Preston Brooks Beat Charles Sumner Over Anti-Slavery Speech

In the mid-1850s, the United States was being torn apart over the issue of slavery. The abolitionist movement was becoming increasingly vocal, and enormous controversy focused on whether new states admitted to the Union would allow slavery. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 established the idea that residents of states could decide for themselves the issue of slavery, and that led to violent encounters in Kansas beginning in 1855. Key Takeaways: Sumner Caned in Senate Chamber Senator Sumner of Massachusetts, a prominent abolitionist, was physically attacked by a slave state congressman.Preston Brooks of South Carolina caned Sumner, beating him bloody in the U.S. Senate chamber.Sumner was severely injured, and Brooks was hailed as a hero in the South.The violent incident intensified the split in America as it moved toward the Civil War. While blood was being spilled in Kansas, another violent attack shocked the nation, especially as it took place on the floor of the United States Senate. A pro-slavery member of the House of Representatives from South Carolina strolled into the Senate chamber in the U.S. Capitol and beat an anti-slavery senator from Massachusetts with a wooden cane. Senator Sumner's Fiery Speech On May 19, 1856, Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts, a prominent voice in the anti-slavery movement, delivered an impassioned speech denouncing the compromises that helped perpetuate slavery and led to the current confrontations in Kansas. Sumner began by denouncing the Missouri Compromise, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the concept of popular sovereignty, in which residents of new states could decide whether to make slavery legal. Continuing his speech the next day, Sumner singled out three men in particular: Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois, a major proponent of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Senator James Mason of Virginia, and Senator Andrew Pickens Butler of South Carolina. Butler, who had recently been incapacitated by a stroke and was recuperating in South Carolina, was held to particular ridicule by Sumner. Sumner said that Butler had taken as his mistress â€Å"the harlot, slavery.† Sumner also referred to the South as an immoral place for allowing slavery, and he mocked South Carolina. Listening from the back of the Senate chamber, Stephen Douglas reportedly said, â€Å"that damned fool will get himself killed by some other damned fool.† Sumner’s impassioned case for a free Kansas was met with approval by northern newspapers, but many in Washington criticized the bitter and mocking tone of his speech. A Southern Congressman Took Offense One southerner, Preston Brooks, a member of the House of Representatives from South Carolina, was particularly incensed. Not only had the fiery Sumner ridiculed his home state, but Brooks was the nephew of Andrew Butler, one of Sumners targets. In the mind of Brooks, Sumner had violated some code of honor which should be avenged by fighting a duel. But Brooks felt that Sumner, by attacking Butler when he was home recuperating and not present in the Senate, had shown himself not to be a gentleman deserving of the honor of dueling. Brooks thus reasoned that the proper response was for Sumner to be beaten, with a whip or a cane. On the morning of May 21, Preston Brooks arrived at the Capitol, carrying a walking stick. He hoped to attack Sumner, but could not locate him. The following day, May 22, proved fateful. After trying to find Sumner outside the Capitol, Brooks entered the building and walked into the Senate chamber. Sumner sat at his desk, writing letters. Violence on the Floor of the Senate Brooks hesitated before approaching Sumner, as several women were present in the Senate gallery. After the women left, Brooks walked to Sumner’s desk and reportedly said: â€Å"You have libeled my state and slandered my relation, who is aged and absent. And I feel it to be my duty to punish you.† With that, Brooks struck the seated Sumner across the head with his heavy cane. Sumner, who was quite tall, could not get to his feet as his legs were trapped under his Senate desk, which was bolted to the floor. Brooks continued raining blows with the cane upon Sumner, who tried to fend them off with his arms. Sumner finally was able to break the desk free with his thighs and staggered down the aisle of the Senate. Brooks followed him, breaking the cane over Sumner’s head and continuing to strike him with pieces of the cane. The entire attack probably lasted for a full minute, and left Sumner dazed and bleeding. Carried into a Capitol anteroom, Sumner was attended by a doctor, who administered stitches to close wounds on his head. Brooks was soon arrested on a charge of assault. He was  quickly released on bail. Reaction to the Capitol Attack As might be expected, northern newspapers responded to the violent attack on the Senate floor with horror. An editorial reprinted in the New York Times on May 24, 1856,  proposed sending Tommy Hyer to Congress to represent northern interests. Hyer was a celebrity of the day, the champion bare-knuckles boxer. Southern newspapers published editorials lauding Brooks, claiming that the attack was a justified defense of the South and slavery. Supporters sent Brooks new canes, and Brooks claimed that people wanted pieces of the cane he used to beat Sumner as â€Å"holy relics.