Week 5 Should Physician-Assisted Suicide be Legalized

Anonymous
timer Asked: Dec 13th, 2017
account_balance_wallet $35

Question description

Hello I need some help with my final paper please!


Week 5 - Final Paper

Final Paper

Please read these assignment instructions before writing your paper, and re-read them often during and after the writing process to make sure that you are fulfilling all of the instructions. Please also utilize the assignment guidance and the outlined modelprovided.

Overview
In the Week One Assignment, you formulated a concrete ethical question, took a position on that topic, and identified a reason supporting and a reason opposing that position. In the Week Three Assignment, you discussed either deontological or utilitarian theory, applied that theory to the question, and raised a relevant objection.

By engaging with the course material, you now have had a chance to refine your thinking and broaden your understanding of the problem by approaching it from the perspective of multiple ethical theories.

In this paper, you will demonstrate what you have learned by writing an essay in which you

  • Present a revised formulation of the ethical question and introduction to the topic.
  • Explain the kind of reasoning you think is the best way to approach this question, and how that reasoning supports the position you think is strongest.
  • Raise an objection, and be able to respond to it.

Instructions
Write an essay that conforms to the requirements below. The paper must be 1500 to 2000 words in length (excluding the title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..

The paragraphs of your essay should conform to the following guidelines:

  • Introduction
    Your first paragraph should begin with the topic question, suitably revised. It should be focused, concrete, and on a relevant moral problem. You should then introduce the topic in the way described by the Week One instructions, but reflecting the developed understanding and information you have gained about the topic and any necessary refinement of the scope.

    Follow this with a thesis statement that states your position, and a brief description of the primary reason(s) supporting your position. (See the handout on thesis statements provided). Finally, provide a brief preview of the overall aim and procedure of your paper.
  • Explanation and Demonstration of Moral Reasoning
    This section of the Final Paper will explain and demonstrate what you believe to be the best way of reasoning about the question you have chosen, and showing how that reasoning supports the position you have taken on the question. You might explain the principles, rules, values, virtues, conceptions of purposes and ends, and other general ideas that you find persuasive, and show how they support concrete judgments.

    In the course of doing so, you must make reference to at least two of the approaches that we have examined in the course (such as deontological, utilitarian, or virtue-based), and utilize at least one resource off the provided list for each of the two approaches. One of these theories may be the theory you discussed in your Week Three Assignment, but your discussion here should be more refined.

    For example, you might find the reasoning associated with Aristotelian virtue ethics to be the most compelling, and reference Aristotle in the process of showing how that reasoning supports a certain conclusion. In the course of this, you could contrast that with a utilitarian approach, referencing Mill for instance.
  • Objection and Response
    After explaining the ethical reasoning that supports your position, you should raise an objection and respond to it. An objection articulates a plausible reason why someone might find the argument weak or problematic. You should explain how it brings out this weakness, and do so in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with your own argument. Then, provide the best response you can to the objection, showing how it does not undermine your position. Your response should not simply restate your original position or argument, but should say something new in support of it.
  • Conclusion
    Provide a conclusion that sums up what you presented in the paper and offers some final reflections.

Resource Requirement
You must use at least four scholarly resources. Two of the resources must be drawn from the list of acceptable primary resources on each of the two theories you discuss. For example, if you discuss deontology and virtue ethics, you would need at least one resource under the “Deontology” list and at least one resource under the “Virtue Ethics” list. The other two may be from either the Required or Recommended Resources, or scholarly resources found in the Ashford University Library.

  • The textbook may be cited, but it does not count toward the resource requirement. If you cite the textbook, you will still need to cite at least four more sources that fulfill the requirements stated above.
  • If you need help with finding additional resources, or are unsure about whether a particular resource will count toward the requirement, please contact your instructor.
  • For sources to count toward the resources requirement, they must be cited within the text of your paper and on the reference page. Sources that are listed on the references page, but not cited within the paper, do not count toward fulfilling the resources requirement.
  • For information regarding APA, including samples and tutorials, visit the Ashford Writing Center.

