Suicide
Suicide is defined as an intentional and uncoerced self-killing in which the conditions causing are self-arranged. Suicide has been condemned as necessarily immoral by most western religions and also by many philosophers. It is argued that suicide defies the will of God, that it is socially harmful and that it is opposed to nature, thereby degrading humanity by treating themselves as a thing rather than as a unique human being. The applied ethical issue of suicide focuses on two problems of whether suicide is permissible, and if so whether suicide intervention is permissible. Although many ethical issues emerged only recently, the issue of the moral permissibility of suicide has long been a history in a philosophical discussion. The ancient Stoics condoned suicide, but they believed in universal human freedom. Depriving any group of individuals or any person of freedom of choice, whether subtly, is contradictorily opposed to the principles. Many critics of the view that demands the right to suicide point out that, while liberty for some may result, others lose their freedom - older people who would not choose to willing but would be pressure into the choice by family members or doctors, as well as those who might make an irration
The dilemma has led some activists to justify physician assistance in suicide on the basis of patients rights and the duties required of the caregiver in order to guarantee the free exercise of those rights has set guidelines for ethical care of the intractably suffering, dying patient (Dempsey, 1977). For example the highest value for suffering, terminally ill patients is to maintain control and dignity in dying by preserving the right to self-determination. When there is no longer any value reasonable possibility to maintain control or dignity, there is no significant moral distinction between allowing such a patient to die and actually causing death. And when a cure is no longer possible, the most important aspect of the physician's care of the patient is the relief of unbearable suffering - essentially the caregiver provides those services dictated by the consumer's autonomous choice (Malcolm, p13). Consequently, if the physician's ultimate role is viewed as the relief of suffering, then he can in good conscience continue to fulfill his contractual obligation to the patient by providing the autonomously chosen "service" of assisted suicide (Malcolm, p13). As long as the intent of what people consider therapy, would be a sense of relief from suffering, therefore it would de just as moralistic for a person a caregiver to withdraw life support from one patient as to prescribe lethal drug for another. al choice for death when they were temporarily in pain that was adequately controlled, those suffering from the effects of disease, or those who are severely depressed or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, which depicts a "rational" decision impossible. In conclusion, suicide is viewed by many as a "cure" for dying, especially for older, sicker individuals. It is important for example to provide care for dying older individuals in the form of adequate pain relief and emotional support and comfort rather than offering a cure in the form of suicide. But as a society we can choose to see suicide among older persons as a rational decision, in the best interest of the individual and the society, we can see it as a tragedy - in many cases, a preventable tragedy. Also it is not life but the right to life that a just system of law ought to protect. Thus if one is chooses to exercise this right by committing suicide that violates no one else's rights, one has the right to do so. To secure assistance for this, however, it must be carried out with great care and professional assistance and should be considered okay but only when thoroughly limited to a certain extent by legal care. Most supporters of the right to die and of the "death with dignity", as well as those who favor rational suicide and legalized assisted suicide for the old, argue from the perspective of terminal illness and pain and suffering. For instance, Plato opposed suicide since it "frustrates the decree of destiny"(Plato, 1993); he also argued "the gods are our guardians, and that we are a possession of theirs, then there may be reason in saying that a man should wait, and not take his own life until God summons him, as he is now summoning me"(Plato, 1993). Aristotle also opposed suicide since it is "contrary to the rule of life"(Aristole, p8). Greek and Roman philosophers approved of suicide as a means of ending suffering. Additionally, the perception the life is meaningless, in terms of one afflicted by suffering or not - that most decision to hasten death. Maybe the question not be "How bad am I suffering?" but "Where can I seek meaning in life, once caught in the jaws of suffering?"(Fairlie, p206) It certainly would be nice if all patients could find such a meaning through suffering. But it is clear that some who suffer never seem to respond with any hope for meaning in life, while others with perhaps
Some common words found in the essay are:
Oregon Measure, Epictetus Voltaire, , According Kant, David Hume, Greek Roman, Nile River, Seneca Seneca, Porcius Cato, Immanuuel Kant, assisted suicide, health care, traditional christian, health care workers, control dignity, terminally ill, care workers, voltaire 1824, suicide violates, farlie p206, terminal illness, suffering terminal illness, nature own happiness, maintain control dignity, death entirely god,
Approximate Word count = 2574
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