† The speech Sumner had given, of course, had been about Kansas. And in Kansas, news of the savage beating on the Senate floor arrived by telegraph and inflamed passions even more. It is believed that abolitionist firebrand John Brown and his supporters were inspired by the beating of Sumner to attack pro-slavery settlers. Preston Brooks was expelled from the House of Representatives, and in the criminal courts, he was fined $300 for assault. He returned to South Carolina, where banquets were held in his honor and more canes were presented to him. The voters returned him to Congress but he died suddenly in a Washington hotel in January 1857, less than a year after he attacked Sumner. Charles Sumner took three years to recover from the beating. During that time, his Senate desk sat empty, a symbol of the acrimonious split in the nation. After returning to his Senate duties Sumner continued his anti-slavery activities. In 1860, he delivered another fiery Senate speech, titled â€Å"The Barbarism of Slavery.† He was again criticized and threatened, but no one resorted to a physical attack on him. Sumner continued his work in the Senate. During the Civil War he was an influential supporter of Abraham Lincoln, and he supported Reconstruction policies following the war. He died in 1874. While the attack on Sumner in May 1856 was shocking, much more violence lay ahead. In 1859 John Brown, who had gained a bloody reputation in Kansas, would attack the federal armory at Harper’s Ferry. And of course, the issue of slavery would only be settled by a very costly Civil War.

Patient Care, Quality Improvement, And Teamwork - 1399 Words

With rapidly advancing technology and the aging population, health care improvement remains at the center of providing proper patient care. However, it is imperative to ensure improvement is quality improvement, thus advancing patient care while still protecting patient safety. Quality and Safety Education in Nursing provides goals and guidelines for providing the best care. Prioritizing patient-centered care, quality improvement, and teamwork provides methods to increase patient safety, while excellent patient care can be maximized when striving to achieve cares that are safe, timely, efficient, effective, equitable, and patient-centered. Question 1: How do patient-centered care, quality improvement, and teamwork/collaboration relate to patient safety? Patient-Centered Care Patient-Centered Care proves to be one facet of increasing patient safety. With patient-centered care, patients and their families need to be the primary managers of care; they lead the way and make decisions (Whorley, 2010). Health care employees are responsible for providing the options and following through on the cares the patient chooses. Patient engagement improves patient safety because patients tend to be more invested in their care and can even help observe for adverse or unwelcome reactions. Patients’ willingness to adhere to their regimen increases if they provide input about their treatment modalities. One method for health care employees to include patientsShow MoreRelatedMidterm Patient Quality And Safety Paper1603 Words   |  7 PagesMidterm Patient Quality and Safety Paper Over time the health care industry has become more complex. Health care is rapidly evolving and continuing to complicate our delivery of care, which in turn has the same effect on quality of care. This steady evolution and change results in nursing shortages and an increase in the prevalence of errors being made. In hopes of preventing these errors and creating safe and high quality patient care, with the focus on new and improved ways of thinking, The QualityRead MorePrinciples Of Total Quality And Health Care Statistics747 Words   |  3 Pages Three Principles of Total Quality Mary Carnahan HA 412: Quality Management and Health Care Statistics September 25, 2015 â€Æ' Introduction In this paper I am going to research three articles that describe current practices in healthcare organizations, in these articles I will be looking at the three principles of total quality: customer focus, continuous improvement, and teamwork. The Three Principles of Quality What are the three principles of quality? The three principles are customer focusRead MoreWhat Do Nurses Really Do?1711 Words   |  7 Pagesand role of nurses. None of these ideas truly portray nurses and what they do. Nurses are with the patients more than the doctors. People do not realize how little they will encounter the doctor in the hospital until they are actually in the hospital. People quickly realize how important nurses are. Because nurses interact with their patients constantly, nurses are the ones who know the patients best. In the article â€Å"What Do Nurses Really Do?†, Suzanne Gordon explores what nurses truly do. SheRead MoreChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder ( Copd )935 Words   |  4 PagesAmerican population) living with COPD. QSEN, which stands for Quality and Safety Education for Nurses, has developed six competencies related to nursing care. These competencies are Patient-Centered Care, Teamwork and Collaboration, Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Improvement, Safety, and Informatics. These aforementioned QSEN competencies break down how nurses should be treating patients and working with the health care team. Patient-Centered Care is a major competency due to the nature of what nursingRead MoreTeamwork And Communication Of The Healthcare Field Essay1590 Words   |  7 PagesTeamwork and communication are very important in providing good quality care, especially in the healthcare field. A team is described as a group of people that works together and cooperatively, between each member of the group to reach a common goal (Sullivan, 2013). For a team to function, communication is essential. A report by McKay and Crippen (2008), as stated by Alfaro-LeFevre, (2013) showed that when collaboration is in place, hospitals