The Final Paper:

  • Must be 1500 to 2000 words in length (excluding title and reference pages), and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..
  • Must include a title page with the following:
    • Title of paper
    • Student’s name
    • Course name and number
    • Instructor’s name
    • Date submitted
  • Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement and statement of procedure.
  • Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.
  • Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.
  • Must make meaningful reference to at least two of the ethical theories studied in the course.
  • Must use at least four scholarly resources that fulfill the stated requirements.
  • Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  • Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

LIST OF ACCEPTABLE PRIMARY RESOURCES FOR THE WEEK THREE ASSIGNMENT AND WEEK FIVE FINAL PAPER These are the primary resources that you can cite when explaining a moral theory in order to fulfill the relevant portion of the resources requirement. * Indicates readings included in the “Required Readings” portion of the course. Utilitarianism *Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism, in the original version in the textbook, or in the version by Jonathan Bennett. Retrieved from www.earlymoderntexts.com • See the guidance for the required portions of the text. Haines, W. (n.d.). Consequentialism. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/conseque/ Singer, P. (2003). Voluntary euthanasia: A utilitarian perspective. Bioethics, 17(5/6), 526-541. Deontology *Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals in the original version in the textbook, or in the version by Jonathan Bennett. Retrieved from www.earlymoderntexts.com • See the guidance for the required portions of the text. O’Neill, O. (1993). A simplified account of Kant’s ethics. In T. Regan (Ed.) Matters of Life and Death, 411-415. Retrieved from http://users.manchester.edu/Facstaff/SSNaragon/Online/texts/201/O'Neill, Kant.pdf Virtue Ethics *Aristotle. (1931). Nicomachean ethics. (W.D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford, GBR: Clarendon Press. Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8438/pg8438.html • See the guidance for the required portions of the text. Hursthouse, R. (2012). Virtue ethics. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. • Chapters 14-15 are included in Chapter 6 of the text. 1 Feminist/Care Ethics *Held, V. “Feminist transformations of moral theory.” • Included in Chapter 6 of the text. See the guidance for the required portions of the text. *Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://lms.manhattan.edu/pluginfile.php/26517/mod_resource/content/1/Gilligan In a Different Voice.pdf. *Noddings, N. (2010). Maternal factor: Two paths to morality. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. (213-220) (Ebook) 2
PHI208: THESIS STATEMENTS Bradley J. Thames Ashford University THESIS STATEMENTS This guide is intended to help you construct a strong thesis statement for an ethics paper. But it should not take the place of the resources provided through the Ashford Writing Center, especially when using those resources is part of the assignment instructions. The Thesis Generator is a helpful resource that can be found by going to the Ashford Writing Center at awc.ashford.edu. Look under the "Writing Resources" tab, then under "Writing Tools,” and click on "Thesis Generator.” For additional help on crafting a good thesis statement, look under the "Writing Resources" tab, then under "Essay Development,” and click on "Thesis Statements.” The thesis serves as the backbone of your paper. Or if you like, it states the central idea of the paper, around which everything else revolves. Every part of your paper is meant to in some way explain and defend that thesis. So it’s really important to construct a thesis that is focused enough that you can defend it in the space given to your paper, and for that thesis to be clear, concrete and specific, and to include a statement of the primary reasons for that position. So let’s look at some examples of some strong and some weaker theses. We’re going to be looking at topics that are not under the list of options, but you can use them as models for how to construct a thesis on the topic that you choose from this list. First, you will be presented with a weak thesis statement, and then, you should try to think about why it’s weak and what might make it stronger before reading the explanation. 1. Weak Thesis Abortion is a really tough issue that has sparked a lot of controversy and debate for over four decades, and there are many good arguments on both sides. What makes it weak? No position. In other words, you don’t really tell me what your stand is on this issue; you simply reiterate that it is an ethically important issue, which should already be obvious. Be sure that your thesis clearly states your position. Some Stronger Alternatives • Even though abortion involves taking the life of a biologically human creature, its relative lack of development, considered in comparison to the burdens a woman may face in carrying it to term, means that abortion may be morally justified in some cases, and that is a determination that should be left up to the individual woman to make with the full support of the law. PHI208: THESIS STATEMENTS • Bradley J. Thames Ashford University Anytime there is uncertainty about whether a class of beings is human, a liberal democratic society should always err on the side of humanity, thus we should consider fetuses to be human and criminalize most cases of abortion. These statements specify the position that the person takes and provide a concise statement of the primary reasons for that position. They also limit themselves to one particular aspect of this wide and complex debate. Compare that with the next thesis. 