Evans 1

ReNae Evans
Kelly Turnbeaugh
English 1010
August 5, 2016
Annotated Bibliography: Euthanasia
I chose to do my issue exploration essay on the topic of euthanasia or physician assisted
suicide. I would hear stories of people wanting to end their life or their suffering from terminal
illnesses and having to move to a state where they could ask a doctor to prescribe them a lethal
dose of medicine. I wanted to learn more. I researched the background and the terms involved.
I looked into the options that terminal patients have when they are nearing the end of their lives.
I researched the law and what the people for and against had to say. I could never commit
suicide myself. I dont believe it is my right to take my life. I wanted to explore this topic and
learn why people did want to have the choice to end their lives. I wanted to know why other
people fight against them having a choice. Why has this topic been taboo?
Nordqvist, Christian. Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. Medical News Today.
MediLexicon, Intl, 8 April 2016. Web. 16 July 2016.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182951.php
Summary: The author, Christian Nordqvist editor of Medical News Today, explains the
terminology and medical definitions involved with the issue of euthanasia. He then lists the
options that patients who are terminal with intractable suffering and pain have in treatment and
refusing treatment. Nordqvist lists the highlights of the history of euthanasia from 460 BC

Evans 2

through March of 2009 when the State of Washington became the 2nd state to legalize physician
assisted suicide. He then lists arguments for and against voluntary euthanasia. He ends with the
results of a survey of American physicians opinions and the results of a literature review on who
opts for euthanasia in the countries where it is legal.
Evaluation: I chose this article as a source for my paper because it thoroughly explains
euthanasia and its context. Written by Christian Nordqvist an editor for Medical News Today a
market leader in health news on the internet. I thought the article was helpful for overall
education on the topic. It was unbiased information and came from a reliable source. I liked
how it explained the issue in clear, straight forward language easy to understand.
Reflection: I needed information. I didnt really know much about euthanasia until I
read this article. I hope the terminology and information will help me in my research efforts as
well as give me a good basic understanding for writing my essay. I learned terminally ill patients
do have some options. Palliative care is one I am not familiar with. I think I will research that
next.
PalliativeDoctors.org. American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
What is Palliative Care? Web. 22 July 2016.
Summary: In an article on the palliativedoctors.org website titled What is Palliative
Care? I learned that palliative care is the relieving or soothing of symptoms of a disease or
disorder while maintaining the highest possible quality of life for patients. Palliative medicine
can be provided by one doctor while other doctors work to cure the illness. The author states that
palliative care could possibly help people recover from their illnesses by relieving the more
stressful symptoms such as pain, anxiety or loss of appetite as they go through difficult medical

Evans 3

treatments. The article states that people of any age and in all stages of illness are eligible for
palliative care however financial coverage varies. The web-site explains that palliative care
doctors are specially trained and head the palliative team of nurses, social workers and other
medical, non-medical and volunteers who provide palliative care. The overall goal, according to
the author, is to improve the patients and their familys quality of life while they are ill. They
say hospice is a specific type of palliative care for people who have 6 months or less to live.
Evaluation: This article was found on palliativedoctors.org the patient web site for the
American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Palliative care is one of three major
legal options available to people who are terminally ill and suffering persistent and unstoppable
pain. I felt it was important to understand what it entailed and how it works. The article was a
good source for my paper because it is important to know what the options are. Palliative Care
in my words is the care to ease the suffering of the patient and improve their quality of life while
dying.
Reflection: There are a lot of palliative care physicians out there that believe they are able
to manage unbearable symptoms for terminally ill patients. I can see how palliative care could
be a great relief for some patients allowing them to enjoy the time they have remaining and
prepare themselves and loved ones for the coming death. I can also see how palliative care
might not be able to relieve the suffering in some cases. What about those people? This is just
an ugly topic. It points to the importance of having a living will. I guess it has to do with core
beliefs. Does anyone have the right to die? What does the law say?
Washington vs. Glucksberg. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University
Law School. Archive of Cases. 96-110. Web. 23 July 2016.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/521/702

Evans 4

Summary: The Supreme Court is the highest Court in the US judicial system. On June
26, 1997, it was decided that the right to assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamental
liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause. The syllabus attached to the court
documents on the website explained that the Court has a method to establish Due Process in two
primary ways. First, the Court has observed that the Clause protects those fundamental rights
and liberties which are based in the Nations history and tradition. Second, the Court requires a
careful description to be submitted of the asserted fundamental liberty interest. The Court
decided that the asserted right had no place in our Nations history and traditions and that the
submitted descriptions did not meet the requirement.
Evaluation: This information came from the case archives of Cornell University Law
School. The Legal Information Institute is a non-profit public service of Cornell Law School and
provides no-cost access to legal research. A syllabus was attached to the court documents that
was straight forward and explained how the Court made its decision regarding the Due Process
Clause. We do not have the right to assistance in killing ourselves according to the constitution.
The Cornell Law School seemed like a good source for reliable information.
Reflection: The further I get into this research, the more I wish I had chosen a different
topic. I wanted to know more, so this is me learning more. Each State has their own legislation
and statutes regarding assisted suicide. There are 5 states that currently have legalized physician
assisted suicide in some manner. I am glad the Supreme Court ruled as it did. We fight for our
freedoms and rights to live how we choose. We are here to live, experience life. Now we want
the right to die as we choose? That is scary to think about but maybe evolved times call for
different measures? I like that we are approaching the issue from the state government level. An

