Physician Assisted Suicide Arguments Both Sides Introduction: Why Is Physician-Assisted Death Controversial?

Physician-assisted suicide, or physician-assisted death, is now legal in four American states as well as in several countries including Canada and the Netherlands (Appelbaum. 2016). Generally, physician-assisted death applies to patients diagnosed with a terminal illness. The request to terminate the life prematurely is based on the patient’s tremendous suffering. In Canada, for example, “pphysicians whose patients disclose a wish to die must always be listening for underlying deep sorrow,” (Chochinov, 2016, p. 253). However, it can be difficult if not impossible to determine whether a patient’s expression of sorrow is temporary, influenced by physical pain or exacerbated by underlying mental illness. Physician-assisted suicide can also be framed as a moral issue, with some physicians claiming that assisting a patient to die goes against the tenets of the medical profession (American Medical Association, 2018). This paper uses two scholarly articles to evaluate the two opposing views on the ethics of physician-assisted death.

Presentation of Argument In Favor of Physician-Assisted Death

In an article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Quill, Back & Block (2016) argue that physician-assisted death is justifiable under certain circumstances. The authors use a case study to prove their point that physician-assisted suicide is not a black-or-white...

The authors address the complexity of issues in this scholarly article.
Premise 1: Patients with a serious illness have the right to self-determination, and for “control over their own bodies, their own lives, and concern about...distress,” (Quill, Back & Block, 2016, p. 245).

Premise 2: Physician-assisted death is the best way to address these concerns in a legal and ethical manner.

Premise 3: The concerns about “coercion, vulnerability, and slippery slopes” have “not been borne out by experience with legal open access to physician-assisted death,” (Quill, Back & Block, 2016, p. 245).

Conclusion: Legalizing physician-assisted death eliminates some of the thorny ethical and legal problems, and prevents abuses of power and ambiguities.

Although the Quill, Back & Block (2016) study is not empirical and does not involve any quantitative data, it is a thoughtful presentation of multiple points of view on the issue. The authors ultimately come out in favor of physician-assisted suicide based on several concerns, namely that the practice does promote the ethical imperatives of patient autonomy, respect, and dignity. Moreover, the authors reason that when physician-assisted death is legal, it can be conducted in a straightforward fashion that eliminates subversion and possible dangerous consequences.

Presentation of an Article Against…