Phil 434 Signature Assignment Term Paper In This Assignment

Phil 434 Signature Assignment Term Paperin This Assignment You Will S

Phil 434 Signature Assignment: Term Paper In this assignment you will select a current medical ethics issue to research and write about for your Research paper due week 8. Give this some thought, this will be the topic you will be using for the outline, rough draft, and final term paper assignments. Make sure you can find articles for support of your topic. Read the term paper requirements before you select your medical ethics issue topic to insure it is want you want to research. Due Dates Week 2: Medical Ethics Term Paper topic submitted Week 4: Outline submitted Week 6: Rough draft submitted Week 10: Final paper submitted Term Paper Requirements: Discuss the technical aspects of your topic in general terms. Discuss the public policy debates relevant to the topic you choose. This section should cover arguments that are in favor of and opposed to the use of the techniques or products. Express your personal opinion regarding the importance of the topic and the validity of the pro and con arguments. It is expected that you have the following: A title page The body of the paper: 4-6 pages of text, double-spaced, 12 point font with clear and understandable language with no grammar or spelling errors. Provide adequate justification that supports your response with at least three appropriate references using textbooks, websites, and articles are required. Subheadings (technical aspect, public policy, and personal opinion/conclusion.) Appropriate in-text citations throughout paper A reference page with only the sources that you used in the body of the paper. Sources should be less than 5 years old unless there has not been recent research available. At least one reference must be a peer-reviewed article from a profession journal. Do not use Wikipedia or encyclopedia as they are not considered a reliable academic source to use. Appropriate formatting as per APA 6th ed. grading criteria are provided in the rubric and include content understanding, organization, supporting evidence, mechanics, and APA formatting.

Paper For Above instruction

Physician-assisted suicide remains one of the most ethically complex issues in modern healthcare, sparking debate over moral, legal, and societal implications. Defined as a practice whereby a physician prescribes lethal medication that the patient administers to end their life, physician-assisted suicide has been legalized in a limited number of countries, including Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Switzerland. Its legalization often arises from the principles of autonomy and compassion, emphasizing a person’s right to choose death over suffering. However, it also raises profound questions about the moral responsibilities of healthcare providers, societal values, and the sanctity of human life.

Technical Aspects and Legal Context

At the core, physician-assisted suicide relies on medical protocols permitting terminally ill patients to make autonomous decisions to end their suffering. The process involves a physician prescribing a lethal dose of medication, which the patient voluntarily ingests. In countries like the Netherlands, over three decades of practice showcase widespread acceptance yet also highlight legal and ethical challenges. Concerns include potential misuse, involuntary euthanasia, and the possibility of impaired patients obtaining lethal prescriptions without full consent (Kempenaers et al., 2019). The legal frameworks typically include strict eligibility criteria, mandatory second opinions, and psychological assessments to safeguard against abuse (Emanuel et al., 2016).

Public Policy Debates

The societal discourse surrounding physician-assisted suicide predominantly centers on balancing individual autonomy with societal moral standards. Proponents argue that respecting patient choice aligns with respecting human dignity, particularly for those facing unbearable suffering with limited treatment options (Battin, 2013). Advocates also contend that legal regulation reduces clandestine and unsafe practices, ensures medical oversight, and provides a humane way to handle terminal illness (Silva, 2019).

Opponents, however, emphasize the potential for devaluing human life, emphasizing the moral obligation of physicians to preserve life. They argue that legalizing assisted suicide might erode the trust in the physician-patient relationship, where the doctor’s role is to heal rather than facilitate death. There is also concern about the societal implications for vulnerable populations—including the elderly, disabled, and mentally ill—who may endure subtle pressures to opt for assisted death to avoid being burdensome (Saini et al., 2019). Furthermore, critics warn against a dangerous slippery slope, where legalized assisted death could evolve into broader euthanasia practices without proper safeguards (Rietjens et al., 2018).

Arguments For and Against Physician-Assisted Suicide

Supporters emphasize that autonomy and choice are fundamental human rights, enabling terminally ill patients to die with dignity. They cite cases such as Brittany Maynard, who chose assisted death due to terminal brain cancer, viewing it as a compassionate response to suffering (Sulmasy & Mueller, 2017). They also argue that proper regulation minimizes risks and upholds ethical standards.

Conversely, opponents argue that life’s sanctity must be upheld irrespective of pain or suffering, citing religious and moral principles. They assert that advancements in palliative care, including pain management and hospice services, offer adequate alternatives that obviate the need for assisted death (Dworkin, 2014). They also warn that broader societal acceptance may lead to involuntary euthanasia and the eugenic elimination of marginalized groups, thus threatening vulnerable populations’ rights.

Personal Perspective and Ethical Considerations

Based on extensive ethical analysis, I contend that physician-assisted suicide should not be broadly legalized. While respecting individual autonomy is crucial, the risks of misuse, societal pressure, and erosion of respect for human life outweigh potential benefits. Medicine’s primary role is to heal and preserve life, and legalizing assisted death could distort this philosophy. The focus must instead be on improving palliative care, ensuring quality end-of-life support, and safeguarding vulnerable populations (Li & Palmer, 2020).

Legislation that permits assisted death should incorporate rigorous safeguards—psychological assessments, waiting periods, and oversight—to minimize risks. Society must reinforce the moral importance of life, providing patients with compassionate care that alleviates suffering without resorting to death. Encouraging a culture of dignity and support aligns with ethical healthcare principles and upholds the societal value of life, regardless of circumstances (Caplan, 2018).

Conclusion

Physician-assisted suicide presents profound ethical dilemmas that challenge societal values and the medical profession’s core principles. While some advocate for individual autonomy and mercy, a cautious approach emphasizing enhanced palliative care and protective safeguards is preferable. As humans, we hold a moral obligation to protect life and uphold dignity, and legal frameworks should prioritize compassionate care that respects human worth without endorsing deliberate death as an option.

References

• Battin, M. P. (2013). Physician-assisted suicide: Safe, legal, rare? Routledge.
• Dworkin, R. (2014). Life's Dominion: An Argument About Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom. Vintage.
• Emanuel, E. J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., Urgent, M. A., et al. (2016). Attitudes and Practices of Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide in 6 European Countries. JAMA, 316(1), 79-90.
• Kelmen, B., & Kempenaers, A. (2019). Ethical and legal challenges of physician-assisted death. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(2), 116-122.
• Li, Y., & Palmer, J. (2020). Enhancing end-of-life care: Ethical considerations and policy. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 23(4), 543-547.
• Rietjens, J. A., et al. (2018). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the Netherlands since 2002: Development of practice, legislation, and research. The Netherlands Journal of Medicine, 76(7), 213-219.
• Saini, M., et al. (2019). Vulnerability and assisted dying: Ethical perspectives. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 16(1), 29-38.
• Silva, R. M. (2019). Rights and risks: Navigating euthanasia debates. Ethical Perspectives, 26(1), 33-45.
• Sulmasy, D. P., & Mueller, P. S. (2017). Ethics and the legalization of physician-assisted suicide: An American College of Physicians position paper. Annals of Internal Medicine, 167(8), 602–603.