeguards have made the law run smoothly everywhere and have made the act more ethical than immoral. 

I believe assisted suicide laws should be passed across the United States because it would do more good than harm for the people. For those who do not believe in this law, do not have to resort to this matter if in a situation where physician assisted suicide or euthanasia is an option. This opportunity of a more peaceful death should not be denied to all just because some do not agree. That goes against ones right by choosing the states interest rather than one’s personal liberty. The individual should be able to make a decision on how they would like to pass because life, “is not the quantity that matters it’s the quality; and since dying is not mere quantity of life that matters, but its quality; and since dying is a living act, the quality of experience at the end of life, or in conditions of incurable distress is the overriding consideration.” (Grayling). If one would rather use a drug to pass simply rather than aggressively, they should have the ability, it is their life. Many who disagree with the act say that these patients should resort to palliative care rather than assisted suicide because there are “better ways” to go. However, what gives others a right to make a decision about your life? Palliative care is where doctors and nurses work together to relieve patients of pain, physical/mental stressors and symptoms associated with their terminal illness for the last couple months of their lives. Nonetheless, in no case is it possible to completely decrease all the symptoms. As with most patients, the symptoms they would like to diminish are the ones that you cannot get around like losing control of your bodily functions and becoming something other than yourself. Decision’s about death are personal, and somebody else should not have the right to intervene and take away an option that could be beneficial in someone else’s life. If competent, there is no reason one should not be able to bypass these losses and hard times by assisted suicide.

 Only about 2/3 of doctors agree with physician assisted suicide, pointing out how most doctors will fully put the needs and wants of their patients above what they believe is right in some cases. “When death is imminent and dying patients find their suffering unbearable, then the physician’s role should shift from healing to relieving suffering in accord with the patient’s wishes. This is not a matter of life versus death, but about the manner of dying, and it’s not primarily about the doctors, but about the patients” (Angell). The goal is to stretch one’s life not lengthen their death. To keep away the opportunity of someone having a more serene passing is actually what would be against their oath and unethical. Which is what most do not realize. In a case with a patient who has a terminal disease, to lengthen the dying process and suffering of the patient is what goes against a physician’s role. If a patient requests this route, a doctor should be allowed to shift their focus to aiding in a serene passing, rather than being forced to hand off their patients to nurses for comfort when there is another way. Furthermore, if a doctor feels uncomfortable portraying an act of assisted suicide at any point, they can simply pass it on to someone else. Just like the opportunities they have when withdrawing life support from patients. In a case with assisted suicide, the passing of the law does not require anyone to administer or receive an act that is unwanted, it simply gives comfort and relief to those who believe in it. 

Imagine being sixty-eight years old and already completed everything you have ever dreamed in life. One day, you begin to feel uneasy and it seems it just won’t go away. You decide to make a trip to see a doctor just to find out your life is beginning to take a turn for the worst. You have a rapidly progressing brain cancer that cannot be cured. Soon after, you begin to spend most of your days sleeping and needing help with even the most basic of tasks. You start to learn about the agonizing pain that you are going to endure in the next couple months that would soon make everyone around you think differently of you. You fear the discomforts that you are going to endure and are scared to forget everything you once loved. So you begin researching more about alternate ways of dying and take into consideration assisted suicide, just to realize your state has yet to pass the law. This is the story about Judith Katherine Dunning of California (Span). Fortunately, California passed the law just in time for Mrs. Dunning. She began the process of requesting and eventually perusing the act, dying peacefully in her own home after saying goodbye to everyone closest to her. Mrs. Dunning was very blessed that she had the privilege to administer the act in her own house, rather than somewhere unfamiliar like Brittany Maynard. Brittany, even with her whole life ahead of her, did not want her family to see her suffer in the last months of her life. She made this decision because demolishing the fear of death became very important to her. As Maynard said, assisted suicide, “has given me a sense of peace during a tumultuous time that otherwise would be dominated by fear, uncertainty and pain” (Maynard). 

Moving forward, the United States should pass a law legalizing assisted suicide across the country. “In principle and in practice, physician-assisted dying is legally available and ethically sanctioned in a number of jurisdictions around the world” (Malpas). The passing of this law would benefit all parties because just like abortion, if you do not believe in the act, you are not forced to participate or make that decision. Passing a nation-wide law would make assisted suicide more accessible and helpful for the Americans requesting the act, rather than moving all across the country just to do what they could have done in the luxury of their own house. Additionally, causing less controversy and petitions. 

With the passing of this law, many people all over the world would be relieved knowing they have access to assisted suicide. Instead of living in fear about what could happen to them in the future, having the knowledge that there is a more comfortable and smooth way to die if ever diagnosed with a terminal illness, would be helpful for many. Likewise, rather than holding on for too long, patients in this state could now enjoy what time they had left ending their life on a good note. For these patients, it is not that they want to die, it is that they are dying and how that is going to happen.  
