June Lemos
Prof. Johnston
English 1B
October 25, 2005
Annotated Bibliography
Working Title: Whether ‘Tis Nobler
Working Thesis Statement: Supporters of euthanasia for terminally ill patients believe that humans should not have to suffer and should be allowed to end their lives with dignity, while right-to-life groups contend that no one but God should determine the moment of death for a human and physician-assisted suicide is a criminal offense.
Brief Description of Subject: This hotly contested topic is a debate on whether active euthanasia should be legalized or not. The recent Terri Schiavo case, where physicians removed the feeding tube from a Florida woman who had been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, made this controversy headline news. Right-to-die groups maintain that in certain instances where patients are clinically brain-dead, terminally ill, or in excruciating pain with no reasonable possibility of recovery, no extraordinary efforts to keep them alive should be undertaken and the patients should be allowed to die. Religious fundamentalists feel that taking patients off life support is murder, assisted suicide is still suicide and therefore sinful, and that these patients should be kept alive by any means and at any and all costs. My essay will describe the views and beliefs held by both sides, outline what assumptions they seem to be making, and attempt to evaluate why the two sides feel as they do.
List of Sources:
Bender, David L., ed. Is Euthanasia Ethical? Opposing Viewpoints Series. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc., 1989.
This pamphlet, though dated, presents arguments by different authors for and against assisted suicide. I will be able to use these essays to point to the thoughts, fears and assumptions driving the writers.
Bender, David L., and Bruno Leone, ed. Death and Dying. Opposing Viewpoints Series. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1992.
What defines death? Should death be determined by choice or by law? Are people in vegetative states considered dead? This book considers the medical, legal and philosophical aspects of dying.
Jost, Kenneth. "Is It Too Easy to Remove Life Support?" The CQ Researcher 13 May 2005: 15.18:1-28. Coll. of the Redwoods, Ft. Bragg. 24 Oct. 2005 <http://library2.cqpress.com/>.
This journal article is useful to me because it contains a number of good polls, charts and graphs that show the public’s opinions on the issue. It presents information from both sides and quotes reliable sources (for example, the American Bar Association and the National Right to Life Committee). The 28-page piece has a lot of up-to-date information on this controversy and goes in-depth about the Terri Schiavo case.
Kevorkian, Jack. Prescription: Medicine -- The Goodness of Planned Death. Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1991.
I can use some good quotes from this book by the most vocal proponent of assisted suicide. Even though it is a little bit dated, it still has useful information on what the doctor believes is the “right thing to do” and the reasons for doing it.
Kleespies, Phillip M. Life and Death Decisions. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2004.
This book focuses on the ethical and legal concerns of euthanasia. The book is fairly recent, published in 2004, so it has some pertinent current information. Chapter 4 is just packed with facts and figures I will be able to quote in my essay. The practice of euthanasia in the Netherlands and Oregon is detailed here. There is a large section presenting essential arguments Pro and Con that will be very useful.
Nakaya, Andrea C., ed. Terminal Illness. Opposing Viewpoints Series. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005.
This is another book in the Opposing Viewpoints Series and it is very current (2005). It has a back-and-forth look at the issues that will be helpful to me in articulating and evaluating the claims being asserted by both sides of the euthanasia debate.
Peck, MD, M. Scott. Denial of the Soul. New York: Harmony Books, 1997.
This book, written by a physician, concentrates on the human “soul,” and puts the human euthanasia debate into the context of the question: Do we want a society that encourages the soul and its development? He seems to take in both sides of the situation in a thoughtful and philosophical way.
Petrou, Michael. "A Time to Die." Maclean's 5 Sept. 2005: 118.36:22-25. EBSCOhost. Coll. of the Redwoods, Ft. Bragg. 9 Oct. 2005 <http://web30.epnet.com/>.
This writer views the idea of “death with dignity” as something beautiful. The article focuses on euthanasia in Holland. I felt it was important to get a perspective from outside the United States.
Savage, David G. "Justices Hear Oregon Right-to-Die Case." Los Angeles Times 6 Oct. 2005: A-10. NewsBank. Coll. of the Redwoods, Ft. Bragg. 24 Oct. 2005 <http://infoweb.newsbank.com/>.
This newspaper article is important for its currency. The piece was published in the LA Times on October 6, 2005, and talks about our newest Chief Justice, John Roberts, and his thoughts on the issue of allowing terminally ill patients medication that will end their lives.
Wojtyla, Karol. "It is I who bring both death and life (Dt 32:39): The Tragedy of Euthanasia." Evangelium Vitae: Chapter III - You Shall Not Kill. 25 Mar. 1995. Roman Catholic Church. 24 Oct. 2005 <http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0141/_PR.HTM>.
This article from the official Roman Catholic Church website is useful because it contains a lot of revealing language that clearly indicates the thinking of those in the church regarding euthanasia. Here, in Pope John Paul II’s own words, are some very good quotes that cut to the heart of the controversy over the right to die.
Worsnop, Richard L. "Should Doctors Help the Dying to End Their Lives?" CQ Researcher 5 May 1995: 5.17:1-25. Coll. of the Redwoods, Ft. Bragg. 24 Oct. 2005 <http://library2.cqpress.com/>.
This analysis from CQ Researcher goes in-depth about the cost of caring for the terminally ill and the legal rights of terminally ill patients, their doctors and families. The report also contains a Pro/Con debate which is helpful for its strong language, obvious bias, and the presentation of two arguments side by side, one by a member of the Hemlock Society and one by a law professor from the University of Michigan.