Controversies Over the Right to Die - Paper Example

Introduction

The right to die also known as assisted suicide or euthanasia has ignited economic and political discourse in the United States for over a century. The first bill on the Right to die was conscripted in Ohio. However, it did not succeed, but it marked the beginning of arguments hence igniting numerous trends on euthanasia. According to Hanley (2016), euthanasia is described as the practice or act of killing another individual who may be extremely ill to prevent additional suffering. Its supporters view it as a way to provide patients with compassion and dignity by giving them a rapid demise. Conversely, the opposing cluster state that the Hippocratic Oath made by medical practitioners denotes that they have a moral responsibility to ensure that patients live for long. Some individuals contend that legalizing euthanasia could unfairly aim the disabled, minorities, and poor and develop motivations for most insurance companies to end lives in attempts to save money. Others proceed further arguing it can be a shield for murder. Therefore, to gain more insight on the controversy over euthanasia, it is essential to examine its current trends in the US, parameters to make it safe, and legal implications required to ensure it has fewer risks for doctors as well as understand how culture takes part in assisted suicide.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Current Trends on the Right to Die

Individual States in the United States permits doctors and defines what is or not a legitimate medical act which denotes that the laws on rights to die to differ from one state to another. Presently, the right to die is legal in Vermont, Washington, Oregon, and California. Since euthanasia legislation differs from state to state, there is an increasing trend that many individuals who support it are relocating to states that have legalized assisted suicide in efforts to end their lives peacefully (Hanley, 2016). For instance, a twenty-nine-year woman named Brittany Maynard, who suffered from brain cancer in 2016 made a headline in social media after posting a video illustrating her decision to relocate to Oregon from California to gain entry to its demise with dignity law. Additionally, her video on YouTube has gained over 12 million viewers while reigniting the controversy over the right to die further across the United States.

Currently, for a big number of terminally ill patients living in states which do not embrace laws on right-to-die, they have led alternatives are unattractive according those who oppose euthanasia. For instance, in Massachusetts, a state that is yet to approve euthanasia law, Jim Carberry from Natick explained how he watched his wife die a painful demise. She had suffered from Cancer which Margie Carberry chose to remove her feeding tube to starve to death (Hanley, 2016). Additionally, a significant number of patients tend to decide to take action into their hands particularly when terminally ill and there lack legal actions towards assisted suicide. This has led to the presence of many organizations and publication of books guiding people on how to terminate their lives. A prominent alternative is using a gas hood kit which necessitates patients to wear a plastic bag on their head and open helium gas tank. Therefore, because their body reflexively requires to breathe, they will inhale pure helium leading to their demise within a few minutes (Hanley, 2016).

Parameters Considered for a Legal and Safe Assisted Suicide

Firstly, individuals have the right to die. Since the debate on assisted suicide revolves around the right to live, people can choose the course of their lives through their will. Therefore, they have the right to control its course. This follows that they have the similar self-determining ability as humans which permits them the key right to choose how they die which should make euthanasia legal and safe (Paterson, 2017). Secondly, assisted suicide does not cause harm to other individuals since death is a personal affair. This is because it encompasses direct harm as well as ending the life of only those who have requested it which does not infringe on other fundamental rights (Paterson, 2017). Therefore, under the two parameters, it should be legal to assist patient end their lives.

Legal Implications to Make Euthanasia a Lesser Risk for the Physicians

Assisted suicide should be appropriately regulated to ensure it has fewer risks for physicians. The United States should control the right to die just like developed states such as Belgium and Netherlands which have insignificant implications from euthanasia. Since the issue of assisted suicide in the US is intensely argued, there should be competent consent particularly arising from the patient to terminate his life (Bernert et al., 2014). This will ensure there is ethical consideration such as the absence of conflict of interest on physicians hence protecting them. Additionally, to ensure there are few legal implications for physicians, it is significant to consider establishing a line between what is viewed as assisted suicide and what is seen as murder. This is facilitated by having a competent consent from the patient and avoiding conflict of interest from the patient on euthanasia (Bernert et al., 2014).

Role of Culture on the Right to Die

Culture practices have broadly been used in health care to reduce disparities in service qualities provided to different individuals. The Standards for Cultural Competence guidelines provided by NASW has focused on fundamental sections of health care based on culture (Bullock, 2011). Therefore, culture has taken a substantial role in making decisions on assisted suicide. Doctors currently recognize that most patients when making decisions on rights to die irrespective of the culture, incorporate their families and friends. While performing with patients from ethnic or racial minorities who appear to depend more on informal rather than formal supports, family then tend to be a greater aspect of euthanasia plan. For example, for African Americans patients, they appear to talk to their members of family first before making choices on assisted suicide instead of consulting with physicians. According to Bullock, (2011), for Hispanic patients, the significance of involving family member to their desire for assisted suicide had more cultural importance than physician-made decisions to assist them to end their lives. Thus, involving a family in a patient's assisted suicide shows the role played by culture on the issue of the right to die.

Conclusion

The right to die has a profound debate which has led to various trends such as patients taking unattractive options to euthanasia. Having the right to die and assisted suicide not causing harms to others are some parameters to make it legal and safe. Culture has also been found to have a role in euthanasia. Therefore, the United States should regulate the law on assisted suicide rather than leaving it at a state level to avoid various implications particularly on physicians and affected patients.

References

Bernert, R. A., Hom, M. A., & Roberts, L. W. (2014). A review of multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines in suicide prevention: toward an emerging standard in suicide risk assessment and management, training and practice. Academic Psychiatry, 38(5), 585-592.

Bullock, K. (2011). The influence of culture on end-of-life decision making. Journal of social work in end-of-life & palliative care, 7(1), 83-98.

Hanley, A. (2016). The "Right-To-Die" in America: New Trends Explained. Retrieved from http://www.northeastern.edu/rugglesmedia/2016/04/20/right-to-die-in-america/

Paterson, C. (2017). Assisted suicide and euthanasia: a natural law ethics approach. Routledge.