With Liberty and Justice for All

The debate of physician-assisted suicide has been one of great interest to many people. It is an issue that affects every person at some point in their lives. The topic of death is one that every individual will face for themselves as well as for their loved ones. “In February, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider the legality of the Bush administration’s effort to outlaw physician-assisted suicide in Oregon, Raising the possibility that a ruling by the Court during its next term could effectively invalidate the controversial law known as the Death with Dignity Act.”(Okie 1627)This law will enable terminally ill patients to end the suffering for themselves and for that of their loved ones. The two main ethic principles that play a major role in peoples decisions of when to end their suffering are patient’s autonomy and the utilitarian principle. This paper will examine both sides of the issue, however through the proof of the research, the final decision of patient-assisted suicide should be a viable solution to end the undo suffering of terminally ill patients.

As of today Oregon is the only state to have successfully passed bill allowing physician-assisted suicide known the Death with Dignity Act. This act allows physicians to write a prescription for a lethal dose of drugs that would kill the patent that has chosen suicide. “The Death with Dignity Act was a citizens' initiative passed twice by Oregon voters. The first time was in a general election in November 1994 when it passed by a margin of 51% to 49%. An injunction delayed implementation of the Act until it was lifted on October 27, 1997. In November 1997, a measure was placed on the general election ballot to repeal the Death with Dignity Act. Voters chose to retain the Act by a margin of 60% to 40%.”(oregon.gov). The belief of the opponents to this act is based on the utilitarian principle and that by allowing physician-assisted suicide the families would be suffering unnecessarily due to the decision made by the patient to end their lives. What the Supreme Court will have to decide is if the 14th Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to make their own decisions regarding their choice of life or death. This clause states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” (United States “Constitution”) This amendment guarantees that the citizens of the United States are allowed to pursue their own individual choices in life without the interference of the government. This law allows individuals who have chosen that they are unable and unwilling to continue with the suffering that they are experiencing due to their terminal illnesses, and be allowed to take their own lives.

Patient autonomy allows the patient and only the patient to make the final decision on the best course of medical treatment. Now, if that person chooses that their best course of treatment is to allow themselves to end their pain and suffering then the patients’ autonomy should be respected. On the other hand, there is the utilitarian principle, which states that people or patients should make decisions based and what would is best for the great good of the community. Some may argue that physician-assisted suicide since it would end unneeded pain for the patient and for the patient’s family may be considered as keeping to the utilitarian principle. There is no higher good than not wanting to see your family have to endure the view of a person’s pain and suffering of a loved one and just allow that pain to dissipate.

According to Kathleen Foley, who does not believe in physician-assisted suicide, “there are three major factors in suffering: pain and other physical symptoms, psychological distress, and existential distress”. (Foley 95) Her belief is that all of these factors can be treated without having to resort to suicide. With the issue of pain and suffering, “specialist in palliative care do not think they practice physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. Palliative medicine has developed guidelines for aggressive pharmacologic management of intractable symptoms in dying patients, including sedation for those near death” (Foley 96). Foley believes that with the advances in pharmacology today, most pain and suffering may be combated with rigorous amounts of pain killers and even in worst case scenarios sedation for those near death. This would allow for the disease and not the physicians to end the life of the patient without the patient undergoing any pain from their illness.

Another factor she believes is a reason that patient would ask for assisted suicide is the psychological distress that they are under when they are fighting a terminal disease. In her article she states that “physicians are inadequately trained