Physician-assisted suicide should be legalized. A reason for legalizing physician-assisted suicide is by the fact that lengthening life of a suffering, terminally ill person is pointless, and they should be allowed to end life to diminish suffering. Van den Haag expresses this ideal, "we will, at last, allow individuals to control their lifespan within the boundaries set by nature and we will reduce or eliminate the immense undeserved suffering to which hitherto we have sentenced so many innocent people" (van den Haag, 4). There will be those who oppose and argue that "the effective administration of palliative care should become the foundation for providing a more dignified and moral end-of life-therapy" (Capps, 11). Some do not want palliative care, and that "it is senseless "suffering" and the indignities of dependency, incontinence, and poor quality of life which lead them to request a hastened death. In addition, not all patients want the consequences of adequate pain control, which include diminution of cognitive function and severe constipation" (Girsh).
             Opponents of physician-assisted suicide will argue that the families of those who experience the lost of an family member by assisted suicide is traumatized by the death, "family members often have difficulty coping with the impending loss of their loved ones" ( Capps 13) . If a terminally ill family member decides to die earlier, family members can prepare for the death. The family will know when the terminally ill family member will die and the method will also be known.
             Opposers argue that physician assisted suicide involves the taking of a life and that is considered killing a person even if only aid is given to achieve death, which legally is wrong. But murdering a person is different from killing a person in self defense. A person killing in self defense is legal. Haber writes that "it is wrong in the absen...