can decrease their mortality rate by 41%. When mortalityRead MoreDefinition Of Health Care Quality1657 Words   |  7 PagesThe definition of health care quality has changed significantly over the years. Depending on who is asked (doctor, patient, nurse etc.), the definition can vary; however there are always some similarities. There are two definitions expressed by the Nation al Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) that I believe adequately express my view on health care quality. One definition is from the Institute of Medicine that states health care quality is â€Å"safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficientRead MoreEssential Attributes in Nursing1220 Words   |  5 Pagesfor educated nurses. Nurses is the first provider of health care, which delivers a high quality of care, safe environment, person-centred and focuses on the care of individuals, families and communities. In a nursing good workplace citizenship needs an understanding and maintaining a good relationship between patients and health professional to deliver quality health care and services. In the context of nursing, communication, teamwork and social responsibility is the main graduates attributes thatRead MoreEvaluation Of The Joint Commission On The Accreditation Of Hospitals1324 Words   |  6 PagesQSEN Essay Paper Teamwork and Collaboration Natalie M. Alvarez Intro to Prof. Nursing NUR3160 Professor Newman November 26, 2014 â€Æ' Introduction According to the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAHO) in July 2004 released a Sentinel Event Alert on the prevention of infant deaths. Its database showed that nearly three-quarters of hospitals cited communication break down and teamwork problems as a major reason for these deaths. The practice of teamwork and collaborationRead MoreThe Nurse s Performance During Their Handoff Report Essay881 Words   |  4 Pagesthe patient being involved in their care. As the healthcare industry has become more of a patient-centered, the hospitals are participating in a publicly reported government HCAHPS survey- a composite scale score that measure patient’s hospital experience through a metric satisfaction survey. An effective handoff is critical when transferring any medical information of a patient’s continuity of care from one nurse to another. According to the Health Professions Education: A Bridge to Quality: â€Å"allRead MoreQuality And Safety Educati on For Nurses1277 Words   |  6 Pagesdelegation of the Quality and Safety Education for Nurses (QSEN) is to challenge nurses of their knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) for continuous improvement for the quality and safety of the healthcare systems where they work. Ensuring safe care is a fundamental value and ethical responsibility of the nursing profession (International Council of Nurses, 2000).† All nurses should be well educated to understand that safety reduces the possibility of injury to the patients and providers; and

The Science of Shopping Free Essays

Caution! An anxietytriggers in your brain signaling the entry of new arrivals in the mall, an outcry for shoppers all around to come to the mall and buy the latest stuff designer/manufacturers have to offer claiming it is only a limited stock variety. The customer scout out the shop which is the most crowded considering it has the best to offer, he/she move in start sweeping by the items, trying to find what reflects your style and communicates your attitude towards the observers. The customers perceive what your fellow shoppers are purchasing or showing interest in and compare their selection with your choice and taste. We will write a custom essay sample on The Science of Shopping or any similar topic only for you Order Now Thesis statement: The purchasing behavior in the united states in America and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The different ways of how they purchase and make their decisions while buying things. What modes they use? Body: The most common trend in the United States is that most of the people go out and window shop. They waste their time doing nothing, just hang out with friends and family and go through most of the shops and end up buying in small quantities. Most of the American society believes in online shopping. Then why do the women in Saudi Arabia have to stay in some constraints while going out for shopping? Thus in the Saudi Arabia the buying behavior of the female gender is totally different when it comes to clothes. They have to stay within the constraints they are living in. According to Norton â€Å"the mall is a favorite subject for the laments of cultural conservatives and others critical of the culture of consumption. † (Norton, 105) However in America there are no such limits. People can buy whatever they want. They have no constraints. Therefore this is the main difference in the buying behavior of both the countries. One can see people of different buying behavior, different race, and different cultures in the shopping malls. Do the people in Saudi Arabia believe in window shopping? Or do they prefer window shopping? For the people of Saudi Arabia window shopping is wastage of time. KSA shopping style is more related to direct item shopping, the customer shops what the customer want and leave, spend time skipping shops, but as soon as the customer get what he wants he leave. Thus in America the uying behavior is rational. The main focus of the American buyer is the features and benefits of the product. Therefore the retailer has to keep in mind different things. As the mall is a public place and people from different parts of the world come there, so it becomes offensive for the public, if the retailer or any