From the standpoint of the nature of life, individuals have the right to decide on life. However, the Patient Right to Autonomy Act in Taiwan is a law through the national legislation, giving patients the option to choose their own medical treatment. Determining how to face the right of life or death, highlights the essence of autonomy and our well-being by resorting to the law.
If the "right to survive or die" is to be won through the consensus of the legislation, then it is doubtful whether the limited provisions formed by the combination of a few people and communication can be expected to resolve the self- determination of life and the sorrow of loved ones through the medical "informed consent" obligation.
In order to comb through this issue, this article further examines the legislative procedures of the Patient Right to Autonomy Act and found the process full of defects. In the process a single legislator leads the motion, there are a lot biases in policy implementations, political consultations depending on the party line, on certain professionals opinions, and compromise on the efficiency of the proceedings, as well as the emphasis on the authorizing administrative agencies. This result may lead to the effectiveness of the act in the name of protecting the patient's autonomy, but instead it is protecting the medical institutions or physicians from their medical obligations and responsibilities.
Finally, this paper argues that the limited nature of the provisions of the Act does solve some specific social problems. It seems to guarantee that people have the right to choose to die naturally. In fact, the implementation of autonomy at the end of life still depends on the how the caring professionals meet the needs of terminal patients.