Compare the perspectives of two different authors on the chosen topic with research from a minimum of two sources.
“Title” & Link to article:
1. What Is Physician-Assisted Suicide, and Why Should You Care About It? by Natalie Allen https://adflegal.org/article/what-physician-assisted-suicide-and-why-should-you-care-about-it
2. The Right to Assisted Suicide by Esther B. De La Torre https://www.lonestar.edu/rightto-assist-suicide.htm
QUESTIONS
What is physician assisted suicide?
Who benefits most from physician assisted suicide?
Why is physician assisted suicide not legal in all states?
Sample Solution
Comparison of the perspectives of two different authors on the topic of physician-assisted suicide
Sample Solution
Comparison of the perspectives of two different authors on the topic of physician-assisted suicide
Comparison of the perspectives of two different authors on the topic of physician-assisted suicide:
Author 1: Natalie Allen
- Natalie Allen is a legal analyst for the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal organization.
- She defines physician-assisted suicide as “the act of a physician providing a terminally ill patient with the means to end their own life.”
- She argues that physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong because it violates the sanctity of human life.
- She also argues that physician-assisted suicide could be abused by patients who are not truly terminally ill or who are not of sound mind.
- She believes that physician-assisted suicide should not be legal in any state.
Author 2: Esther B. De La Torre
- Esther B. De La Torre is a professor of law at Texas A&M University.
- She defines physician-assisted suicide as “the act of a physician providing a terminally ill patient with the means to end their own life, at the patient’s request.”
- She argues that physician-assisted suicide should be legal for terminally ill patients who are of sound mind and who have made a voluntary and informed decision to end their lives.
- She believes that physician-assisted suicide can be a compassionate option for patients who are suffering from unbearable pain and who have no hope of recovery.
- She also argues that physician-assisted suicide can help to protect patients from being subjected to unnecessary suffering.
Comparison
The two authors have very different perspectives on physician-assisted suicide. Author 1, Natalie Allen, believes that physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong and should not be legal in any state. Author 2, Esther B. De La Torre, believes that physician-assisted suicide should be legal for terminally ill patients who are of sound mind and who have made a voluntary and informed decision to end their lives.
The two authors also differ in their views on who benefits most from physician-assisted suicide. Author 1 believes that physician-assisted suicide is most likely to be used by people who are not truly terminally ill or who are not of sound mind. Author 2 believes that physician-assisted suicide can be a compassionate option for patients who are suffering from unbearable pain and who have no hope of recovery.
Finally, the two authors differ in their views on why physician-assisted suicide is not legal in all states. Author 1 believes that physician-assisted suicide is not legal in all states because of the strong religious and moral opposition to it. Author 2 believes that physician-assisted suicide is not legal in all states because of the political power of the medical establishment, which is opposed to physician-assisted suicide.
Conclusion
The debate over physician-assisted suicide is a complex one, with strong arguments on both sides. It is important to consider the perspectives of all stakeholders in this debate before forming an opinion.