customer brings up or says anything which offends any race or culture. According to Norton â€Å"Controversial displays, by stores or customers or the plethora of organizations and agencies that present themselves in the open spaces of the mall, are not permitted. (Norton, 105) Thus they should be careful while putting anything on display keeping in mind that the mall is a public place and there are some limits and boundaries they should keep in mind. Conclusion: The purchasing of behavior totally depends on our culture and belief system. The sellers and retailers display things according to the want and culture of different people. They study their behavior and make alternations accordingly. It is the consumer who tells the seller or retailer how to attract them. The make and provide products for every gender and age of the society. KSA shopping has displays of the most expensive and fancy stuff hanging as a customer grabber. They even put up gold plated items in display to grab the customer by need or greed. USA shopping has displays with new arrivals as well as old running stock, their display of attention gathering is purely based on shoppers intention, whether they want to buy it or not,. The retailer can’t force a customer to shop at your place. This shopping trend shows well known respectable brands have the most sales because of trust. How to cite The Science of Shopping, Papers

The Ethical Debate of Assisted Suicide free essay sample

The Ethical Debate of Assisted Suicide Hippocrates the father of modern medicine stated â€Å"I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel†: clearly he opposed the practice of euthanasia, known later in modern society as â€Å"assisted suicide. † The debate regarding Euthanasia or assisted suicide has been a subject that has been examined, discussed and ethically dissected for thousands of years. Early Roman and Greek cultures regarded euthanasia as an acceptable practice, both societies sharing the opinion that â€Å"there is no need to preserve the life of someone who has no interest in living. † Centuries later, as a result of shifting morals and values, assisted suicide has become an issue of the ethics of quality vs. the sanctity of life as well as one that conflicts with religion and politics (Keelan, 2006). When religion and politics are removed from the debate of assisted suicide, what remains is the desire of a terminally ill individual to choose to end their pain and suffering, to die of their own choosing with dignity and peace, to obtain a â€Å"good death. We will write a custom essay sample on The Ethical Debate of Assisted Suicide or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page † The debate for or against assisted suicide finds its origins based in religious, political and social beliefs and viewpoints. Those who support the practice feel that the terminally ill have every right to choose to end their lives in order to avoid pain and suffering. Additionally they feel that current medical treatments for the terminally ill leave them with no alternative but to endure undo pain and suffering, prolonging a life that will end, regardless of medical practice and jurisprudence. Assisted suicide provides quality of life because it affords one the opportunity to plan and prepare for their eventual death, taking into account their needs as well as the emotional needs of those they love. To plan one’s death is to take control of one’s life to the very end, something advocates of assisted suicide claim allows for dignity and closure. Advocates for assisted suicide will argue the choice to terminate the life of an individual who is dying is an individual choice and should remain so, separate from any religious or political interference or influence: it should not be governed or mandated by laws. Furthermore, they argue that even in the best medical settings, keeping a terminally ill patient alive is only palliative, that is medicine can only reduce pain but not eliminate it all together, that suffering can and will continue. For those who are opposed to assisted suicide, often a religious or spiritual approach is the primary factor in deciding that such a practice violates both Gods and Mans laws with regards to the valuing of human life. Additionally they argue that only God has the right to take a human life and by choosing assisted suicide the patient and loved ones will not be spared any pain or suffering (Lynn, Harrold, 2006). There is the belief or hope that advances in medical science have produced drugs and medical therapies that allow for a good quality of life for the terminally ill, affording them comfort and more time with loved ones before the end comes. Perhaps society’s opposition is actually rooted more in the emotional: under the best circumstances when a family member, friend or loved one is dying, the inevitability of their loss and the grieving that goes on long after a life has ended is difficult to process and prepare. It is human nature to begin the grieving process after someone has died, not typically while a dying person is still alive. Ironically we want to shield or spare a terminally ill loved one the anguish of seeing our own grief while denying them the opportunity to shield or spare themselves from any or all anguish that can be resolved with assisted suicide. It is important to note and clarify there are several definitions amongst medical, legal, political and religious communities regarding what is considered assisted suicide. The difference and understanding of assisted suicide is paramount in understanding and ultimately taking a stance or view on the subject. Particularly in the case of physician assisted suicide. In our culture and societies, medicine