2. Weak Thesis Racism is a problem in this country because blacks are treated as inferiors, there is too much prejudice within law enforcement, and there are many racist stereotypes in the media and popular culture. What makes it weak? Too broad. While each of these points is worth considering, it would be impossible to adequately defend all of these claims within the scope of a single paper. It is important to make sure that the claim being defended is narrow and focused enough that you can adequately defended it in the space provided by the assignment. Remember that it is better to be narrow and deep, rather than broad and shallow. Some Stronger Alternatives • When we examine rates of incarceration and instances of police brutality, we find that people of color are targeted at much higher rates than whites, and this reveals an inherent racism within the criminal justice system that is unjust and demands substantial and concerted efforts to change. • While some people may find the image of the “Mammy” character in literature, media, and advertising to be warm and comforting, it reinforces the idea that the “proper place” of the black woman is in a servile position, which in turn supports a conception of the inherent inferiority of blacks that conflicts with the notion that all humans are inherently equal. Notice how each of these theses limits itself to one of the many ways in which racism might be a force in society. Moreover, it doesn't simply describe the sociological facts; it also includes a clear ethical claim, i.e., a claim that invokes conceptions of value, right and wrong, and so forth. Compare that with the next thesis. 3. Weak Thesis Placing more restrictions on gun ownership will make it much harder for potential criminals to have access to guns. PHI208: THESIS STATEMENTS Bradley J. Thames Ashford University What makes it weak? Not an ethical thesis. The claim made by this thesis statement is a sociological one, not an ethical one, strictly speaking; in other words, it is a claim about what effects on society certain policies will most likely have. An ethical thesis would state the ethical significance of that claim, if it were true. The truth of the claim may mean that we have a responsibility to impose tighter restrictions on gun ownership, but it may not. Whether or not it does depends on how that fact relates to our conceptions of ethical value and moral responsibility. Some Stronger Alternatives • While supporters of gun control are correct in holding that there should be some restrictions on gun ownership, I will argue that restrictions similar to those in many European countries would cause more harm than it would prevent if implemented in the United States, given how many people in our society depend upon guns for protection. • While tighter gun control measures might mean that some people will not be able to engage as freely in certain leisure activities like sport hunting and target shooting, the fact that human life itself is far more valuable than such activities and that lives that would be saved by tighter gun control measures justifies the inconvenience such measures would cause for a few people. In the first case, the thesis appeals to the idea that our moral responsibility is to ensure the greatest good and least harm. In the second case, it appeals to the ethical idea that the value of human life itself outweighs the value of any particular enjoyments within that life. These ideas are all debatable, as are the sociological facts, but the relation between the two is the focus of the thesis; the body of the paper would be focused on defending these debatable claims. 4. Weak Thesis I believe that doctors have an obligation to always respect the rights of their patients. What makes it weak? Too vague about some of the key terms. Watch out for terms like “rights” and “respect” and others that can mean many different things. You want to instead be as specific as you can. In the alternatives below, notice how the “rights” in question are specified, and what it means to “respect” a patient (and what it doesn’t mean) are also clarified. Some Stronger Alternatives • A patient always has the right to be told the truth by his or her doctor so that he or she can make the most informed decisions, even when telling the truth results in greater harm than good. PHI208: THESIS STATEMENTS • Bradley J. Thames Ashford University A patient has the right to the most effective form of treatments possible from her doctor, and if a doctor believes that a patient will be better treated if they aren’t aware of the whole situation, then it is permissible for the doctor to lie. 5. Weak Thesis Criminals are scourges on society and it’s ridiculous to think they deserve to keep living. What makes it weak? Too extreme, indefensible, uses inflammatory language. This is a formal philosophical essay, not a screed, not a Facebook post or blog comment, not a conversation among friends. Make sure your position can be adequately defended with reasons and evidence, and that you maintain a respectful, formal tone. Some Stronger Alternatives • When someone knowingly and deliberately takes the life of someone else without just cause, the only kind of punishment that truly fits that crime and satisfies the demands of justice is to have his or her own life taken in return. • It is never right to take the life of an innocent person, and since there is always a possibility that we might execute an innocent person, capital punishment is not justified. 6. Weak Thesis Everyone has their own religious beliefs, and who are we to force them to pray if they don’t want to? What makes it weak? Rhetorical question, not a statement. Remember that this is a thesis statement. In fact, avoid using rhetorical questions anywhere in your essay. Ideas are almost always communicated much more clearly and precisely when they are stated positively and directly. Some Stronger Alternatives • Since public prayer implicitly expresses an endorsement of religious belief, officially sanctioned prayer in public schools constitutes a violation of religious freedom and should not be allowed. • While official school prayers are a violation of religious freedom, banning any student-led prayer gathering on campus grounds is equally a violation of religious freedom. PHI208: THESIS STATEMENTS Bradley J. Thames Ashford University Again, remember that a thesis announces your position, and it is something you can argue for. I should know what conclusion you will be trying to defend on this topic, and the primary reasons supporting that conclusion. And for ethics papers, the thesis should have a clear ethical statement to make. In sum, you should avoid a thesis statement that 1. Doesn’t state the position clearly and directly. 2. Is too broad. 3. Does not state an ethical claim. 4. Is too vague. 5. Is extreme, indefensible, or uses inflammatory language. 6. Uses rhetorical questions. When you have constructed your thesis, run through these examples and consider whether your thesis statement makes any of these mistakes. If it does, try to revise it, and if you are unsure or are having trouble, please consult your instructor.
