Many people who are suffering from a long-term or terminal illness wish to end their suffering in a humane and dignified way. This has recently become a controversial topic in the United States as more people advocate for the right to end their own lives. Today, there are a handful of assisted suicide states in America that allow this.
Currently, Washington, Vermont and Oregon allow physician-assisted deaths. Montana and New Mexico may soon allow this due to recent court cases that may be appealed. The main argument against this practice is that allowing doctors to help patients to end their life violates their Hippocratic Oath, which all doctors have traditionally taken. The Hippocratic Oath basically promises to do no harm to a patient. There are also various religious objections to this practice as well, from both Christian and non-Christian faiths.
There is also a concern about prejudices against the disabled arising from these laws. This is because do not resuscitate orders are more often used for a person who is hospitalized with a severe disability. A person with a lifelong disability may also suffer from burn out and feelings of depression from many years of prejudice and intolerance in society. These individuals are believed to be more likely to refuse treatment and therefore end their lives prematurely.
In December 2009, the Supreme Court of Montana ruled that there was nothing in the law of the state which prevented a patient from asking for physician-assisted suicide. This essentially paved the way for these procedures in Montana. The Montana courts have also ruled that there is a constitutional right to privacy and that patients should have the dignity to die as they choose.
Medical ethics plays a large part in these recent debates. All doctors traditionally take the Hippocratic Oath, which states that they will not give a deadly medicine to anyone nor counsel them to take it. Therefore, helping someone to die this way contravenes this oath. There are many other similar pacts and oaths that adhere to this principle, such as the Declaration of Geneva and the International Code of Medical Ethics. But the main idea is that helping someone to die is against the principles of a being a good doctor.
So far, three different states have made laws allowing assisted suicide in very limited cases. The Oregon law allows physicians to give lethal medications to a terminally ill patient so that they can end their lives. However, this comes with specific steps, including a waiting period and various release forms that must be signed before the medication can be given. Vermont and Washington also have similar laws.
Many health care professionals oppose this practice due to the possible harmful effects it may have on certain vulnerable people. This is often called the slippery slope argument, which is based on the fear that once society permits assisted suicide or euthanasia for terminally ill people it will start to affect other vulnerable people as well, such as the disabled and the elderly. The concern is that it might be used by people who feel unworthy to live because of their age or disability.
New Mexico ruled recently that a terminally ill patient has a constitutional right to receive help in dying. While state law declares it a felony to help a person commit suicide, the judge in the case ruled that the constitutional right of the terminally ill person overruled the state law. Therefore, it is unclear if this ruling applies throughout all of New Mexico or only to the county where the ruling was made.
Currently, Washington, Vermont and Oregon allow physician-assisted deaths. Montana and New Mexico may soon allow this due to recent court cases that may be appealed. The main argument against this practice is that allowing doctors to help patients to end their life violates their Hippocratic Oath, which all doctors have traditionally taken. The Hippocratic Oath basically promises to do no harm to a patient. There are also various religious objections to this practice as well, from both Christian and non-Christian faiths.
There is also a concern about prejudices against the disabled arising from these laws. This is because do not resuscitate orders are more often used for a person who is hospitalized with a severe disability. A person with a lifelong disability may also suffer from burn out and feelings of depression from many years of prejudice and intolerance in society. These individuals are believed to be more likely to refuse treatment and therefore end their lives prematurely.
In December 2009, the Supreme Court of Montana ruled that there was nothing in the law of the state which prevented a patient from asking for physician-assisted suicide. This essentially paved the way for these procedures in Montana. The Montana courts have also ruled that there is a constitutional right to privacy and that patients should have the dignity to die as they choose.
Medical ethics plays a large part in these recent debates. All doctors traditionally take the Hippocratic Oath, which states that they will not give a deadly medicine to anyone nor counsel them to take it. Therefore, helping someone to die this way contravenes this oath. There are many other similar pacts and oaths that adhere to this principle, such as the Declaration of Geneva and the International Code of Medical Ethics. But the main idea is that helping someone to die is against the principles of a being a good doctor.
So far, three different states have made laws allowing assisted suicide in very limited cases. The Oregon law allows physicians to give lethal medications to a terminally ill patient so that they can end their lives. However, this comes with specific steps, including a waiting period and various release forms that must be signed before the medication can be given. Vermont and Washington also have similar laws.
Many health care professionals oppose this practice due to the possible harmful effects it may have on certain vulnerable people. This is often called the slippery slope argument, which is based on the fear that once society permits assisted suicide or euthanasia for terminally ill people it will start to affect other vulnerable people as well, such as the disabled and the elderly. The concern is that it might be used by people who feel unworthy to live because of their age or disability.
New Mexico ruled recently that a terminally ill patient has a constitutional right to receive help in dying. While state law declares it a felony to help a person commit suicide, the judge in the case ruled that the constitutional right of the terminally ill person overruled the state law. Therefore, it is unclear if this ruling applies throughout all of New Mexico or only to the county where the ruling was made.
About the Author:
You can visit fenregistration.org for more helpful information about Important Information About Assisted Suicide States.
