2. The article was published in the New England Journal of Medicine

3. The article was published in January 1997

4. The author could be in the medical profession or not, maybe the author has had something bad to them and is relating some of type of story to us. The title and the author reveal little to me except that there is an underlying tone of why the author is writing the article.

5. The working claim of the article is; that the patient has the ultimate right and no one else, not the doctor, lawyers, politicians, judges or anyone else who think that they have a right to interfere with the rights of people who what to take their own life. They can be only judged by one person, if they believe in that person.

6. At sometime this year the Supreme Court will have to make a decision that will affect the entire population of the United States, that decision will to permit doctors to help their patient take their own lives. If the Supreme Court allows this, doctors in 12 states would be allowed to assist in physician assisted suicide.

In 1994 the state of Oregon became the first state to allow such a law, however it is in suspension. S

7. The story about her father is a great underlying section of her life that she will have to live with for the rest of her life. She takes the stand that if assisted suicide were available to her father at the time he was thinking of committing the act of suicide that he might have thought of the assisted suicide as a different approach. To understand her views really would have to have a common ground for me to take in regards to her approach. Although, having two sets of elderly grandparents and knowing what their decisions are in regards to assisted suicide I can identify with her feelings toward the subject.

The author lists several arguments against physician-assisted suicide, and discusses them why she believes they are unpersuasive.

Assisted suicide would be a threat to the economical and socially vulnerable. The poor, disabled, and elderly might coerced to request it. This would have to be taken into consideration, but when after Roe vs. Wade they thought the same thing as well. This is understandable in this era with managed care. But, the main question is to what we are going to do to make sure that this doesn't happen.

Of the three methods to hasten death in the medical profession, withdrawing life sustain treatment, assisting suicide, and euthanasia. The right to stop treatment has been allowed since 1976. Where euthanasia is illegal in all 50 states, assisted suicide is illegal in most of them. Why then would there have to different distinctions? The doctor's role. The doctors roll is either passive or active. Passive being that when the life treatment is withdrawn, active is when euthanasia is administered. Assisted-suicide is in the middle. The distinctions are to doctor-centered, we should ask ourselves what is the role of the patient, active or passive? Passive being when the patient is utterly incapacitated, but an active stance is required for assisted-suicide.

This impossible in the medical profession. The right to terminate treatment could be shown to have fallacies toward abuse, however assisted suicide cannot, it requires the

Some common words found in the essay are:
Court Appeals, Association AMA, Supreme Court, Journal Medicine, assisted suicide, Marcia Angell, physician-assisted suicide, Suicide Choose, medical profession, assisted suicide available, suicide available father, supreme court, suicide available, assisting suicide, withdrawing life, doing themselves, die slowly, available father,
Approximate Word count = 1398
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)