Physician-assisted Suicide and Euthanasia.
Should Physicians Heed requests to help patients take their own lives? This is the question which sparked a wide spread debate regarding the right of a patient to live or to die. These debates try to conclude whether such practices are mercy upon the dying or murder of a human being. Seventy to eighty percent of people in developed nations, such as the U.S. can expect to die of a condition with a long, downhill course. Even extremists from both sides of the arguments agree that there are certain cases where a physician assisted suicide or euthanasia should be an option. These such people also agree that there are certain cases where a life can be saved. The question arises as to where one draws the line. .
The fight to legalize physician assisted suicide of Euthanasia is gaining ground. It is viewed as a way to help suffering people. The strongest argument points out that any life worse than death should not be lived. These advocates believe that it is a doctor's duty to ease suffering even if this means assisting a patient in suicide. Healing can be viewed as relieving a person from a very difficult situation. The quality of the patient's life involves pain, but also involves common dignity. One should be able to make a "final exit" rather than suffer through a vegetable status. In many cases where a terminal illness is being fought, euthanasia should be a choice. Many family members of such terminally ill patients do not want to witness a drawn out dying process, which they find meaningless. .
Many arguments have arisen against the taking of a life. Some consider physician assisted suicide as "cold, heartless murder." In 1990, Janet Adkins was helped to her inevitable death by Dr. Kevorkian. Janet had alzheimer's disease. A related and sustainable concern which is related to the murder debate is the question of weather or not Amrican doctors would follow any statutes set up by the government.