The topic that I was assigned is the physician-assisted suicide. How is physician-assisted suicide viewed by the medical profession? Is physician-assisted suicide legal in the U.S? The ethical dilemma I am examining is, should this be a decision between a physician and the patients, or should it be controlled by the state? I believe this should be a matter that should be left between the physician and the patient.
A physician-assisted suicide refers to a situation where a medical practitioner or a physician facilitates the suicide of a patient. The process involves prescription of a controlled substance thus assisting in a suicide. The topic is very relevant in medical law and ethics. The concept of physician-assisted suicide is significant as it seeks to uncover how different stakeholders and medical practitioners view the issue of physician-assisted suicide. Moreover, the topic aids in identifying any legal precedents and laws that guides and govern the issues relating to physician-assisted suicide and also reveal whether physician-assisted suicide is legal in the United States of America. The physician-assisted suicide raises diverse ethical issues and dilemmas (Sugarman, Jeremy and Daniel 251). The famous case of the state of Michigan vs. Jack Kevorkian helps in identifying who should be held liable in such a situation. The issue of physician-assisted suicide has sparked worldwide debates for decades. As it stands out, the decisions that have been made in the recent past lay a foundation through which issues relating to euthanasia can be understood (Sugarman, Jeremy and Daniel 251). The case sets a legal precedent is identifiable on how the court treats the aspect of mercy killing. Jack Kevorkian is convicted by the jury of second-degree murder for administration of a controlled substance and facilitating murder. The defendant was convicted for the death of Thomas Youk, a former racecar driver.
The medical profession heavily prohibits and condemns the act of physician-assisted suicide. They argue that the prohibition of mercy killing is a cornerstone and a milestone in medical ethics. The American Medical Association in consultation with the American Psychiatric Association, as well as American Nurses Association made brief reports declaring that the physician-assisted suicide is against the medical ethics. They argue that the act of assisting in intentionally taking away the life of a patient is unethical and is contrary to the objective of healing that provides a guide for medicine and nursing profession (Gallo 88). The medical practitioners are guided by the Hippocratic Oath that stipulates that a physician must not be involved in any manner whatsoever in administering a deadly drug to any patient or even make a suggestion to that effect. In addition, physician-assisted suicide is illegal in United States of America (Gallo 89). Although there are numerous acts such as the Death with Dignity Act that attempt to legalize the aspect of physician-assisted suicide, the Drug enforcement Administration maintains that it is illegal. I chose the case of the state of Michigan vs. Jack and the article on whether physician-assisted-suicide serve a legitimate purpose since both addresses the matter in legal and medical profession perspectives. The sources stipulate whether decisions should be between the physician and the patient only or whether the state should also take part in the decisions.
The two courses of action to resolve my dilemma are either to leave the patient to make the decisions solely or involve the state in the decision-making process (Gallo 89). The advantage of the first resolution is that it gives the patient a chance to decide what is best for the without coercion or duress. However, the disadvantage is that patients who suffer terminal illnesses would rush to make irrational and uninformed decisions without considering other available alternatives. Those patients would opt to end their sufferings quickly to avoid affecting their relatives. The advantage of the second resolution is that a patient through consultation is capable of making rational and informed decisions that would yield positive results in their healing process. The disadvantage, however, is that the state prohibits physician-assisted suicide and would always act to protect the law. In such a case, an individual’s wishes may not be realized as intervention by the state may prevent certain actions as physician-assisted suicide from happening (Sugarman, Jeremy and Daniel 251).
In my opinion, I believe that this should be a matter between the patients in consultation with a physician. The reason is that the process helps a patient who suffers get a dignified death and acts such as the Oregon Death with Dignity Act attempt to champion these interests by legalizing physician-assisted suicide (Gallo 89). The state should not take part in such decisions but should only formulate policies and procedures that guide the implementation of these medical procedures whenever it is deemed necessary. The pertinent questions that often arise are who should provide a final decision in such a situation and whether the decision provided is acceptable under the rule of law.
In conclusion, the aspect of physician-assisted suicide presents a great dilemma in the medical, the state, and the rules of creation. In situations of permanent and terminal illness that involve a large degree of suffering, the patient should be left to make a final decision. In my opinion, no one understands the sufferings that one undergoes better than the patient himself. Therefore, the decision of whether a patient should undergo a physician-assisted suicide should be solely between the patient and the physician. It is good and ethical to appreciate the fact that such decisions are not appropriate to the healthcare in general, but the serve to end sufferings of people who suffer terminal illnesses with zero chances of recovery.
Works Cited
Gallo, N R. Elder Law. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Sugarman, Jeremy, and Daniel P. Sulmasy. Methods in Medical Ethics. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press, 2001. Print.
"Whether Physician-Assisted Suicide Serves A 'Legitimate Medical Purpose' Under The Drug Enforcement Administration's Regulations Implementing The Controlled Substances Act." Issues In Law & Medicine 17.3 (2002): 269. Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition. Web. 20 Nov. 2014.
