According to Ullmann-Margalit (51) while dealing with the subject the agony of doubt deliberates that it is among the most confusing issues to deal with. Most people do not want to die, at least not now, and the debate of holding on to the inevitable and that of letting go heats up. Questions arise concerning the social, religious and ethical factors that have to be taken into play while considering end-of-life or right-to-die and thus bringing complexity to an otherwise easy decision. But the most crucial question to ask is: are those in support of the right-to-die justified in their movement? This will be the question that will be addressed in this argumentative essay.
Why oppose the right-to-die movement
For those in opposition of the right-to-die movement (Ullmann-Margalit 73), there are a number of issues that they raise. It is often argued that most of those involved in right-to-die decisions engage in such decisions because they are not given enough information (Samanta and Samanta 218, 219). This results in anger and frustration among family members for that decision (Health Commission n. pag. qtd. in Samanta and Samanta 219).
Legally, the law provides that each individual has the right to live until such a time when life terminates naturally (Parhizgar, Parhizgar and Parhizgar 415). It is also argued that a person has the right to either live or die with dignity and assisted suicide does not count as part of dignified deaths (Parhizgar, Parhizgar and Parhizgar 415).
It is also argued that the work of counselors who decide to deal with terminally ill patients and their family members have the mandate of letting their clients obtain the best end-of-life care possible (Werth and Crow 195). This ensures that there is enough support physically, socially, emotionally as well as spiritually (Werth and Crow 195). This however does not come without a cost for both parties since the family will have to incur the expenses and the as to struggle with self determination during critical decision making (Werth and Crow 195).
It is also clear that while making these decisions, the decisions ought to be made based on informed consent (Werth and Crow 195). Sometime, the patient may be experiencing dementia, clinical depression or delirium for which they may be affecting the patient’s decision making capabilities (Werth and Crow 197, 198). If such a person is allowed to make their right-to-die decision, this may be done without the patient having comprehensive information before consent and thus should not be encouraged (Werth and Crow 198).
For those who profess to be born-again, their personal autonomy to make the right-to-die decision is surrendered to rabbi, or mullah or other religious heads claiming that the will of their Head be done over their lives (Ullmann-Margalit 69). Davila in his 2006 journal article notes that there are five predominant issues that lead people to seek futile healthcare which include psychological,...