The Instigator
noved18
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imnotacop
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Physician Assisted Death

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
imnotacop
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/19/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 679 times Debate No: 67345
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

noved18

Pro

Why is it that only a few states have legalized Physician Assisted Suicide? There are so many good things that can come out of it. All of the pain that a patient is in can end if they want it to, especially if they are going to die anyways. A patient can die with dignity and not have to be remembered as the person who drooled, puked and pooped himself all the time. Instead they can be remembered how they want to remember. Health care costs for the patients can stop being paid and they can leave money behind for their loved ones especially if the patient was the main money supplier of the house. Vital organs can be saved and used on other patients that are truly in need of those organs. Families can be more happy because they were able to tell their loved one that they loved them before they died and would be happy because they get to know that their loved ones pain and suffering is ending. And most importantly doctors could move on to other patients who are need of the medical care instead of wasting their time on a patient who is going to die with in the next month anyways. So why in the world are we not legalizing this in every state? Whats the harm in it?
imnotacop

Con

As someone in favor of physician assisted suicide, physician assisted death, ie murder, is a horrible idea.
Murder is illegal in the U.S, and therefor physician assisted death would be unlawful do to the broad nature of the topic at hand.[1]

[1]http://www.law.cornell.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
noved18

Pro

By saying murder you are making it seem like the physician is going around killing these patients, which is not the case.
These patients have to meet the following criteria
18 years of age or older
" Capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him/herself
" Diagnosed with a terminal illness with only 6 months to live
The attending physician decides if the criteria have been met, but further requirements are then necessary. Some of those include:
" Two oral requests by the patient, at least 15 days apart
" A written request by the patient signed by two witnesses
" Confirmation of diagnosis and prognosis by the attending doctor and a consulting physician
" The attending and consulting physician must determine whether the patient is capable of making health care decisions for him/herself
" Patient must be informed of feasible alternatives
" Attending physician must request the patient to notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request
" Physicians must report all prescriptions for lethal medications to the Health Authority, Vital Records

The physician may prescribe the medicine " cocktail" to the patient but, it is the patients choice if they want to end their life or not. The physician only gives them the chance to choose what they feel is best for themselves because it is their life, so let them decide what to do with it.
imnotacop

Con

When I say murder, I confront broadness of the topic at hand. I make no claim that anyone is going around murdering people, I am stating that, with the broad nature of the debate topic, the implementation of any such tittle would allow murder.
The criteria set in your rebuttal is different than the criteria set in the debate topic.
Any point you make differing from the topic is null and void do to it's differing from your own topic.
Debate Round No. 2
noved18

Pro

noved18 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
noved18

Pro

the word "murder" implies a very evil intent to bring the most severe harm imaginable upon another person. But with physician assisted suicide there is NO evil intent and NO desire to bring harm upon another person.
And "murder" means the killing of another person. But there is no other person killing in physician assisted suicide. The patient is the one killing themselves, making it their decision to end their life. I don't see a victim of murder pointing at the murderer and saying" you can kill me now". The physician is just there to help the patient by giving them a choice and it is there decision to partake in that choice or not.
imnotacop

Con

The debate topic is "Physician Assisted Death," not "Physician Assisted Suicide."
I am entirely in favor of the ladder. The broadness of the debate is just that, broad. You are trying to bring it down to one thing while ignoring the rest of the possibilities under the definition of the actual debate topic. It's blatant and doesn't work. You can die more ways than suicide. Change the debate topic in a future debate if you want to specifically debate suicide, but this is not that debate.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
noved18imnotacopTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I was initially thinking that Con was deflecting with unfair semantics, but that wasn't the case. Con plays a clever semantics game that fits the resolution; the distinction between "death" and "suicide" is made apparent by Con, and he/she effectively argues that "death" could involve murder. The source proved vital for Con's case, as defining many 'Physician assisted death[s]' as murder gave him the win, so source points to him/her on that. Conduct goes to Con, too, for the round forfeit by Pro.