English
Euthanasia has always been a controversial social issue in the cultures around the world. It is associated with ethical issues as well as social consequences. The term Euthanasia itself means, mercy killing. It is the process of ending someone's life based on that person’s own wish. When a person wants to end his life because he is suffering from a terminal disease or some other weakening condition, Euthanasia is often recommended. In most of the states of the United States, euthanasia is considered illegal. However in many states including California, physician-assisted suicides are legalized based on the requirement of the situation. The Administration of California passed a law making physician-assisted suicide legal in September 2015. Jerry Brown the Governor signed the bill and made it a law in October 2015. This law was made as a supportive law to the Natural Death Act of California which permits the taking away of life-support systems for terminally ill patients. California has already accepted many such laws like the ‘End of Life Option Act’ which allows terminally sick patients to make use of lethal drugs, which they can use for themselves to end their life to put an end to suffering. Often Euthanasia is a term used to say about mercy killing, which is different from an assisted suicide. In mercy killing, the taking away of life is homicide itself. Any action resulting in death is killing. There are controversies that, even if it is done based on the request of the patient, it should come under the purview of homicide as an action by an individual is leading to the death of another person. Assisted suicide is a general phrase used to explain the method to help a person end his life. However, this is mostly done on an implementation level by the physicians. Different methodologies can be adopted to execute this. Lethal drugs taken as an intravenous injection is the most commonly practiced system. Most of the drugs used for mercy killing offer a peaceful and calm death for the patients. Removing life support is a different thing considering the fact that, in this case, the patient in pain will not survive if the medical care is not constantly available. This type of medical care can be life support systems like an artificial ventilator, an intravenous supply of life-support nutrients, or electric signals to retain heart beat. For carrying out Euthanasia, there should be permission from the patient to remove the life-support. (California Euthanasia Laws - FindLaw)
California's ‘End of Life Option Act’ was a controversial one, as it dealt with the deliberate ending of human life. ‘The End of Life Option Act’ became law in 2015. This law had provisions permitting incurably sick patients who are sure to die within six months to opt for a self-induced death by taking the help of a physician. The patient should also go through a screening process to ensure that he is mentally fit to take the decision under his free will.
The historical timeline of Euthanasia is also worth mentioning. In 1972, the US Senate held the initial National Hearings on Euthanasia to discuss the topic on a national scale. The United States Senate Special Commission on Aging (SCA) conducted the primary nationwide discussions on the right to die. In 1974, a new organization named ‘Society for the Right to Die’ was formed. It was in December 1984 that American Medical Association extended their support towards removing life supporting medical aids in certain inevitable situations. In March 1976, the US Supreme Court Ruled while hearing the Quinlan Case that artificial ventilators may be removed if the patient wishes so. (Historical Timeline - Euthanasia)
The historical case on Euthanasia was of Karen Ann Quinlan which initiated a debate whether removing life-supporting facilities from a patient who is not sure to die of an illness, and who cannot be even called alive in medical terms is acceptable. In earlier times, the choice whether to use the life support systems or not was a personal choice. However, with this case, the issue was in front of the courts. The revolutionary verdict by the Supreme Court of New Jersey in this case later became the model for many cases all over America.
The sequence of the case started in 1975. Karen Ann Quinlan was a 21-year-old girl who was a patient suffering from cardiopulmonary illness after consuming a mixture of alcohol and a combination of recreational drugs. The medical condition became serious, and she was diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) which is an irrecoverable brain-dead situation. Dr. Fred Plum, the noted neurosurgeon, declared her as an individual who no longer has any cognitive capabilities. She had a normal blood pressure and made some sounds, however, she was not aware of anything in her life. She was kept alive using a respirator from the day she was in the hospital. Even though her parents requested physicians to remove the support systems so that she would be relieved from the suffering, the doctors denied their requests on legal grounds.
Subsequently, her father, Joseph Quinlan, approached the court to get sanction to remove life support systems. The court did not accept his appeal to remove Quinlan's respirators. In March 1976, the Supreme Court of New Jersey made a verdict that, if the ethics committee of the hospital could find that Quinlan will not recuperate from the stage of coma, her artificial respirator may be detached. Later, Quinlan's life support was removed. However, she sustained to breathe normally and continued in comma stage till she died in 1985. (Court and the End of Life - The Right To Privacy: Karen Ann Quinlan)
In the modern context, there is a need for ethical, legal as well as medical studies on Euthanasia. The book, ‘Euthanasia, Death with Dignity and the Law’ by Hazel Biggs and ‘Right to Die and Euthanasia’ by Lisa Yount are great resources to continue advanced research on the topic.
Considering the above factors, Euthanasia may be considered as humanitarian practice. However, the chances of abusing the norms should be considered as well. The effective implementation of Euthanasia is very important as it involves valuable human lives. A much detailed study about Euthanasia and its impact on the society will be helpful to predict the future of the newly made laws.
In my personal opinion, studies on Euthanasia and the laws relating to it need high priority. The main reason is that the newly passed law needs to be time-tested for its implementation, and its effects on the society. Since this rule gives authority to remove an individual from life support system, a lot of risk factors and malpractices can be associated. Due to the same reason, I think that research on this topic will spread light to the future generations regarding the situation that led to the formation of a new law and also about its consequences.
Works Cited
"California Euthanasia Laws - FindLaw." Findlaw. Web. 10 Apr. 2016. <http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-euthanasia-laws.html>.
"Court and the End of Life - The Right To Privacy: Karen Ann Quinlan." - Supreme, Medical, Respirator, and Patient. Web. 10 Apr. 2016. <http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/582/Court-End-Life-RIGHT-PRIVACY-KAREN-ANN-QUINLAN.html>.
"Historical Timeline - Euthanasia - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. Web. 10 Apr. 2016. <http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.timeline.php?timelineID=000022>.
