The right to assisted suicide is a serious issue that affects everybody in the United States (Isaac 80). Suicide with the aid of a psychiatrist is referred to as assisted suicide. The never-ending controversy on these topics centers around the question of whether a sick patient has the right to die with the help of a practitioner. Terminally ill people have faced many obstacles in their search for the right to die with dignity over the years (Randall 884). Their relatives often wind up spending a lot of money by transferring their citizenship. Assisted suicide should be legalized in the U.S. because people who are suffering from a terminal illness should be able to choose a peaceful death for themselves instead of dying from their painful illnesses.
Among organizations which have shown the concern for dying with dignity is Final exit Network. Over the past years, this nonprofit making organization believes in death with dignity and the people’s right to self-determination (Maris 460). To assist the society in understanding the importance of assisted suicide, Final exit network has been educating the society about all ends of life choices and compassionate presence for the terminally ill patients who decided to end their unbearable pain through assisted suicide.
Although different people and organizations have pointed out different critics concerning assisted suicide, Final exit Network has been explaining various advantages which people with terminal illness can attain from assisted suicide (Margaret 460). Although this organization was charged for assisting a 57-year-old woman who had lived with intense pain for more than a decade, the group argued that it merely provides compassionate presence for the terminally ill patients by providing information concerning assisted suicide if they request it.
Final Exit argues that the last important decision which terminal ill patient can make in his/her life is concerning how they shall end their unbearable pain. One of the better ways of ending this kind of condition is through assisted suicide and if it is not legalized in all states, it means patients in some states may end up experiencing some sense of inequality (Ekland-Olson and Aseltine 45). Terminal ill patients feel for the amount of sacrifice which their families undergo to obtain legal access to death with dignity. Some families even end up changing their residency from one state to the other to ease the process of enabling their patients to die with dignity.
According to the final exit vice president, dying with dignity should be termed ethical because it is one’s choice concerning his/her life. Making families change residency from one state to the other or waste a lot of resources because of a choice which one can make concerning his/her life is not right or fair (Maris 460). Although people and even organizations have been opposing assisted suicide terming it as unethical, with the continuous campaign towards its legalization may make it the human right of the 21st century.
Final exit Network believes that mentally competent patients suffering from unbearable pain and with no chance for long-term survival should be allowed to have assisted suicide if they make this kind of decision. The organization argues that if people have the tight to deny lifesaving treatments, they should also have the freedom to decide on ending their own lives. Each person should also be given the right to decide concerning his/her health. When a patient thinks he/she does not want to continue living with the pain and request the physician to terminate his/her life, this should not be termed as unethical. In such a case, the patient makes a decision in a similar way he/she would have decided not to take pain relieving drugs.
Although Final Exit is the only organization which publicly provides education to the end of life choices, it does it with a lot of considerations (Nick 34). People who apply for this kind of assistance are screened carefully by a group of medical committee to ensure they meet all requirements. Before any assistance is offered to the patients, the medical team must ensure the patient is diagnosed with a terminal illness and are also deemed to have no hope.
Most families do not consider the hospital cost while the terminally ill patient is still alive. When the patient passes away, the family struggles with the huge bills and are often subject to financial ruin (Frederick 70). Most of the terminal ill patients want their death to be peaceful and with a high level of consolation. Leaving families with huge hospital bills is by no means a type of consolation. If the terminal ill patients opt for assisted suicide, they assist in easing their families’ huge hospital bills as well as their suffering.
The terminal ill requires the right to assisted suicide because it means to encounter their end with short of unnecessary suffering cost. Most of the patients also believe that the right to assisted suicide is an inherent right which an individual should think about. It is also a liberty that should not be termed as unethical or illegal because those who are dying might want to use it as a way to pursue their happiness.
Final exit Network argues that terminally ill patients should be allowed to die with dignity. Choosing the right to assisted suicide would be a final exercise of autonomy for the dying patient (Maris 460). Physicians who assist terminal ill patients in terminating their life should not be prosecuted because they assist one who has made his/her final active choice in life.
According to final exit, death should not be separated from anything done in medicine. When a terminal ill patient says he/she does not want to lie on the bed for a given period waiting to die, the doctors should take the necessary steps to assist that patient (Allison 50). However, this should be done based on various considerations. Final exit argues that physician and other Medical practitioners should not be prosecuted for assisted suicide because they simply obey patients’ decision. They do not tell the patients that their lives should be terminated because it seems there is no hope. This means physicians should be allowed to assist patients who request for assisted suicide the same way they are allowed to assist patients with other forms of problems.
People are capable of choosing all sorts of things in life. For example, one can make a decision concerning who he/she wants to marry, the kind of work to do, the hospital to attend and so forth (Randall 884). Similarly, terminally ill patients should also be given the right to make decisions concerning their life. The law that allows people to live as long as they want should be amended to allow patients with unbearable pain to have an assisted suicide. People should not be unnecessarily kept alive against their own will.
In support of its work, this organization believes that terminal ill patients should be given the right to terminate their lives with assistance from the medical practitioners. This organization also states that those who assist the terminal ill patients to die with dignity should be free from prosecution.
The argument that the primary role of physicians should be to heal focuses much on the physicians than on patients. In the situations where healing is impossible, death is imminent and the patient is in unbearable pain, the primary role of physician should shift from healing to relieving pain upon the patient’s request. Physicians should comply with the patient’s request of assisting them to die with dignity because the physicians do not force them to come up with this kind of decision.
It is unfair that when patients are facing death in unbearable pain and in the most desperate moment of their life, nobody can offer a little assistance because the law bans this kind of help (Maris 462). The government and other stakeholders should address the issue and legalize assisted suicide. Families waste a lot of resources in seeking on how terminally ill patients can be assisted. Patients also undergo a lot of pain that can only be addressed through assisting them to die.
The decision to die should be taken as one’s right to his/her life. Therefore, assisted suicide should be legalized in all states because sometimes families are forced to change their residency to seek places where their terminal ill patients can be assisted. The primary role of physicians should incorporate healing and assisting patients to relieve pain.
Allison. Kostrzewa. Facing Dementia: Integrating Palliation into All Aspects of Care. Creative Nursing, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2013, PP. 45-67.
Ekland-Olson. S & Aseltine. Elyshia. How Ethical Systems Change: Tolerable Suffering and Assisted Dying. New York: Routledge. Print
Frederick, Truba. N. Beliefs and Perceptions about the Personality Characteristics of Children and Adults Suffering from Terminal Illness. North American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 1, 2010, PP. 67-90.
Isaac. Mozonde. Human Illness and Experience of Vulnerability: A Summary and Reflection upon the Opening Keynote by his Grace Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu. Journal of Research Administration, Vol. 41, No. 45-78, 2010, PP. 67-89.
Margaret. Dore. 36 Vermont Bar J: Physicians-Assisted Suicide: A recipe for Elder Abuse and the Illusion of Personal Choice. Issues in Law & Medicine, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2011, pp. 456-503.
Maris. Ronald. W. Pillaged: Psychiatric Medications and Suicide Risk. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina. 2015. Print.
Nick, Kurt. P. Ethical Guidelines for Counselors when working with clients with Terminal Illness Requesting Physician Aid in Dying. Adultspan Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2012, PP. 56-78.
Randall. Krakauer. Invictus: Increasing Patient Choice in Advanced illness and End-of-Care. Frontier of Health Services Management, VOL. 27, No. 3, 2011, PP. 890-900.