Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The Right-to-Die bill is a proposed law that is aimed at giving authority to terminally ill patients to end their lives through the assistance of a physician. Currently, six American states allow citizens to opt for physician-assisted suicide rather than continue suffering. In addition, to the six states, the District of Columbia allows physician assisted death. The issue of physician-assisted death has become controversial and as a result, it has attracted the attention of experts from various fields including religion, medicine, politics, and the academe. The Right-to-Die bill should be passed because a right-to-die legislation would alleviate a patients suffering, allow them to die with dignity, reduce healthcare financial burden on the family, and give patients the opportunity to bid family members farewell and therefore, die peacefully.
End suffering and death with dignity
Many terminally ill patients undergo great suffering because of the excruciating physical and psychological pain that they experience due to their illnesses. In certain cases, there is little or no hope of recovery. Therefore, ending life would be the best solution to such suffering. It should be considered a criminal act for anyone to make a patient continue living who does not want to because of the suffering experienced. Death is the only way that pain and suffering can come to an end. In that regard, patients who wish to avoid suffering through death should not be prevented from ending their lives (Cholbi and Varelius 54).
The right-to-die legislation would also give individuals an opportunity to die with dignity. In many cases, some people die after losing their physical and mental capacities completely. In such cases, they die without dignity. Some illnesses lead to the disintegration of certain faculties that lower a human being to the level of an animal. The Supreme Court has made several key decisions regarding critical issues such as a patients right to refuse medication and the right to abortion (Hardes 66).
This implies that individuals have a protected liberty that allows them to choose whether to end their life in order to bring intolerable suffering to an end. Opponents of Right-to-Die legislation argue that assisted death is against the Hippocratic Oath that requires physicians to do no harm to patients. However, the admonition to do no harm can apply to assisting patients end their suffering through death. Prolonging the life of someone who considers it as a burden because the suffering is intolerable is harmful (Cholbi and Varelius 55).
Reduce financial burden on families
The financial cost of taking care of terminally ill patients is usually high and a burden to patients and their families. Many families struggle to pay healthcare bills in hopeless cases that could be handled by giving patients the freedom to choose death. A study conducted by Mount Sinai School of Medicine has shown that Medicare beneficiaries spend at least $39,000 during the last five years of their lives (Hardes 69).
People with terminal illnesses spend approximately $66,000 to cater for their healthcare needs. The costs of healthcare that people incur near the end of life are so high that many households struggle to get the money (Cholbi and Varelius 63). healthcare services near end of life are expensive because may families believe in paying for aggressive and advanced medical interventions that they think are the solutions to their loved ones pain and suffering. If a patient wants to die rather than continue living and suffering, there is no reason to deny them their wish.
Bid farewell to loved ones
Finally, a Right-to-Die legislation would give patients an opportunity to bid farewell to their families, prepare a will, and die peacefully in the knowledge that their loved ones are not psychologically suffering because of their predicaments (Hardes 75). Many patients never get the opportunity to say goodbye to their loved ones because they die unexpectedly and in a lot of pain. Giving patients the freedom to choose to end their lives would give them adequate time to make peace with life and spend their last moments with their loved ones (Cholbi and Varelius 83).
Moreover, patients die peacefully because they die knowing that they will not cause more pain to their loved ones. The loss of independence and the discrimination associated with certain illnesses are unbearable because patients watch as their loved ones grieve and suffer because of their situations (Hardes 89). The psychological, financial, and spiritual support offered to patients takes a toll on families if given for long periods of time. Patients can also get the opportunity to write their last wishes and make amends.
Conclusion
Only six states and the District of Columbia have right-to-die laws. The Right-to-Die bill should be passed by the other states because it allows patients to die with dignity, reduces healthcare financial burden of families, gives patients the opportunity to die with dignity and the chance to say goodbye to loved ones. It is necessary to enact more rights to patients with terminal illnesses in order to give them the freedom to choose to die in order to end their pain and the suffering of their loved ones.
Works Cited
Cholbi, Michael, and Jukka Varelius. New Directions in the Ethics of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Springer, 2015.
Hardes, Jennifer. Law, Immunization and the Right to Life. Routledge, 2016.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.