My Sources

As my research for this particular project went on, I picked out my top 10 sources of information. Below is an analysis of each source, as well as a link to the source itself.

"There's Nothing Progressive about Physician-Assisted Suicide"

• This source comes from Time Magazine's website. This makes it pretty credible, as Time magazine is a well-known, and widely read magazine both in print and on the web.
• The author of this source is Christopher J. Hale, who is the director at Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. According to LinkedIn, he studied at Xavier University. Because this information is all readily available, that makes it much more believable, as it is tied to Hale's name. 
• This source was published on October 14, 2015. At this time, the case of Brittany Maynard, who wanted the right to die was nearly a year old. Because of Maynard's publicity, this article could be seen as a response to her death a year after.
• This article gives a source of information about people who are against the right to physician-assisted suicide. The stakeholders in this particular article are people who believe that it is for religious reasons that one should not have the right to choose when they die. It's important to my project because in the project I will be taking an unbiased approach to the story.

Time, Inc. "Logo of Time" 07/11/2009 via Wikimedia Commons. PD-TEXTLOGO license.

"Physician Assisted Suicide Fast Facts"

• This source comes from CNN's website which leads me to believe that it is very trustworthy and credible, as CNN is a major news source that has a reputation for being reputable.
• The author of this story is listed as "CNN Library" which is confusing to me. Since this source is written like a quick reference guide, it takes information from other sources that are cited. So I'm assuming that this article is more of a link to other articles written by CNN journalists.
• The source came out on October 6, 2015. At this time, California had just passed a law that allows citizens to choose the time of their deaths in cases of terminal illness. Due to the highly contested nature of this law, CNN probably released this article to give more quick information for the average person interested in what was going on.
• This source gives important information specifically about how the laws in each state work as well as opposing viewpoints. It represents the people who are for the legislation and those who are against it as well, as it is more of an informative, rather than argumentative article. It's important to my project because of the relevant information that it supplies about the topic of my controversy.

TimeWarner. "Logo" 06/08/2014 via Wikimedia Commons. PD-TEXTLOGO license.

"Dying with Dignity, the Case for Physician-Assisted Suicide"

• This article is from a student newspaper out of Colorado State University. I would think that an article coming out of a college newspaper would be credible, especially because the author of the article is tied to it by name, which would impact their career and future if something were untrue.
• The author of this story is Brittany Jordan, a journalism student at Colorado State University. I would say that Brittany has credibility because she sources information throughout her article and her reputation is tied to this article, which is incentive to be truthful.
• This article was posted on October 13, 2015, in wake of California's decision to pass legislation that made physician assisted suicide lawful. This is an opinion piece, so I believe that this opinion was written in response to California's decision, and to advocate for Colorado's decision regarding the same matter.
• This source gives a liberal opinion regarding the issue of physician assisted suicide. It's also the opinion of a young person, so that reaches a different demographic as well. It's important, when writing an unbiased piece, that you see all opinions on the matter. As I had previously mentioned, I have a source from a conservative Catholic organization, so this opinion could be seen as somewhat of an opposite of that.

"Physician Assisted Death"

• This article is from a website of a "nonpartisan research institution dedicated to bioethics." This leads me to believe that it is a credible source, as it is unbiased and is the official website of a well-known research institution. 
• There are two authors of this article, Timothy E. Quill and Jane Greenlaw. Quill is a doctor as well as a professor of medicine at Rochester University. Greenlaw is an RN as well as a professor of bioethics at the University of Rochester. Given both the authors credentials and backgrounds, I would say that this is a credible article. 
• This article does not say when it was first published, but because it is a briefing and a timeline on the controversy of physician assisted death, it leads me to believe that the article is very current with information as it has dates from October of 2015. This article is purely objective, so it was no doubt written to inform people of a controversy that has been debated for a long time.
• Because this article is so objective, it will be useful in my article as an idea for me of how to keep unbiased when I literally have an opinion about everything. Besides that, it has a timeline which is always useful information and will no doubt help when I'm making graphics for my quick reference guide. 

"Debate: Should Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legal?"

• This is a podcast from NPR's website. The fact that it comes from NPR means to me that it is probably a reputable source, as NPR is a radio station and news source that is found all around the country and listened to by many people. 
• Involved in this particular debate are Peter Singer, Andrew Solomon, Ilora Finlay, and Dr. Daniel Sulmasy. I looked up all of these people and found out that they all have very credible backgrounds. So even though this is a debate in the form of a podcast, I would say that I believe that the opinions of the people involved are based on credible facts. 
• This debate took place in November of 2014, right before Brittany Maynard was scheduled to take her life with the help of physician-prescribed drugs. It could be possible that this debate was scheduled because at this time, the controversy of physician-assisted suicide was a hot topic because of Maynard. This debate took place in New York, a state where physician-assisted death is not legal. If they had done it in a state where it was legal, there would probably be less of an even divide between the two sides. 
• This podcast is extremely valuable because it gives two professional opinions on either of the sides. Rather than having extremists opinions, such as liberal college students and religious organizations have, the people involved in this debate are professionals in the field and are likely to be more objective when forming their opinions. 

Esrever. "Logo of the National Public Radio (NPR)"12/01/2007 via Wikimedia Commons. PD-TEXTLOGO license.