PHI208: WEEK FIVE ASSIGNMENT GUIDANCE WEEK FIVE ASSIGNMENT GUIDANCE Notes and Advice This paper is a demonstration of what you have learned about moral reasoning based on our examining of ethical theories and specific ethical issues. As such, you should focus your attention on carefully spelling out the reasoning that supports your conclusion, and relating that to the theories we have discussed in class. You are free to write on the same topic and question you wrote on in previous papers or choose a different topic and question. If you choose a different topic, you would benefit from going through the Week One Assignment exercises. For a list of acceptable topics to start with, see the options from the list of topics available in the online course. If you are still unsure of your topic or of how properly to focus it into a relevant ethical question, you are strongly encouraged to consult with your instructor. You are free to draw upon the work you did in previous papers, and reuse parts that you feel were strong, but you are not to simply recycle the previous papers. This paper should reflect the culmination of the development of your thoughts on this issue, and many of the requirements for the final paper cannot be satisfied by a heavily recycled paper. The consideration of an objection against your own view is a way of showing that your view has the support of good reasons and can answer its strongest objections. Therefore, aim at identifying and addressing the strongest opposing argument you can, bearing in mind that a good thesis should be able to respond to the best arguments for the other side. Thesis Statement The thesis statement is more than just a position statement of the sort you provided in the first assignment; rather, it states the position and the primary reasons in such a way that the reader should have a clear sense of how the reasons support the position, which is what will be spelled out and explained in the body of the paper. Please see the handout on thesis statements available in the online course. Checklist This checklist can help you ensure that you have completed all of the assignment instructions. PHI208: WEEK FIVE ASSIGNMENT GUIDANCE Make sure that you  Provide an introduction that starts with the question, describes the ethical problem (including the most relevant issues), summarizes your procedure in the paper, and concludes with your thesis statement.  Explain what you think is the best way to reason about this issue, and show as clearly and persuasively as you can how that reasoning supports your position.  Make reference to at least two of the approaches we have examined in the course.  Raise a relevant objection against your position that you can imagine being raised by someone holding a contrary position.  Provide a strong response to that objection that shows that your own view can withstand it.  Provide a conclusion that sums up what you showed in the paper and offers some final reflections, including a revised statement of the thesis.  Utilize at least one for each theory drawn from the list of acceptable primary sources for that theory (for a total of two).  Utilize at least two other resources from the required or recommended readings and media or scholarly sources found in the Ashford University Library.  Cite your sources within the text of your paper and on the resources page.  Include a title page and list of resources.  Proofread carefully for mechanical and grammatical errors.  Format the assignment in APA style.  Write between 1500 to 2000 words. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.
Running head: SHORTENED TITLE The Title of the Paper First name Last name PHI 208 Ethics and Moral Reasoning Prof. Heraclitus of Ephesus January 1, 2014 SHORTENED TITLE Title 2 Begin with the ethical question you are addressing. The rest of your first paragraph should introduce the topic by briefly but precisely discussing the concrete topic under which this question falls, including any necessary context, background information, etc. This should draw upon your work in the Week One Assignment, but should be more succinct and reflect the development of your understanding of those ideas throughout the course, as well as any revision, narrowing, and focusing of the problem under consideration. Your introduction should include a preview of what you plan to do in the paper, and how you will proceed. Conclude your introductory paragraph with a thesis statement that states your position on the question and the primary reasons in such a way that the reader should have a clear sense of how the reasons support the position, which is what will be spelled out and explained in the body of the paper. Demonstration Moral Reasoning This section of the Final Paper is more open-ended than other parts of the papers you have been working on (including other parts of this paper). By now you will have seen how moral reasoning involves moving back and forth between general ideas, such as principles, rules, values, purposes and ends, and so forth, and particular concrete judgments. We have examined different forms that can take, where the general ideas might be utilitarian principles, deontological duties, or Aristotelian ideas about the human telos and the virtues. Your job here is demonstrate that you have acquired a sense of how that kind of reasoning proceeds, and that you have understood and considered the examples that were studied in the class. SHORTENED TITLE Along the way, you will need to relate what you are doing to these other theories. 