Blog 2

Yes, I would suggest that there is a public controversy surrounding the idea of assisted suicide. One that has become more prominent within the last ten years but also, like you said, seems to earn more attention through social media outbreak stories (like Brittany Maynard’s). Assisted suicide is something that is difficult to discuss, not only because of people’s conflicting views on the matter, but also because it’s an extremely uncomfortable topic for most. For this reason, I think stories of assisted suicide cases don’t stay in topic of discussion in the media or news for much longer than a couple weeks.

Several different narratives and articles have been published surrounding the assisted suicide controversy. There’s not just two simple opinions for something like this, a “yes” and “no” doesn’t really do this topic justice. Some articles are written by authors that have strong moral and religious beliefs. These articles will typically discuss why the idea of assisted suicide goes against certain religions and the common moral code of any person. Some articles argue that assisted suicide goes against the accepted laws of medical ethics, it is completely unacceptable for a doctor to aid in an ill person’s suicide. By doing this, will doctors have more time to treat patients with a “better shot” at life? Lastly, another argument that arose is that doctors should assist a suffering patient in committing suicide, if that is what they truly want. Since a doctor’s main “job” is to avoid pain and suffering, they should do whatever is necessary.

There are laws for assisted suicide in the United States right now. It is legal in only six states (Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Montana, Colorado and Washington DC). It is Illegal in most other states, including Pennsylvania, and under review in a few other states. There is clearly still a stigma about physician assisted suicide nationwide since it is only legal in a few states. For most patients who are terminally ill and wish to have access to this option, sometimes they won’t be able to because of their location. Brittany Maynard moved to Oregon just so it could be available to her.

In 1994 the Death with Dignity Act was passed in Oregon, since then it’s been legalized in the states I’ve mentioned before as well. People are really pushing for legalization of this in more states because of all apparent good it can do. For example, it allows patients to recollect dignity and reclaim confidence of their own bodies. Also, by making assisted suicide legal in more states it would lower the rates of hazardous substitutions like hanging oneself or shooting.


These things are great but people are also afraid of a “slippery slope where human life is devalued.” If assisted suicide is legalized will that put certain groups at risk such as the elderly, disabled, and the poor? People fear that we will be led down a path of “persuasive medical killing” if this becomes legalized. Physician’s feel conflicted when given this responsibility and don’t want to hold that type of god-like power in the medical world.

Comments

  1. You do a nice job here - especially in your final paragraph - of raising the sorts of questions that are part of this debate. Remember, however, that your paper is not about the relative merits of each position, or about the difficulty involved when making this sort of decision (that docs "don't want to hold that type of god-like power"). Rather, your paper ought to focus upon the broader narratives that have emerged from this debate - and how those narratives are wielded to influence public opinion.

    Consider the differences in the public debate when the subject was Dr. Kevorkian v. Brittany Maynard. Were the same issues and questions raised? What about during the Terri Schiavo case? Is the quality of the debate totally dependent upon the sort of incident that fosters the public attention? Does the debate which lingers after the event fades from public consciousness stay focused? Does that debate always turn toward the same themes?

    You do a pretty nice job of acknowledging the various issues that accompany this controversy. Remember that our goal in the class is to objectively analyze persuasive strategy and technique as observed in public discourse. Good stuff here. Let me know how I can help.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts