Assisted Death can be seen as a controversial subject because it begs the question of what is death and how valuable life is. Death is seen as a taboo subject because no living person officially knows what occurs or what it actually is. The only common outlook on death is that everyone will eventually die. With this misconstrued idea of death, the topic of assisted death becomes confusing. Religion, perspective and circumstances shape my view towards assisted death. With each assisted death, I agree the most with active voluntary euthanasia and voluntary euthanasia because the patient makes the choice towards their own life and they are able to avoid the torture of pain or sickness that is caused by with-held medical treatments. That procedure is morally permissible. With assisted death, the patient/individual 's perspective on it is the most significant. Autonomy should matter the most when concerning assisted death. Derek Humphrey of the Hemlock Society wrote "...If you can 't eat, sleep, or read, and the quality of life is so bad, and there is a certainty that you are dying, it is a matter of dignity to be able to end your life."(Pence 51) Humphrey 's statement goes along with my moral perspective on assisted death. The death should be done only when the patient 's situation is unlivable. I go against the natural law theory 's principle of totality where I believe an individual can choose whatever they want to do with their own body once they are stable and competent. Life is a gift from God but if the individual can not physically or emotionally deal with life because it is severely drastic, they should have the option to rely on assisted death. In Case #1, the woman in her 70s simply can be depressed and devastated due to her condition.
…show more content…
The combination of diabetes and partial paralyzation is most likely wearing on her mental and emotional state. The Supreme Court 's decision to allow the woman to die by denying her food and medical aid is morally impermissible. In order to make it morally permissible, the nursing home should have a psychology counselor look over the woman to evaluate her decision of wanting to die. It is also morally impermissible because the denial of food and medical aid goes against her basic needs. The ultimate decision towards death should be left up to the patient. Due to her refusal of food, water, and insulin, her decision to die does not seem to be final. If death was something that she truly wanted it would have been asked for immediately. I agree with Justice Chris Kourakis who claims that the patient 's self-starvation is not considered suicide. The patient is not terminal so the nursing home should continue to provide her with basic necessities since her decision to die isn 't final. Her decision to starve may be a cry for help or a method of control. Since she can not control her illness on her own she may want a sense of control through her starvation. The denial of food and insulin will take time to take a toll on her body which will make her death process longer. In Case #2, the patient with AIDS was terminal and was painfully waiting for his death. He made the decision to make a contract with his gay lover, Ray Gosling, to kill him if the pain got worse and if there was nothing that the doctor can do. Ray Gosling obeyed the contract and killed his gay lover by smothering him with a pillow. This situation followed active voluntary euthanasia therefore it is morally permissible. The patient made a decision towards his life and since he was unable to take his life by himself, Ryan committed the assisted death. It is morally permissible because the patient lived in an era where there was no cure or treatment for AIDS so death was the only outcome within his situation and the patient ultimately made his own decision towards his life. The patient 's quality of life was inevitably bad because it can be assumed that he was in the last stages of AIDS. Everything in his body was most likely withering away as he faced pain. Gosling 's action goes against the natural law theory because he did not allow
The combination of diabetes and partial paralyzation is most likely wearing on her mental and emotional state. The Supreme Court 's decision to allow the woman to die by denying her food and medical aid is morally impermissible. In order to make it morally permissible, the nursing home should have a psychology counselor look over the woman to evaluate her decision of wanting to die. It is also morally impermissible because the denial of food and medical aid goes against her basic needs. The ultimate decision towards death should be left up to the patient. Due to her refusal of food, water, and insulin, her decision to die does not seem to be final. If death was something that she truly wanted it would have been asked for immediately. I agree with Justice Chris Kourakis who claims that the patient 's self-starvation is not considered suicide. The patient is not terminal so the nursing home should continue to provide her with basic necessities since her decision to die isn 't final. Her decision to starve may be a cry for help or a method of control. Since she can not control her illness on her own she may want a sense of control through her starvation. The denial of food and insulin will take time to take a toll on her body which will make her death process longer. In Case #2, the patient with AIDS was terminal and was painfully waiting for his death. He made the decision to make a contract with his gay lover, Ray Gosling, to kill him if the pain got worse and if there was nothing that the doctor can do. Ray Gosling obeyed the contract and killed his gay lover by smothering him with a pillow. This situation followed active voluntary euthanasia therefore it is morally permissible. The patient made a decision towards his life and since he was unable to take his life by himself, Ryan committed the assisted death. It is morally permissible because the patient lived in an era where there was no cure or treatment for AIDS so death was the only outcome within his situation and the patient ultimately made his own decision towards his life. The patient 's quality of life was inevitably bad because it can be assumed that he was in the last stages of AIDS. Everything in his body was most likely withering away as he faced pain. Gosling 's action goes against the natural law theory because he did not allow