Many patients are admitted to hospital near the end of their lives or due to circumstances that portend the end of their lives. How a person dies, lives, and receives medical care at the end of life is important. All of these things affect not only that person directly, but also their family and the rest of society. The growing debate between physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia (PAS-E) has many ethical implications for those practicing in health care. The aim of this essay is to explore fundamental ethical issues related to PAS-E from the healthcare professional's perspective. The main areas of controversy that are highlighted in this essay are: the act of humanity, inalienable and natural rights, and preventing a terminally ill patient from ending his life by committing suicide. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayThe Right to Physician-Assisted SuicideThe right to die by assisted suicide/euthanasia (PAS-E) is a very controversial topic. Supporters of PAS-E believe that a terminally ill patient has the right to voluntarily end their life because allowing them to live with pain and suffering could be considered inhumane. PAS-E allows a patient to end their life peacefully, quickly and with compassion. Euthanasia is the act of ending life without pain or suffering, usually administered directly by a physician. An example of this is when a lethal injection is administered to the patient by a doctor. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a patient is prescribed a lethal dose of medication, which is administered not by the doctor but by the patient themselves. For example, withholding/discontinuing life-sustaining treatments, terminal sedation, or allowing a patient to take painkillers that may hasten death. The Canadian Medical Association describes the PAS-E process as follows: “the subject suffers from an incurable illness; the agent knows the person's condition; commits the act with the primary intention of ending that person's life; and the act is undertaken with empathy and compassion and without personal gain.” PAS-E should absolutely be a legal right for every person, because it is a human act, an inalienable and natural right, which prevents a terminally ill patient from having to end their life by hand by its own means. suicide. A person has the right to decide what they want to do with their own life. If an individual has the right to refuse life-saving medical treatment, why should they not have the right to end their own pain and suffering? Inalienable and natural rights are the rights that an individual possesses at birth. PAS-E is a right that certainly falls into this category. It is clearly stated in the Declaration of Independence that among these rights are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Given that the Declaration of Independence is essentially a blueprint for our rights as American citizens, it seems clear that the right to PAS-E should be legal throughout the United States of America. California is one state that has shown acceptance that PAS-E is an inalienable and natural right: "In 1992, members of Californian's against Human Suffering created and proposed Proposition 161 which would allow patients in phase terminal less than six months to live. the right to end one's life with the assistance of a doctor. Currently, California, Vermont, Oregon and Washington are the only US states that have legalized PAS-E, whileMontana only legalized it by court order. Countries other than the United States also participated in legalizing the right to PAS-E, including “Switzerland, the Netherlands, Japan, Mexico, Belgium, Colombia and Albania.” Many people agree that the right to PAS-E should be completely legal. There are many organizations around the world that have been established with the sole purpose of supporting the right to PAS-E and raising awareness and education on why it is an inalienable and natural right. Some of these organizations include: the National Death with Dignity Center, the Euthanasia Research & Guidance Organization (ERGO), and the Euthanasia Educational Council (EEC), to name a few. These organizations play an important role in educating individuals about the truths and positive aspects of PAS-E. Alongside the issue of patient rights, autonomy also comes into play: “Ethical arguments in favor of physician-assisted suicide emphasize the principle of respect for patient autonomy and a broad interpretation of the physician's duty to relieve suffering. Not allowing PAS-E is inhumane based on various aspects. Allowing an individual to die slowly while suffering and experiencing excruciating pain can comparatively be considered torture. Why should it be widely accepted that an animal, which has emotions, cognitive thinking skills and can feel pain, is put out of its misery by a lethal injection? but shouldn't a human have the same right? Since animals do not enjoy the same rights as humans, it would seem entirely appropriate not to grant them rights that humans are deprived of. Not only does PAS-E end the pain and suffering of a terminally ill person, it allows anyone emotionally involved in their life to feel less pain and enjoy peace. Watching a loved one suffer a horrible death can cause emotional and physical distress. Allowing PAS-E to be the choice of an individual who has no quality of life allows that individual to end their life with dignity rather than dying as someone they are ashamed or embarrassed about . When quality of life is compromised, a person may feel like they are living as a shadow of their former self. It is also difficult for family and loved ones to see a life collapse before their eyes. According to Ezekiel Emanuel of the University of Pennsylvania, “In the states of Oregon and Washington, the reasons for wanting a PAS were: 90% of patients reported a loss of autonomy, 90% were less able to engage in activities that make life enjoyable and 70% of patients reported a loss of autonomy. % reported a loss of dignity.” All of these reasons clearly highlight how ethical it is to deny a patient the right to die. Watching family members and loved ones suffer because of the pain and suffering a person faces can lead to a range of psychological problems in a terminally ill person. patient. The medical literature suggests that "the incidence of major depression in terminally ill patients ranges from 25% to 77%." Depression is both associated with intense suffering and is a cause of intense suffering.” Not only does depression cause additional suffering in a patient who is already suffering, it can eventually lead to suicide. Prolonging the life of a person who no longer wants to live can push them to take matters into their own hands. It is absolutely horrible that terminally ill patients feel the need to commit suicide, as if facing a=1