and those who practice it are regarded as life savers, not life takers. It is the opinion of many that our medical communities have a responsibility to preserve life, not to participate in the voluntary ending of one. Many incorrectly assume that assisted suicide is always administered by or includes the involvement of physicians but this is not the case. A basic definition of assisted suicide states: â€Å"it is the act of intentionally killing oneself with the assistance of another who deliberately provides the knowledge, means, or both. In physician-assisted suicide, a physician provides the assistance† (Gupta, 2006). It is noted this definition actually provides two distinct, separate descriptions of â€Å"assisted suicide†; the intentional act of killing one’s self and physician assisted suicide. Gupta goes on to claim 60% of physicians agreed that physician-assisted suicide should be legal in some cases. It appears in medical circles, the issue of assisted suicide is considered both humane and appropriate for those with no hope of recovery. In the case of a person who is terminally ill, the denial of choosing assisted suicide often results in their committing suicide by their own hand in order to end their pain, once and for all. To deny one the right to end their own life is to force one to live against their own free will. In his journal End of Life Decisions and the Maximization of Length of Life Edward Stringham states â€Å"Along with the actual physical pain and suffering comes mental suffering: the constant worry and concern about the well-being of their family members who are often spending time taking care of the dying loved one and in some cases, paying the bill for the artificial extension of life. The last month of life of a terminally ill patient can consume 40% of the total spent on healthcare during the lifetime of an individual. If the patient has already told family members that he wishes to die and discontinue burdening himself and his family members, assisted suicide should be permissible—especially if the whole family and friend network is in agreement. † Too often the mental death and the physical death all people experience sooner or later are not reconciled with one another and in the case of a loved one; the physical needs are often taken into account before the mental needs. We can see the physical pain and suffering but cannot see or know what is taking place inside the psyche of a dying person. From a social standpoint the issue of assisted suicide crosses ethical and religious boundaries making it difficult for many people to understand or consider. Because ethics are often based upon personal morals people tend to have a â€Å"bandwagon appeal† attitude about assisted suicide; it is either right or it is wrong. Many cannot reconcile assisted suicide to being anything more than what their personal beliefs tell them it is: murder. They hold true to their Christian beliefs that all life is sacred and the taking of a life, even to release or relieve someone of their pain and suffering is unthinkable, a sin in the eyes of God. For them, the right to life will always override the right to die by one’s own choosing. It is believed that seeing someone die a natural death is a part of the process of life, that is they consider it holy, justifiable and is in keeping with the natural order of things, i. e. God’s plan. Changes in morality and ethics within our culture however have begun to consider assisted suicide as not only a personal choice but an option when medicine can no longer stop the pain or prolong life in a comfortable, dignified manner. Media attention has brought â€Å"right to die† discussions into the living rooms of millions of Americans, making it a subject that is being discussed more than ever. Assisted suicide is a subject that makes most humans uncomfortable for it makes us examine the subject of our own mortality. When considering assisted suicide, with or without the presence of a physician, it is a question at some point most will ask themselves: â€Å"If I am dying and there is no hope for recovery, would I choose to end my life in order to end my pain and suffering? † We are forced to examine our own morals, ethics and spiritual beliefs, a tall order for a healthy human being. For the terminally ill, the time for such personal examination can be well behind them, the focus being on release. In the case of a family member having to decide for a dying loved one, the biggest dilemma or question they face is â€Å"Am I doing the right thing? As morals change, so do the terms and conditions of assisted suicide. While many still think of assisted suicide as murder, others have changed their viewpoints by claiming it should be allowed if a person has less than six months to live or they are in a permanent vegetative state. Perhaps a change in thinking such as this is an attempt to appeal to the moral majority as well as those who support the practice of assisted suicide. Or perhaps many individuals are beginning to apply the possibility of opting for it, as we are all going to die one day. Fear of pain, medical expenses, prolonging the pain and suffering of self and family has created a new way of looking at assisted suicide: we all hope for a good death and by eliminating fear, pain and suffering, maybe that too can be considered God’s plan for us. Recent high-profile cases of assisted suicide, such as the case of Terri Schiavo, a victim of an abnormal cardiac condition which rendered her brain dead at the age of 26, raised the question (and awareness) as to whether or not assisted suicide is morally and ethically wrong. Schiavo’s husband Michael wanted to end his wife’s life by choosing passive assisted