Physician-assisted suicidePhysician-assisted suicide, suicide made possible by a physician providing a patient with the means to commit suicide, and euthanasia, the kindness to commit suicide by the doctor, is an extremely debatable question. Nonetheless, I am certain that there are some fundamental agreements that argue both for and against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, and when compared to each other, there are much stronger arguments in in favor of banning medically assisted suicide rather than their legalization. However, to begin with, it is important to point out that banning this practice in our society requires more effort and debate than allowing it. This speaks to the value we place on the rights and freedoms of the individual, because individual freedom is so important that a compelling reason must be given to ignore it. Because the results of a decision regarding physician-assisted suicide are extremely personal. The individual has the fundamental right to determine the course of his or her own life, and obviously death is part of that course (Dworkin, p. 265). So, to demonstrate that medically assisted suicide must be legalized, we must simply demonstrate that there is no reason for it to be considered illegal. One of the arguments often made in favor of banning physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia is that it legitimizes suicide. If suicide and physician-assisted suicide were made legal rights, the belief that people who attempt suicide are unbalanced and in need of psychological help, condoned by many studies and years of experience, would be overturned. . Those seeking suicide would have the legal right to be left alone to do something irreversible, based on a bent ass... middle of paper... in our hands when life ends,” he said. “It’s the Creator’s decision. » At the same time, the Church recognizes that a dying person has the moral possibility of refusing extraordinary treatments that only minimally prolong life. “The predominant distinction or criterion for a legitimate refusal of treatment is whether the treatment in question is considered proportionate or disproportionate,” explains Di Camillo. This means that patients can legitimately forego “treatment that does not provide reasonable hope of physical or spiritual benefit, such as resuscitation of a person at the very end of life,” he says. Works Cited “Religion and Spirituality”. National Center for Death with Dignity. Np, and Web. April 15, 2014. “Religious Groups’ Views on End-of-Life Issues.” » Pew Research Centers Public Life Religion Project RSS. Np, and Web. April 14. 2014.