3 For example, you might be taking a utilitarian approach, or an Aristotelian one, and would make reference to Mill or Aristotle in the course of doing so, and contrast your approach with Kant’s. Or you might model your approach on the reasoning of one of the contemporary readings that dealt with specific issues. Also, you will likely need to provide factual evidence to support the movement from general ideas to concrete particulars. Objection and Response Each of the assignments involved examining a possible objection to the main argument, and this paper will do so as well, but follow up with a response to the objection. An objection articulates a plausible reason why someone might find the argument weak or problematic. Or it might raise a consideration supporting a rival position, or a counterexample that seems to go against certain claims you have made. You should explain how it represents and objection, and do so in a way that would be acceptable to someone who disagrees with your own argument. You would then provide the best response you can to the objection, showing as clearly and persuasively as you can how it does not undermine your position, without simply making the same argument you have already made over again (that is, your response should say something new). Conclusion Provide a conclusion that sums up what you showed in the paper and offers some final reflections, including a revised statement of the thesis (do not simply repeat your thesis, but rephrase it in light of the discussion you just had). SHORTENED TITLE 4 Total Word Count: 1500 to 2000 words (note: that’s at least twice as long as this outline). SHORTENED TITLE References 5 Required: Primary text in support of theory 1, drawn from the list of acceptable resources. Required: Primary text in support of theory 2, drawn from the list of acceptable resources. Required: Scholarly resource drawn from either the required or recommended readings or from the Ashford University Library. Required: Scholarly resource drawn from either the Required or Recommended Resources or from the Ashford University Library. Suggested: Other resources as needed. Note that resources must be cited in the text as well as included in the bibliography to satisfy the requirement. The textbook and guidance do not count toward the resources requirement, though you are free to use them as additional resources.
Running Head: PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE Physician-Assisted Suicide Karina Cordova PHI 208 Ethics and Moral Reasoning Prof. Brandon Edwards- Schuth November 12, 2017 1 PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE Physician-assisted Suicide Should a physician-assisted suicide be allowed in a certain specific cases such as when a patient is terminally ill with less than three months to live? Introduction: The physician-assisted suicide is suicide that is committed by the help of a physician. It involves the medical doctor intentionally providing a patient with the means of suicide. It may involve the prescription of the lethal doses of drugs with the consent of the patient. In physicianassisted suicide, the patient voluntarily expresses the wish to end his or her life. It is a method legal in different states however, it does need to be prescribed from a licensed physician with the approval by the state from which the patient reside. The doctor performing the suicide must be a doctor of medicine approved by the board of medical examiners for the state. It has been argued that it is a way to make people die with comfort, and in a humane way (Wanzer et al. 1984; Council of Ethical and judicial affairs 1992). Currently, it is an issue that has not been fully accepted in all states while the few states that practice it has implemented the conditions on which it have to take place (Rosner, Rognatz, Lowenstein et al. 1992). The rate of patients who request for physician assisted suicide is quite moderate yet a good number of people see it as being unethical. This raises the question on how to ensure the quality in the requests laid by the patients. This makes it more complex with people’s different views. In this paper, I will put more focus on the cases whereby the administration of physician-assisted suicide is being immoral and unethical. 2 PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE Position Statement: The right to live is legal to everyone and an ill person may be in a position that he or she is unable to make a sound decision hence administering physician-assisted suicide should not be an option. Supporting Reason: Everyone has a right to life despite the situation that they may be in health wise and as most diseases may greatly affect the patient to an extent that he or she loses some senses, being handicapped and so on, there is a possibility that the patient may be affected psychologically and mentally. Such person is totally unable to make a sound decision concerning life. Administering physician-assisted suicide can then not be considered as the patient’s volunteer wish. The rights of self-determination should not just be allowed on the patients, for instance an unconscious patient to determine whether to continue living or die, since they are not allowed to take the law at their hands. Opposing Reason: Most people hold on the fact that the patients should not decide for themselves on the life choice yet there has been a concern on the well- being of the family. In the other point of view, a patient who have few days to live can voluntarily take the physician-assisted suicide in order to save on the family costs. I.e. the hospital bills and other expenses. This will save the family from incurring the excess charges if the patient could have continue being hospitalized till the due date. 3 PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE References Rosner, F., Rogatz, P., Lowenstein, R., Risemberg, H. M., Bennett, A. J., Buscaglia, A,. & Henry, J. B. (1992). Physician-assisted suicide. New York state journal of medicine. Rogers, J. R. (1996). Assessing right to die attitudes: a conceptually guided measurement model. Journal of Social Issues, 52(2), 63-84. Walker, R. M. (1999). Ethical issues in end-of-life care. Cancer Control, 6, 162-167.

