Decision Made in Support for Physician Assisted Death

Judgment on Physician Assisted Death

Prosecutions, where the state stands as the main complainant, are held up as criminal prosecution. A State prosecutor is duty bound to prove sufficiently that the action of the accused was inconsistent with the existing laws. In the case of the physician who gave a lethal dose to assist a terminally ill patient in dying it is the duty of the prosecutor to defend the existent law. The prosecutor ought to present to the court sufficient information regarding the law on physician assisted deaths.

Decision Taken and Justification

The legality and legality of physician-assisted death have raised numerous debates some leading to the Abolishment of laws against assisted suicide others upholding the law. The different state has differing justification on assisted suicide with some allowing physician-assisted suicide on grounds of the patient's quality of life and others assessing the palliate care measure explored to determine whether assisted suicide was the last resort. The defendant in the prosecution has a duty to share to the court the circumstances that necessitate action to assist a patient in easing their suffering. The consideration for other alternatives explored to ease the patient's suffering is paramount to facilities the decision-making process arriving at assisted suicide (Quill & Battin, 2004). Where no options in palliative care are explored, it is considered that the physical facilitating procurement of the lethal measure is liable for malpractice or criminal prosecution. The idea of some state disallowing and, therefore, upholding the law against assisted suicide serves to ensure that legalization of euthanasia in not abused.

In the case where the patient is terminally ill, it is obvious that death will come but the physician attending to the patient has the obligation to ensure the patient's quality of life. The need to ensure quality of life calls for the physician to explore all medical options available. In the case where the state brings a case against a physician, it is important to determine whether the physician's action prior to the procurement of the lethal dose. Evidence for extensive consideration of other measure to ease that suffering should be sought and evaluated (Quill & Battin, 2004). In the event that there are efforts sufficiently evidencing unsuccessful exploration of options by the physician, then it would be prudent to exonerate the physician from punishment for assisted suicide action.

In the case against physician-assisted suicide it is the observation of the law that it falls under the dictates of immorality to take one's life. Since the state is charged with the obligation of upholding the sanctity of life, it is also the state responsibility to ensure that the protection of life does not compromise on the quality of life afforded to the individual and the relative. The key argument here being even though the state takes up the obligation to protect life as a moral obligation, it is also important that the quality of life is a consideration upheld (William, 2000).