suicide. Her parents were opposed to his decision as they felt that if their daughter could make the choice, she would choose to stay alive. Her husband argued Terri would not want to be kept alive, but neither side could produce substantiated proof or documents that supported these wishes, only conversations she had with family members and friends (Shepard, 2009). Shiavo’s parents attempted to dispute medical tests and diagnosis by claiming that while Terri could not speak she could move her eyes and make facial gestures that suggested recognition and emotional connection (Snead, 2006). Despite a medical diagnosis of permanent vegetative state, Robert and Mary Schindler, Schiavo’s parents, held out hope that their daughter would one day recover. The Schiavo case sparked national debate: many felt that since Terri was alive she was a living human being; to euthanize Terri Schiavo would be committing murder. Others felt that because she would remain in a vegetative state, she was no longer â€Å"alive† and therefore her husband had every right, morally, ethically and legally, to choose to end his wife’s life. As a result, for the first time in U. S. history, a sitting president, George W. Bush, acting from a conservative religious position, signed legislation to keep Terri Schiavo alive. Ironically, as the governor of Texas, Bush signed into effect the Texas Advance Directives Act, also known as the Texas Futile Care Law which grants hospitals the right to cut off life sustaining treatment within 10 days of a doctor giving written notice that such treatment is no longer appropriate or successful. Bush opposed allowing Terri Schiavo to die naturally by having her feeding tube removed, an act that is in fact allowable under the Texas Futile Care Law. Futile-care† laws effectively disregard a patient’s directive or family member’s decision, and instead, place control of end-of-life matters in the hands of physicians and hospital ethics committees (Marietta, 2007). Eventually all appeals to keep Schiavo alive failed and on March 31, 2005, thirteen days after her feeding tube was removed, she passed away. Her feeding tube had been removed and replaced two times previous to her death, amid the ensuring political and religious debates and arguments surrounding assisted suicide (Quill 2005). But was it murder? The conservative religious contingent steadfastly considers assisted suicide to be murder. However, when considering the toll a protracted, non-curable illness takes on the patient and their family, assisted suicide should be looked at as a viable option for those who are terminally ill or in a permanent vegetative state. It begs the question as to why citizens can legally sign a â€Å"Do Not Resuscitate† or â€Å"DNR† order which can lead to an early death but cannot legally choose to die via assisted living. Those supporters of the â€Å"Right to Life† will claim that a DNR order allows for a natural death while assisted suicide ends a life prematurely. It is important to note the clarification between euthanasia and assisted suicide: euthanasia generally refers to mercy killing, i. e. the voluntary ending of the life of someone who is perceived as being terminally or â€Å"hopelessly† ill. Assisted suicide on the other hand â€Å"occurs when persons deemed as having terminal illness or a disability are aided in a deliberate act of ending their lives by physicians, loved ones or other care givers or acquaintances. The difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide occurs because the latter constitutes a joint action between the person wishing to die and another complying with those wishes† (MLPD, 2011). Any terminally ill patient should be afforded the right to choose assisted suicide as a means to end their pain and suffering, be it through passive or active euthanasia. Ultimately the decision to terminate life must be based upon the quality of life of an individual. In doing so, they obtain their â€Å"good death†; they die when they want to, on their own terms, in their own time, all things that many human beings, if given the chance, would aspire to do. Politics and religion aside, just as all human beings should be afforded the right to make decisions that govern and affect their lives, they should be able to make decisions that govern how their lives will end. For those who want to spare their families the burden of having to make the choice of terminating life in the event they experience a cardiac arrest or stop breathing, signing a DNR order is appropriate. In the case of an individual who is terminally ill, they should have the right to end their suffering, to spare themselves (and their families) the emotional and financial burden that will surely occur when trying to prolong a life that modern medical science cannot save. Looking at the issue of assisted suicide from this perspective, one wonders if Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine and early opposition to euthanasia, would change his opinion about ending ones’ life early to end undue pain and suffering. Assisted suicide is not murder; it is a release from the tragic agony of an individual whose soul is trapped in a physical body that can no longer sustain and support their life. To deny a dying person their right to choose assisted suicide is to be morally and ethically questionable; to insist on prolonging human suffering and pain it morally and ethically unthinkable. Religion and politics must give way to allow a person the right to choose assisted suicide. In doing so, individuals can obtain a good death, spending their final days, hours and minutes in peace, knowing that they soon will end their suffering in this life and begin a new journey into the next one.