"My Right to Death with Dignity at 29"

• This is a post from CNN's website. Because CNN is considered a reputable news source, I would believe that this is a credible source.
• The author of this post is Brittany Maynard herself. She was the one who was at the center of the controversy in 2014-2015. I would say that she knows the case very well. She may be biased obviously, but as she was so involved in the movement to allow people to die with dignity, that she is obviously knowledgable about what it takes. 
• All of this takes place in Portland,  OR where physician-assited suicide is an available option. This article was written roughly a month before Maynard decided that she would end her life. This is important to the story, because Maynard was from CA where it was not yet legal, so if she had been there and had not been able to move, there is a chance that the story could have turned out differently.
• This is a story that tells the author's story about her journey through finding a place where she had the right to die. She also talks about her advocacy for the fight to allow this option to become available throughout all 50 states. Although Maynard's opinion is clearly biased, she is a major stakeholder in the story as she is one of the ones who wanted the right to die and was willing to fight for it.

"It Was Her Time: Brittany Maynard's Husband on Letting Her Go"

• This source comes from NBC news. NBC is seen as a credible news source, so that leads one to believe that the content in their articles and on their website is all credible information.
• The author of this post is Bill Briggs, a major contributor to NBC news, and the father of a girl who has permanent brain damage from an accident when she was 20. Because he is a main contributor to the website, that leads me to believe that he is credible. Because he also knows how it feels to have a family member in the hospital with no hopes of improving their life quality, I would think that Briggs is actually a good one to conduct this interview as he can relate in some ways to Brittany Maynard's husband.
• This article was written on January 14, 2015, about two months after Brittany Maynard's death. This interview was no doubt a response to the heavily publicized case of Maynard's death. This article takes place in California, the original home of Maynard and her husband. After Maynard chose to end her suffering, her husband returned to their home in the CA Bay area, as they no longer had need to live in Oregon. 
• This story gives the opinion of the one person who should have wanted Maynard to continue to live. This is a very valuable opinion on the topic, because although Maynard's husband stood to lose everything, his wife, his family, and his normal life, he still believed that Brittany was doing the right thing for herself. The opinion of someone this close to the controversy is definitely a valuable opinion, as he himself was a major stakeholder in the case.

"Mixed Medical Views on Brittany Maynard's Choice to Die"

• This source comes from the reputable news source known as the Boston Globe. Based on the fact that you have to buy a subscription to see more than 5 of the articles on the site, I would guess that this is a legitimate news source, because why else would people pay for it?
• This article was written by Deborah Kotz, a former journalist and current press officer for the FDA, according to her LinkedIn. She went to Cornell University. Her credentials and he current job position would have one believe that she is a credible source of information. 
• This article was written the week after Brittany Maynard decided to end her life. No doubt that this article was written as a direct response to what happened with Maynard. Although the article was written in Boston, it shares the story of Maynard who was in Portland, OR at the time. The relevance of the article being written in Mass. is that in Mass., it's still being debated about whether someone should have the right to choose when to die. 
• This source is valuable to my project because it highlights how even after Maynard's death, there is still a huge controversy as to how other states should deal with the right for patients who are terminally ill to decide when to die. It also gives valuable viewpoints of medical professionals in a state where it is being debated currently. 

"Arguments against Brittany Maynard's Assisted Suicide Ignore Her Point of View on Suffering"

• This website is a dot org site so that makes me believe that it is more credible than if it weren't. It also seems to be the website of a specific group of people, as it is the National Catholic Reporter. Although I've never heard of the website, it seems very legitimate as they have links and places where you can contact the web source if you'd like.
• The author of this article is Kelly Stewart, a Yale Divinity School graduate in the field of feminist and queer theory and Catholic sexual and reproductive ethics. Because of her background in religion, I would expect her opinion to be biased, but credible because of her education.
• This article was written in the month following Maynard's death. I believe this article to be a response to the general Catholic opinion about a patient choosing when they want to die. This specific article does not mention anything about a specific location, but it talks about Maynard dying in Portland and the Pope talking about Maynard in a speech that he gave.
• This source is valuable because it presents two, separate religious opinions: one that believes Maynard made the right choice, and one that believes she was wrong in choosing to die. This article presents the stakeholders in the church and gives specific examples of people who are on either side of the controversy.

"Brain Cancer Will Likely Kill Me, But There's No Way I'll Kill Myself"

• This article is presented on a website called The Federalist. In my research about it, I discovered that it is a web magazine that has articles centered on religion, politics, and culture. So in other words, don't talk about this magazine at a family dinner. Although the website appears to have a clear bias in their stances, everything seems to be factual and credible.
• The author of this article is a woman named Maggie Karner who has a similar type of brain cancer as Brittany Maynard had. This is an opinion/editorial type piece where Karner explains that she is in the same situation, but she has the exact opposite views on it. I would say she is credible because of her experience.
• This article was written as a response to Maynard's choice to kill herself. Karen's article takes place in Connecticut, another state that doesn't allow a patient to choose when they want to die.
• This source is important because it shows someone who is in the same shoes as Maynard, who has the exact opposite opinions of Maynard. This will be valuable for my project because it gives an opinion of someone other than Maynard who is going through the exact same thing and has a different idea about how she should handle it. 

Thefederalist.com. "Logo of Thefederalist.com" 10/06/2014 via Wikimedia Commons. PD-TEXTLOGO license.