Evans 5

argument against this issue is the legal slippery slope. That seems like a good topic to research
next.
Physician-Assisted Suicide: The Legal Slippery Slope. The Division or
Medical Ethics and Humanities at the university of South Florida
College of Medicine. Cancer Control. 2001. Medscape.com/
viewarticle/409026_print. Web. 16 July 2016.
Summary: The author of the article states that there is significant public support for
legalizing physician assisted suicide (PAS) and voluntary euthanasia in the United States. The
author explains that the only defenses from sliding from PAS to voluntary euthanasia are relying
on traditional physician morality that stands against it and keeping the issue of voluntary
euthanasia framed in the context of homicide. The article states that if voluntary euthanasia
evolves as a medical choice issue, then it could possibly be legalized. The author explains that in
Oregon, the right allows competent terminally ill patients to request the prescription from a
physician then fill it and self-administer it. This gives the right to just one group of people. What
about the other groups of people? Dont they deserve the same rights? What about the rights of
the incompetent, then who administers the lethal dose? Hence slippery slope. The article states
that if the courts allow PAS to be framed in the context of a basic personal right, like the rights to
refuse treatment, then they will likely extend PAS to voluntary and in-voluntary euthanasia. The
article says that this would happen by extending the right to incapacitated patients, who may or
may not have expressed their choice for PAS prior to becoming incapacitated.
Evaluation: The Moffitt Cancer Center publishes a peer-reviewed journal called Caner
Control. I found this article in an issue of 2001. It is an older document but it explains one of
the main arguments against PAS. I think this article is a good source for my essay because it

Evans 6

explains how PAS could become unmanageable. I think it is a good portrayal of what could
happen using past experience. There are always people who contest the law. This paper is just a
theory of what could likely happen if laws are passed. The fear is for the incompetent and the
patients who will have the decision made for them by others. This argument speaks to pathos.
Fear is an unfortunate but great motivator for a lot of people.
Reflection: I think this is a realistic argument one that instills fear but forces one to look
down the road a little bit. Thinking about this legal slippery slope makes me think of the position
we are putting our physicians in. It also puts the families and loved ones of the patients that
want to end their lives in the same position. What about the incompetent? Physicians and family
members have been making these decisions all along in extreme situations. I guess the law of
assistance would allow it to happen before it was an extreme situation. What about the
physician? In my research I have not come across much, so far, where the physician is doing the
talking. I guess I will see what I can find.
Aguilera, Elizabeth. Doctors Debate the Ethics of Assisted Suicide. 89.3
KPCC. 18 May 2015. Web. 23 July 2016.
www.scpr.org/news/2015/05/18/51737/
Summary: Elizabeth Aguilera, a news reporter, wrote a news report titled Doctors
Debate the Ethics of Assisted Suicide. that was aired on the radio on May 18, 2015. She
interviewed doctors for and against the bill before the California legislature, SB 128 that if
passed, would legalize physician assisted suicide in California. Both groups of doctors, for and
against, point to the Hippocratic Oath and aphorism Do no harm as an argument. Aguilera
interviewed doctors all with differing viewpoints and experience. She reported that doctors for

Evans 7

the issue want to help their patients even through the dying process and that those against are
worried about potential abuses, lack of safeguards and patient trust.
Evaluation: I chose this article because I havent seen anything else like it in my
research. Reading this report, helped me to realize that doctors are people too. They have
feelings and beliefs that effect the way they respond to the issue. I chose this report because
California legislature did pass the bill and they are the fifth state to legalize physician assisted
suicide. The physicians voice is not united but varying just the way each doctor is different. This
article will help me present context on the issue of my essay.
Reflection: Doctors are people too. There seems to be no black and white in this issue no
wrong or right. A lot of heart rending stories and a lot of pain and suffering, but isnt that part of
the life experience? Do we take the easy way out? Or is it a final say of enough is enough?
Choice is the largest argument for assisted suicide.
Berry, Emily Lea. Physician-Assisted Suicide: Yes or No? The Great Debate.
Medscape. 07 January 2015. Web. 23 July 2016.
www.medscape.com/viewarticle/837390/
Summary: Berry wrote the article about an actual debate. There were two participants for
the issue of physician-assisted suicide and two were against. The first argument for the issue
titled Why America Needs Physician-Assisted Suicide: Andrew Solomon is the portion I want
to summarize. Solomon has a PhD, he is an author and a professor of clinical psychology at
Columbia University. He said that dignity is the main reason that this choice about dying should
be legal. He quoted a Supreme Court justice and told his mothers story of fighting cancer then
choosing to end her life near the end of her fight. The other reason he listed was the limitations

Evans 8

of medicine. He doesnt think palliative care and hospice can adequately deal with the end of
every life. He doesnt think hospice is the only way to die.
Evaluation: I chose this article because it was more recent than the others that I could
find. The words of Solomon repeat what many others have written. People want to die in a
dignified manner. They dont want their loved ones to have memories of them out of their minds
and incapacitated. Medicine can keep us living longer in undignified ways. People dont want
that. I will use this argument in my paper as pathos. This is a main reason why people ask for
physician assisted suicide.
Reflection: I totally get this argument. Who wants to leave this life totally out of their
mind and crazy from suffering? Not me. People just want the choice to say enough is enough.
Learning about this issue from all sides has helped me to see why it is such a problematic issue.
The people in each group, in its scope, is trying to protect the rights and liberties of people as
best they can. It is very complex. Researching this topic has left me with a headache and a
heartache. However, I am on my way to writing an excellent essay!
The Suicide Plan. PBS. Frontline. 2012. Film.
www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/suicide-plan/
Summary: The film tells the stories of several assisted suicides from the perspective of
the assisters by interview and narration. The story of Joan Butterstein is highlighted because at
the beginning of the film she tells of her suicide plan and we learn as the film progresses how she
is able to create and accomplish it with the help of a non-profit organization. The other
highlighted story is of Jana Van Voorhis family. Jana was mentally ill and not terminal but was
assisted by a non-profit organization to kill herself. The family pressed charges and lost. The

Evans 9

producers interview the Presidents of two non-profit organizations who exist to help terminally
ill people with end of life care and choices. Frontline referred to these as the underground world
of assisted suicide. One of which assisted Van Voorhis suicide and the other assisted Butterstein.
A palliative care physician was interviewed who had faced his own criminal charges early in his
career for a written prescription of a lethal dose. Detectives and lawyers involved with the Van
Voorhis case were interviewed about trying to uphold the law in these circumstances. The film
ends with the confirmation that Joan Butterstein passed away on her planned date.
Evaluation: The film was informative in a shocking manner. This is the shock source
of my essay. The producers brought to light how the non-profit organizations actually assist the
terminally ill and those who seem legitimate to kill themselves. It is happening in every state.
Family and friends are prosecuted for just being present as loved ones kill themselves. The film
had ethos in the interviewing and presentation. They also tried to cover all of the viewpoints
involved. You could tell the people interviewed had the opportunity to say what they wanted to
say and were sincere in what they believed no matter what side of the issue they were on.
Reflection: This film shows that if people want to do something they will find a way to
do it. Instead of undercover and underground maybe bringing it to light with protections and
safeguards is a better way. All we can do is do the best we can. Find a way to work together to
handle the changes that life brings as it evolves into what comes next. Hopefully this source will
bring some interest to the topic and support for my thesis.
Breslow, Jason M. The Shadow Side of Assisted Suicide. PBS. Frontline. 13
November 2012. Web. 21 July 2016.
www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/person/Jason-M-Breslow/

Evans 10

Summary: The debate over physician assisted suicide has never been a simple one and
the issue only grows more complicated as years go by. Breslow states that the underground
world of assisted suicide has added new layers of moral and legal complexity to the most
polarizing issue in America. He asked six experts to watch the film The Suicide Plan and
comment on the following questions. What does it mean to actually assist in a suicide? Who, if
anyone, should be allowed to pursue aid in dying, and what safeguards should be in place in
states where the practice is legal? He asked an author (for), the director of palliative care at
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (against), a professor of psychiatry at the University of
Washington (we need to start a conversation), a teacher of law and medicine at Indiana
University (undecided), a disabled (spinal muscular atrophy) since birth author (against), a
professor of psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine (we need to start a discussion) to
be his experts. The responses were varied but most agreed we should start the discussion on the
taboo subject death with dignity.
Evaluation: This article was written by Jason Breslow, a digital editor at Frontline for
PBS. I chose this article as a source for my paper because I felt that the experts that were chosen
to respond to the film The Suicide Plan were a good representation of the varied views that we
have as a nation. It brought up some valid points like, why should it be easier and more
acceptable for certain groups to end their lives than others? And Just because I make this choice
doesnt mean you have to. If we open the door can we prevent abuse and regulate it with
safeguards and protections?
Reflection: This article was a good source for my essay because it points to how
problematic this topic really is. I agree with those who know how difficult it is to come up with
legislation that can recognize the interests of all people. I agree with the experts that think the

Evans 11

issue has evolved to the point where it can no longer go ungoverned. We must start that
conversation, openly debate and create laws with explicit safeguards in them so unregulated
transactions dont have to occur behind closed doors. Let people choose to die with dignity if
that is the right choice for them and stop sending their loved ones to jail for assisting them. If we
can accomplish this without punching holes in our constitution, lets do it!