I will be doing a proposal paper on assisted death. I want to prove why one view on the issue should be executed and prove why the other two views are invalid. *I believe that it is the right of the person to choose whether or not he/she continues a life of suffering, or decides to participate in an assisted death. @Moreover@, [I will be proving the fact that all methods of assisted death should be legalized, whether it be simply allowing family members to take a patient off of life support, or giving doctors the administer a lethal dose of medication.]* People should be able to have the choice and can then, individually decide if it is moral or not. In most states, it is currently illegal to perform assisted suicide. @In other words@, [a physician cannot use any methods to assist in death, including a determined overdose and discontinuing life support.] The only exception is Oregon, where both ways are legal. @Also@, [I plan to discuss the constitutional rights that all individuals have to life and death.] I want to explain the importance of allowing people to decide their own morals, and the fact that they differ from person to person. The law should acknowledge personal liberties. My paper will include examples of different cases of people who have been assisted in death and those that wish to, as well as responding to any counter arguments.
I want this paper to be read by my classmates and teacher and I anticipate that many will feel strongly against my proposal. @This is because@, [death in general is a very controversial and possibly sensitive topic.] @Furthermore@, [I hope to really appeal to the emotions of my readers and open them up to both sides of the case.] I will need to perform more research to find specific cases. @Other than that@, I have enough information supporting my claim as well as enough information to counter any other opposing claims.
I found this exercise very useful. I feel that I received the most out of it possible.