As medical knowledge and technology increase, so do options for healthcare.

When it comes to making

decisions concerning the treatments of dying patients, these options are very complicated ethical

decisions. Many have to make the decision on what is the best treatment for a patient not to suffer.

Sometimes decisions need to make on how to end a patient life and treatment all the together. Making

decisions on facing to deal with their own care or their loved ones —confront people from all walks of

life.

Facing death is hard enough but many people and their loved ones also have to deal with having to make

decisions that can be simple or very complex. These decisions can be psychosocial, spiritual, legal, or

different medical decisions. For example, someone who may be dying might have to make a choice of

having care at home or they may rather have medical treatment in a facility. Also some may have to make

a decision on who or why type of family members they want involved in their treatment plan and decision

making. Some other examples of decisions they made be face with are; wills, advanced directives, and

power of attorney. Many might want to make a decision on how they want to spend their dying day; like

reflecting the meaning of life. Some might be religious and want to participate in spiritual ritual or

confessing of sins. In other cultural traditions, planning or even discussing death is considered

inappropriate, uncaring, and even dangerous, as it is viewed as inviting death (Carrese & Rhodes, 1995).

Most people die in hospitals and long term facilities; hospice. Therefore, the families or loved ones will

most likely have to make the decisions for either themselves, a family member, or a loved one. Almost

60% 70% of patients who are seriously ill are unable to speak for themselves when it comes time to make

the decision to either limit treatment or not. Some people find it worse having to suffer then having to

face death. For loved ones watching someone you love can be unbearable. The suffering can be so

immense that the option of euthanasia or physician assisted suicide may be the only choice.

Euthanasia is an act where a third party, usually implied to be a physician, terminates the life of a person

—either passively or actively. Euthanasia is translated from Greek as "good death" or "easy death." As
originally used, the term referred to painless and peaceful natural deaths in old age that occurred in

comfortable and familiar surroundings. That usage is now archaic. As the word is currently understood,

euthanasia occurs when one person ends the life of another person for the purpose of ending the killed

person's pain or suffering (encyclopedia.com).

What people don’t realize that sometime keeping people alive without hope of recovery may be causing

their loved ones more stress and grief, and also if they were to survive it might not be a state that the

patient would have chosen to live, and their medical care might be too much for families to handle.

Some people believe that taking a life away however which way it is done- goes against the principle that

life is sacred. Euthanasia is a form of murder. Some even say that anything else that does not have to do

with prolong life are murderous acts. Justice and fairness come into question. Some are also saying that

because of cost, the healthcare system might use Euthanasia as a better option. Some say that a person

who is sick or their loved who might be much stressed might not be able to make rational decisions about

terminating life.

• Physicians do not kill a patient by omitting treatment, but rather the disease takes the patient’s life.

• Patients have a right to a “death with dignity.” Allowing a dignified death to occur naturally is a moral

act, different from active euthanasia.

Physician participation in the active termination of a patient’s life is controversial for several reasons. The

primary moral objection to physician involvement in euthanasia argues that it violates the physician’s

oath to “do no harm.” However, some advocates for euthanasia have argued that a physician violates the

oath to “do no harm” if he or she extends the life of a suffering individual. The oath to “do no harm” is

complicated by the fact that terminally ill patients represent an extremely frail and vulnerable population

who also are heavily reliant on the medical system.

In conclusion, people who have done their research on the different meanings and complications

concerning assisted suicide. People who have done their research; have researched different philosophies,
different life experiences, and each of these can represent high levels of moral development. Some may

support assisted suicide, believing that this is the right thing to do when it comes to our compassionate

and socially responsible citizens. Citizens who may be for assisted suicide or against it agree that there

are cost and benefits to permitting versus banning the practice. However, they believe differently of these

cost and benefits. Furthermore, understand all the issues that surround assisted suicide is from complete.

This issues continues to be a strong debate for both the families and physicians. Many feel that these

issues will never be resolved.