Tutor Answer

Proff.Holley
School: University of Maryland

Hey buddy!Attached is the assignment.Please have a look at it and feel free to seek any further clarification. If
there's no further work to be done. I'd really appreciate if you could
leave a 5 star⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ feedback for me on Studypool. This would be so helpful in
me securing further work and continue to tutor.Thanks. 😉

Running head: SHOULD PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE BE LEGALIZED?

Should Physician-Assisted Suicide be Legalized?
Name
Course Title
Instructor
Date

1

PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE
Introduction
If a mentally upright and coherent person is requesting to end his or her life due to
illnesses or great distresses, is it unethical to let them die rather than watch them as they live in
agony or in any other uncomfortable manner? That is a common question that lingers in the
minds of not only general the public but also medical practitioners. Physician-assisted suicide is
the act of providing a prescription for medication to a coherent person with proper
understanding, for the use of ending his or her life. Most physicians are faced with a dilemma

when it comes to assisting their patients to take his or her life. That is especially when the patient
doesn`t meet the established legal and ethical standards allowing him or her to commit suicide
(Lee, 1996). For instance, a person may choose to end his or her life because of distress or when
the individual doesn`t get the love and care that he needs from the loved ones. Moreover, some
people may decide to end their life when they are experiencing much pain, e.g., due to diseases
and thus may choose to stop such misery by committing suicide. Most people feel that physicians
have a responsibility not to assist individuals to commit suicide in preserving the sanctity of life
and hence physician-assisted suicide should not be legalized. However, some are of the opinion
that it is okay to help one commit suicide if he or she no longer enjoys life or is incapable of
performing the basic activities and thus physician-assisted suicide should be legalized.
Therefore, the objective of this paper is to examine the whole issue surrounding physicianassisted suicide in a contemporary health center and explain in detail why it should be legalized.
Physician-assisted suicide should be legal for individuals that are experiencing
unbearable pain and who can`t be able to continue living due to their quality of life having been
diminished. That is because patients have a right to choose how to deal with the mental and/or
physical pain that...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
The best tutor out there!!!!

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors