Brittany Maynard was a terminally ill patient who decided to end her own life by taking a lethal dose of prescribed medication. On November 1, 2014, Mrs. Maynard dissolved 100 capsules of a sedative in a glass of water and drank it around her friends and relatives (White, 2014). She decided that assisted suicide would bring her and her relatives less harm in comparison with slowly dying from cancer and terrible headaches. At the moment she decided to use assisted suicide law, she was expected to have less than six months to live.
As a human being, I believe that suicide is immoral and unnatural. People do not decide when and where it comes to this world, and they should not try to take their lives. I think that taking one’s own life is trying to play God. I believe that people need to accept their fate, as everything is a part of God’s plan. I think that assisted suicide is even worse, as a physician is forced to become a murderer, which is against the principles of non-maleficence and beneficence and God’s laws.
However, as a professional, I believe that Mrs. Maynard had every right to take her own life with the help of the physician. First, the decision was in accord with the principle of autonomy, as patients can choose their own path of treatment. Second, assisted suicide was legal in the State of Oregon based on the Death with Dignity Act, which implies that the decision adheres to the principle of justice (White, 2014). Additionally, the decision arguably adheres to the principle of non-maleficence, as the patient would die regardless of the treatment plan. Finally, the decision is also arguably adherent to the principle of beneficence, as the patient experienced less pain in comparison with end-of-life care. Thus, when asked as a professional, I will also insist that the decision was ethical, even though I disagree with it as a person.
Reference
White, D. (2014). Brittany Maynard: A terminal cancer patient’s controversial choice. AMC. Web.