Assisted Suicide

often labeled compassionate, according to the columnist for the Wall Street Journal, Joni Eareckson Tada, legalized assisted suicide or euthanasia is really a deadly double standard for those with severe disabilities, both conditions that are labeled terminal and those that are not. She seems to be of the opinion that euthanasia should never be considered an option no matter how severe or subjective suffering the person is facing. In the article, Tada claims that legalization of euthanasia, “sends a clear message that a person with a disability may not have a life worth living” (1). She touches on euthanasia in The Nethlands and Belguium . She stands for a powerful example of a person with this depilating condition, in this case quadriplegia, can accomplish in spite of her condition. However this is somewhat of a bias perspective because it implies that she has put a measure on the subjective pain this condition and similar to it entails. There should be certain conditions set in order to qualify for euthanasia so that it is an option for people who want it but we can also make a system to prevent people from misusing it. We were granted free will which includes the right to end our life when we chose.
There does not need to be this all or nothing attitude towards assisted suicide and the disabled. Tada argues, “this ruling sends a clear message that a person with disability may not have a life worth living”(1). This law would bring nothing but a choice for the terminally ill. There are some disabilities that are incurable and cause tremendous suffering. They should not all fall under one umbrella. Andrew Btiva wrote in his article, Disability and physician-assisted suicide, “We do not believe that the right to assisted suicide is premised on a diminished quality of life for people with disabilities. It is based on respect for the autonomy of terminally ill individuals during their final days. It does not deny people with disabilities suicide prevention