Death with Dignity

1

Death with Dignity Scenario and Reflection Reflective Journal: Death with Dignity Scenario Topic

Death with Dignity Act What are the key points of contention on this topic?

The key points of contention include the following;  Whether we as human beings have a right to end our own lives when faced with a painful terminal disease  Does suicide violate the sanctity of human life?  Whether physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is justified to end human suffering from a moral perspective  Speakers debate the ethics of Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, passed in 1977  The act allows terminally-ill Oregonians to end their lives legally through self-administration of lethal medications expressly prescribed by a physician Act passed as a citizen’s initiative because the majority of voting Oregonians believed terminally ill patients should be granted legal rights to hasten their deaths.

What side of the argument (stance) do you take on this topic?

I am a proponent of PAS to alleviate human suffering for terminally ill patients.

The Death with Dignity Act, as it stands, is ethical. I resonate with the first speaker’s position that the ethics of informed PAS are sound and conforms to ethical standards, and it should be replicated across other states.

The Law in Oregon sets precedence for other states seeking to adopt PAS and similar laws as morally acceptable.

What strong points does the other side of this topic have?

The strong point that the opponents raise the possibility of PAS being an infringement of individual rights is that the person is not of sound mind and who decides the meaning of sound mind.

What were the three most important things you took away from the topic?

1. PAS is recommended to alleviate human suffering for terminally ill patients.

2. Implementing PAS is both ethically and morally acceptable 3. Implementing Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act and its replication across other states is not a question of legality but precedence based on the morality

2

and ethics of its implementation.

Reflection Physician-assisted suicide (PAS), preferably referred to as physicianassisted dying, refers to the deliberate actions that the physician takes to end a patient’s life with the intention to end their persistent suffering. The Oregon State paste the Death with Dignity Act making PAS legal in 1977 (Mukhopadhyay & Banerjee, 2021). The law sets precedence for other states to consider implementing physician-assisted dying to end their suffering, especially for terminally ill patients. From a personal perspective, I support PAS as it is both morally and ethically acceptable to end pain and suffering for terminally ill patients The utilitarian theory is applicable in the justification of physicianassisted suicide (PAS) for terminally ill patients. It would be ethically correct to execute PAS based on this theory as the decision is made in the patient’s interest. Utilitarianism is a theory of morality that advocates for people to pursue actions that elicit happiness or pleasure contrary to actions that derive harm or happiness (Steffen, 2021). In the case of PAS, the patient chooses to end their pain and suffering from a terminal condition, as PAS gives them peaceful rest and lifts the burden on loved ones to end their suffering (Pence, 2020). For example, it would be a significant burden for a bankrupt family because they have to make an out-of-pocket settlement for their terminally ill patient in immense pain and suffering.

From the preceding, I strongly support the implementation of PAS as it is both morally and ethically acceptable. Whereas opponents of physician-assisted killing argue that it should not be implemented for people of unsound mind, for such individuals, PAS can be administered non-voluntarily as they are unable to give consent because of their current health. Therefore, another appropriate person, such as a close family member, can consent to end their life based on the quality of life and level of suffering. PAS is justifiable, and other states should consider its application.

References Mukhopadhyay, S., & Banerjee, D. (2021). Physician-assisted suicide in dementia: A critical review of global evidence and considerations from India. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 64, 102802.

Pence, G. E. (2020). Medical ethics: Accounts of ground-breaking cases. 9th Ed. McGraw Hill Steffen, L. (2021). Physician assistance in dying: An option for Christians?. Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical

3

Morality, 27(3), 228-249.