TOPIC – Physician Assisted-Suicide 

Prompt: In this activity, you’ll create an annotated bibliography by following the steps below and answering the questions as thoroughly as possible. The questions will prompt you to engage in a conversation with your sources. You will need to follow the steps below three times (for your three different sources).

Before you begin, make sure you have:

Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

  1. Identify your sources, including author, title, and the database information or website.
  2. Summarize your source. (Use the template below.)
    • It seems this source is arguing ____________________. This source is using this evidence to support the argument: ____________________.
    • A counterargument for one of the provided sources could be: __________________________________.
  3. Credibility and Relevance
    • Explain the rationale for the credibility of the source by providing supporting evidence. (Use the template below.)
      • Personally, I believe the source is doing a (good job/bad job) of supporting its arguments because ____________________.
    • Explain the relevance of the source to your argument. (Use the template below.)
      • I think this source will be very helpful in supporting my argument because ________________________.

Guidelines for Submission: Your annotations must include at least three sources. Save your work in a Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Then, check your writing for errors.

Running head: PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE MIND MAP 1

PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE MIND MAP 2

Physician-Assisted Suicide Mind Map


Main topic: why should it be illegalized?

Sub-points:

1. Doctors must treat patients following Hippocratic Oath proclaims

2. Physicians should practice palliative care instead of using lethal drugs to kill terminally ill patients.



Main topic: Euthanasia is harmful because it doesn’t allow people to see human life as sacred

Sub-topics:

1. The Hippocratic Oath isn’t compatible with Euthanasia

2. Analyze the risk in providing state mandates for or against doctor-assisted suicide.



Physician-assisted suicide






Main topic: consequences of legalizing PAS

Sub-topics:

1. Decreased physician professionalism

2. the possibility of error

3. A diminished physician-patient relationship, and

4. A slippery slope toward the practice of euthanasia.

Main topic: what we can do to make it illegal?

Sub-topics:

1. Practice hospice care that allows people to die with dignity.

2. To relieve pain instead of killing.

3. To help friends, patients and families face up to death.

Keywords: physician-assisted suicide, Hippocratic Oath, lethal-medications, palliative care, hospice care, legalization, and illegalization.

Main topic: Physician-assisted suicide should be illegal


Main Idea 1:
Euthanasia is harmful because it doesn’t allow people to see human life as sacred.

A. The Hippocratic Oath isn’t compatible with Euthanasia.

1. Physician-assisted suicide according to Brueck & Sulmasy (2019) is the point whereby doctors provide a platform for ending the life of a terminally ill patient.

2. The Hippocratic Oath is the standards that doctors are expected to maintain.

B. Euthanasia encourages abuse, allowing doctors to justify murder by framing it in compassionate terms.

1. Laws were written to protect people from killing.

2. The abuse of sedation techniques can be euthanasia.


Main Idea 2:
the quality of life for the past years has been increased by the technological advancement.

A. Before, there were no breakthroughs with the opportunity of saving lives and later history will help save even more lives.

1. Modern respirators and defibri

Running head: OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS

OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS

OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS

Student’s name

Instructor

Course

Date

Opposing Viewpoints

I think that the keywords that I use for my search are related to my topic and sub topic. That is why when I conduct my research; I get result that’s close to my topic of physician-assisted suicide. Some of my source has keywords that are almost exactly like my sub topics. Using the opposing viewpoints data base, I searched “Hippocratic Oath”, “hospice care”, and “physician-assisted suicide legalization.”

Source 1: Title: Hippocratic Oath – the majority are academic journals written within the last five years. There are very few videos and news articles. The journals are stressing the importance of complying with work ethics, standards and policies when treating patients – Author – Bennet, Coleman and Co. Ltd

Source 2: Title: hospice care – there are more news articles than other sources; many are about palliative care talking about patients who are struggling with chronic conditions not about the euthanasia practices. I need to narrow my search – Author, Kumon.

Source 3: Title; physician-assisted suicide legalization – there are 2147 news articles about physician-assisted suicide, many written within the past three years. Most of the articles are talking about the importance of legalizing assisted suicide to end the pain of terminally ill patients rather than talking about the value of human life and the consequences of assisted suicide – Author – Bates College.



Running head: PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE 1

PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE 2

Physician-Assisted Suicide Persuasion



Physician-Assisted Suicide

The major I am pursuing is my Bachelors in Nursing, and with my persuasive essay I intend to convince healthcare providers in this persuasive essay that physician-assisted suicide (PAS) must be considered illegal and it should not be practiced in any hospital that values human life. I had to tell them while observing the ethical aspects and value of a human soul alongside the biblical worldview that physician assisted suicide is killing regardless of how you stage or justify the act. Doctors, before they start practicing their profession, make the vow of helping patients and help with the progression of medication. On the off chance that a patient is critically ill, they can be made comfortable with drugs like morphine that are deliberately given through IV or orally to help reduce or stop any pain or misery the patient is experiencing.

There are several reasons that support my argument. Some of them are positive while others are negative. But, since the benefits exceed the negative ones, this practice should be dismissed. For one, we ought not, as a rule, give physicians the privilege to help kill their patients. The entire history of medication has been one of improved healing or, in terminal cases, reduced pain; killing, which debases life to the point of liquidation, is the exact inverse of good and mindful medical care (Knaplund, 2010). To legalize suicide along these lines is to weaponize the therapeutic system against the very individuals to which it ought to be generally attentive. A second reason why PAS may sound interesting is that individuals believe that others ought to be put out of their misery in the event that they are in pain. Rather than having the doctors take the easy way out and simply recommend lethal drugs to the patient, I figure physicians should search for better approaches to relieve the pain. Another issue with allowing individuals to be prescribed lethal dosages of medication is that the prognosis the physician gave them could not be right. According to Brueck & Sulmasy (2019), PAS is practiced legally in three states only in the United States. Montana, Washington, and Oregon allow doctors to perform PAS under the guidelines of the Death with Dignity Act. The act contains stringent patient eligibility measures. For example, the Oregon Death with Dignity Act (ODDA) allows doctors to give a lethal dose of the drug to diagnosed fatally sick patients. The patients understand that this medication when taken will take their life within a couple of moments of taking the medication. All together for an