PAS: A Contentious Act of Freedom

Paper Summary:

The statement from which this paper derives its arguments is as follows: "Life is of ultimate value. It must be protected and preserved at all costs." In lieu of a generalist approach to this statement, this text focuses on the arguments for and against physician assisted suicide. The rationale for this approach arises from two reasons: (1) The ethical dilemmas which surround the protection and preservation of life become sharply distinct in end-of-life decisions, and (2) terminally ill and/or severely debilitated persons who wish to end their lives in a legally sanctioned and painless fashion have been, to date, unable to do so unless they are residents of the State of Oregon or live in the Netherlands. Therefore, the writer capitalizes on the original statement as a launching point to discuss the ethical issues which surround PAS (physician assisted suicide).

From the Paper:

"Using the principles of autonomy and beneficence, and the concepts of 'quality of life' and 'personal dignity,' the following paragraphs will attempt to argue for and against the practice of physician assisted suicide. From a utilitarian perspective, the rightness or wrongness of the act of voluntary active assisted suicide should be judged by its nonmoral results. In other words, does its result cause more pleasure than pain, or more benefit than harm (Beckwith, 2002). For an individual in protracted pain, the choice of a hastened death upholds these utilitarian criteria in the sense that pleasure would result by the ending of pain, and benefit would come from a sense of peace gained from acting upon one's autonomy as an individual and setting to rest the 'only property which I can call my own - my body.'"

More papers on PAS: A Contentious Act of Freedom:

• Argumentative Essay # 48686 : "U.S.A. Patriot Act"
• Analytical Essay # 52351 : "The U.S.A Patriot Act"
• Analytical Essay # 33154 : " "Abraham Lincoln and a New Birth of Freedom"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: