Politics paper

Politics paper - Politics 220 Paper 0163140 Julia Bielaski...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Politics 220 Julia Bielaski Paper 0163140 Mark Twain once said, “Don’t go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first.” The meaning of life and if a given person is worthy enough to live are rather touchy subjects. That is why physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia bring about tremendous controversy among doctors, nurses, and the general public. The two terms must not be confused. Physician-assisted suicide is where the patient actually takes the steps to bring about death. The doctor simply provides the tools, like barbiturates. Voluntary euthanasia, on the other hand, is where the patient desires to end his or her own life so the physician performs the act to satisfy their desire. ( The Atlantic , 1997) The process usually involves an injection to put the patient in a coma. Then the physician stops the patient’s respiration with an injection of a neuromuscular relaxant, which causes the patient to die. ( Sage , 2003) Many states in the U.S. have been debating if the procedures should be legalized, but of course there are plenty of moral and ethical issues involved that prevent any progress from being made. According to the New York Times, the Obama administration is in favor of rationing medical treatment based on age and health. On the subject of health care, the U.S. spends almost double the amount on it than any other developed nation. America is heading toward accepting physician-assisted suicide basically because it means that the people can control mortality. ( The New York Times , 2009) To be clear, there is no evidence that rationing would come from legalizing physician-assisted suicide. However, a journalist from The Atlanta made an excellent argument that said, “Once legalized, euthanasia would become routine. Over time doctors would
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
become comfortable giving injections to end life and Americans would become comfortable having euthanasia as an option.” The common goal in the average human being is to be in control. ( The New York Times , 2009) Assisted suicide and euthanasia come in to action because people cannot control death. The public wants the right to choose, or rather the ability to choose life or death. Having that choice would eventually lead to people choosing to die because life doesn’t seem worth living even though there are better options available. ( The New England Journal of Medicine , 1996) The slow death of a loved one would become an issue with a solution rather than a trial to be overcome. If a law was passed legalizing the procedures, the United States would most likely pushed to have it be covered in health insurance plans. ( The New York Times , 2009) Then if health care is reformed, most Americans will have free or moderately cheap access to euthanasia and assisted-suicide. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have been significant issues for more than
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 7

Politics paper - Politics 220 Paper 0163140 Julia Bielaski...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online