Patients have right to choose

By Jacob Collins |Asst. Online Editor|

Terminally ill patients should have the ability to decide for themselves whether or not they want to wither away in a hospital or pass away slowly in their own home.

Physician-assisted death is legal in three states and may soon be legal in California as well.

On Wednesday, Jan. 14, a bill was introduced to California state legislature that, if passed, would allow physician-assisted death with the following conditions: a prognosis of six months or less to live is given by two doctors, the medication is self-administered, the patient is mentally competent to make their own medical decisions, treatment options such as hospice and pain-management are discussed, two oral and a written request are made 15 days apart, and that two witnesses attest to the request according to San Jose Mercury News.

The bill includes exclusions for Catholic hospitals, which choose not to offer the “right to die” for terminally ill patients that fall under the criteria.

The option for patients that are suffering from their terminal illness to end their own life should be a right.

We control our own bodies and should be able to decide how we want to live the rest of our lives, whether that means dying painlessly at home with loved ones or slowly in a hospital.

The main argument against physician-assisted death is that it is unethical or immoral, and that it diminishes the “sanctity” of human life.

However, I do not believe in “objective” morality or absolute morality. What is moral to one individual may be immoral to the other, which is apparent in society by separation on various issues such as abortion, or gay marriage.

I think that forcing other people to endure pain and suffering at the end of their life is immoral, and that people should be able to end their life on their own terms.

It’s no different than “pulling the plug” on patients with life support.

“I completely am for it. Why would you prolong suffering to someone instead of allowing someone to be at ease?” pointed out student Joshua Segura.

Other objections come from a religious standpoint, mainly Catholicism, which according to the Sacramento Bee, the only problem is that you cannot and should not conflate religion with laws that are imposed on all of society.

Catholic hospitals can outright refuse the medication to offer  to their patients, but not everyone in the state of California practices Catholicism, therefore this law should be regulated by the state.

The right to die should be an option available for those who want it.

Voters who don’t have a terminal illness will never understand the pain, suffering, and diminished quality of life that the victims of terminal illness go through everyday of their life.

Instead of legislating morality, which I am vehemently opposed to, the decision should be left to the individual to make their own decision.