Man's chief purpose it is Live, not to

I shall not waste my days trying to

n -- Jack London (1876-1916) (Burnell, p. 103)

Up until 1976, the right to die was not a consideration among terminally ill patients. Euthanasia was only thought of for animals. But ever since Karen Ann Quinlan case (1976), the right to die has been a controversial issue. It has opened the eyes of patients, their families, and their doctors. They all have their own opinions and aspects of the question, but those whose decisions should be respected? (Burnell, p.104)

This question is different for a terminally ill patient and for the person who is well. From the patient's viewpoint, they should have the freedom to choose. If they have a short time before death then the death usually comes without complications of decision-making.

The court has established three standards with witch to base their decisions regarding right to life. They are:

The best and probably most popular illustration of the right to die is the case of Karen Ann Quinlan. She was only twenty-one years old when she was rushed to New Jersey Hospital having overdosed on valium, methadone, heroin, and cocaine with alcohol while celebrating her birthday on April 15, 1975. (Humphry, p. 107) Karen's friends had noticed unusual behavior as a result of the drugs, and later found that she was not breathing. They attempted to revive her but failed. With the help of a rescue squad her breathing was restored and she was rushed to the hospital. She arrived in a comatose state and was kept alive with the help of a respirator. Even though she was not considered "brain dead" the damage was irreparable. After three month, Joseph Quinlan, Karen's father signed a release to permit the doctors to remove all life support. The doctor refused to remove the respirator stating that to do so was homicide. Joseph Quinlan took the case to court. The Quinlans who are Catholic, sought advice from their priest. Catholic doctrine makes the distinction between taking a life on not using artificial means to keep a life when all else is hopeless. The courts ruled in favor of the hospital but the Quinlans appealed the ruling through the New Jersey Supreme Court. One year later, on March 31, 1976 the Supreme Court granted the wishes of the Quinlans and Karen was removed from the respirator. From the hospital, Karen was moved to a nursing home where she stayed in her vegetative state for nine more years. Barely weighing seventy pounds, she survived on her nasogastic feedings and antibiotics. In June of 1985, Karen Ann Quinlan died. As a result of this case fifty bills were introduced in thirty-eight states in 1977, on behalf of the right to die. (Humphry, p. 108)

Patients do not want to prolong the dying process, if they have the choice to stop the suffering and chronic pain. The patient does not want to prolong life, if it is not considered living. They want to have the freedom to choose and the right to die, and to die with dignity.

But if the death is prolonged and the patient is lingering, the patient may decide whether continuing treatment is still worthwhile. The patient tends to feel that there is no useful purpose to living.

2. Best Interest Standard: This is based on those who know the patient and believe that it is in the best interest of the patient to remove life support.

--George Annas, medical ethicist and attorney (Burnell, p. 99)

Some common words found in the essay are:
Ann Quinlan, Pius XII, Lord Job, Hospice Palliative, Supreme Court, Nancy Cruzan, Jersey Hospital, Quinlans Catholic, AD Burnell, Standard Based, supreme court, terminally ill, karen ann, ill patient, terminally ill patient, karen ann quinlan, ann quinlan, remove life support, remove life, life support, feeding tube, pain suffering, assisted suicide, role determining someone's, determining someone's die,
Approximate Word count = 2131
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page double spaced)