An ethical dilemma that is gaining popularity as means for debate in our society is physician-assisted suicide. This process, according to the University of Washington School of Medicine, "generally refers to a practice in which the physician provides a patient with a lethal dose of medication, upon the patient's request, which the patient intends to use to end his or her own life." The issue of right to life generally refers to preserving life by any means; however, all people also have the right to pursue happiness, which could mean ending suffering, if they so desire.
             Physician-assisted suicide is often associated with euthanasia, and while these two issues have some common characteristics, they possess distinctive discrepancies. Euthanasia comes from the Greek words eu and thanatos, meaning "good or well" and "death," respectively. There are different forms of euthanasia, including voluntary, nonvoluntary, involuntary, and "passive." These processes involve someone other than the person's life in question giving direct assistance to hasten the process of death. Physician-assisted suicide, on the other hand, does not involve the physician (or whoever is assisting in the process) directly. Instead, the assistance is given to the person by a physician, upon that person's request, which will enable that person to terminate his or her own life.
             PAS, according to those who support it, feel as though death is a private issue and all aspects of concern should be considered by the individual. If a person is competent and capable of making decisions, he or she should have to right to choose death if he or she so desires. Death is an act that ultimately affects the person whose life is in question, so if he or she is deemed terminally ill and suffering severe pain, he or she should have the opportunity to end such agony. Supporters of physician-assisted suicide feel as though ...