Author: Amy Sloan
Last saved by: Vincent
Company: American Career College \ West Coast University

END OF LIFE BY PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE

Running Head: END OF LIFE BY PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE

End of Life by Physician-Assisted Suicide
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Date of Submission

End of Life by Physician-Assisted Suicide
I.	Introduction.
a.	Physician-assisted suicide is an issue that has received highly controversial debates in the United States of America and other parts of the world for many years. This controversial debate continues even today with no apparent sign of culmination in the near future. Physician-assisted suicide refers to the practice where a physician provides a potentially lethal medication to a terminally ill, suffering patient at his request that he can take (or not) at a time of his own choosing to end his life (Thomson, 1999). Irrespective of the many ethical concerns surrounding it, physician-assisted suicide is still legal in different countries and states of the world, including North Carolina, Washington, Ohio, Utah, Oregon, and Montana. Different people have different philosophical, moral, and ethical grounds upon which they argue for or against physician-assisted suicide. 

II.	Body Paragraph 1 – Technical aspects of physician-assisted death
a.	Topic Sentence: The rise of modern industrialized medicine in the recent past has made dying to be a process commonly accompanied by technological interventions.
i.	The most frequently used technical interventions in physician-assisted death include chemotherapy, painkillers, feeding tubes and transfusions.
ii.	In many countries, physician-assisted death is not prosecuted provided the doctor’s main intention is to ease patient suffering (Martin, 2010).
iii.	Though chances of dying have been reduced by rapidly developing technology to extend life, such technology is under the control of the medical doctors, which is the reason why physician-assisted death is still common.

III.	Body Paragraph 2 – Public policy debates surrounding physician-assisted suicide
a.	Transition: Physician-assisted suicide is a very controversial topic that has attracted a wide range of opinions by way of heated and polarized debates.
b.	Topic Sentence: The public discourse surrounding the ethical and legal status of physician-assisted suicide is highly critical as it cuts to the very heart of human rights policy and ethics.
i.	In legal terms, physician-assisted suicide is equated to murder, something that makes most debaters consider it an illegal act that should be prohibited.
ii.	Considering the human rights policy, no person has the right to take his own life or take another person’s life, which deems physician-assisted suicide ultra-vires to the human rights policy.
iii.	On ethical grounds, physician-assisted suicide is an altruistic way of helping a patient not to suffer too much pain, but also inappropriate as it perpetrates crime (Thomson, 1999).

IV.	Body Paragraph 3 -Arguments for Physician-assisted suicide
a.	Transition: Though being a highly controversial topic, there are people who strongly believe that physician-assisted suicide is an appropriate practice.
b.	Topic Sentence: Proponents of physician-assisted suicide argue that rest is more just than pain.
i.	Physician-assisted suicide helps the terminally ill patient to stop feeling pain and get eternal rest by dying.
ii.	Physician-assisted suicide is done out of the full will of the patient and the doctor does nothing wrong but a good thing to help a terminally ill patient to fulfil his/her will (Thomson, 1999).
iii.	Majority of terminally ill patients subsequently end up dying and physician-assisted suicide ends their life before too much resources are unnecessarily wasted on such patients.

V.	Body Paragraph 4 – Arguments against Physician-assisted suicide
a.	Transition: Despite having justifiable benefits, many people do not support the practice of physician-assisted suicide.
b.	Topic Sentence: The notion that a physician would help a voluntary patient to die is philosophically, morally, and ethically repugnant to many people.
i.	It is only the Almighty who has the authority over life hence physician-assisted suicide is against the divine law (Burdette, et al., 2005). 
ii.	All people have the moral duty to help others overcome their difficulties. Physician-assisted suicide does not help but kills helpless people and thus not a moral act (Weir, 1992).
iii.	Doctors only treat, but the Almighty heals. The doctors’ determination that a terminally ill patient will not recover is a subjective opinion that should not be used to end one’s life hence physician-assisted suicide is inappropriate.

VI.	Opinion and Conclusion
a.	Transition: From the above discussion, it is evident that different people have different philosophical, moral, and ethical grounds upon which they argue for or against physician-assisted suicide.
b.	Statement of Opinion: Physician-assisted suicide is more beneficial than disadvantageous as it helps terminally ill patients overcome pain through undergoing a peaceful death.

References
Burdette, A. M., Hill, T. D., & Moulton, B. E. (2005). Religion and Attitudes Toward Physician‐Assisted Suicide and Terminal Palliative Care. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 44(1), 79-93.
Martin, B. (2010). Techniques to pass on: technology and euthanasia. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(1), 54-59.
Thomson, J. J. (1999). Physician-assisted suicide: Two moral arguments. Ethics, 109(3), 497-518.
Weir, R. F. (1992). The Morality of Physician‐Assisted Suicide. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 20(1‐2), 116-126.