English
Before I answer the question: “Should suicide or assisted suicide be legalized,” I would like to define first what suicide is. The term suicide means the killing of oneself. It is also known by the following synonyms or hyponyms: assisted suicide, felo-de-se, self-destruction, self-annihilation, seppuku, suttee, or hara-kiri. Similarly, assisted suicide is defined as the act of deliberately giving assistance or even encouraging an individual to commit or attempt to commit suicide. Many people consider suicide or assisted suicide are terminating one’s own life due to various psychological, financial, familial, communal, pathological, etc. reasons. Whether it is the person’s will or with the assistance of someone else (e.g., physician), he/she would rather be kill him-/herself prior to his/her natural demise because of their severe depression, mental problem, continual suffering, or long agony brought about by various highly negative conditions (Ganzini, Goy and Dobscha).
Given such scenario, defenders of suicide or assisted suicide advocate for the basic human rights of all people, not only of life, liberty, and property, but also death (or “right to die) (Grish). They insist that killing oneself or with the assistance of other individuals, should be made legal because it is there choice. On the other hand, opponents suicide or assisted suicide groups assert that killing oneself (or letting others do it for them) is similar to a form of murder to oneself, which is unnatural, immoral, and therefore, not to be made lawful. Hence, the question remains whether to legalize suicide or not. But before that, let me present first claims and counterclaims of those who are in favor or against the legalization of suicide and why it should matter to the present and future generations.
Pro-Suicide Groups/Individuals
Pro-suicide people claim that all people have the explicit rights to choose what to do with their lives, even to the point of annihilating it with their own hands. For them, people possess the personal freedom to do as they please with their lives, such as when under the anathema of a debilitating illness, chronic psychiatric illness, and so on. Additionally, pro-suicide individuals argue that all human beings have inalienable human rights (e.g., life, liberty, property) – and/or even death. Since people own their lives, it is on their own discretion and risk to choose among the best alternatives in life. For instance, some people or their family members kill their loved one (that is, euthanasia), using the assistance of a doctor, such as in cases of being brain dead (Huxtable). Even Japanese who wanted to save faces resort to hara-kiri or traditional ritual suicide, which is not a taboo or considered by their culture. Hence, not far from the concept of various forms of self-destruction (e.g., euthanasia), suicide is considered as an alternative too for people who want to end their own life because of their unbearable suffering, hopes for a decent death, and possibly fears of abuse. Hence, people who terminate themselves do not violate other individuals’ rights, suicide should be legally permitted by our society. For pro-suicide groups, it is a violation of personal freedom if people are denied killing themselves because of their pitiful life that they are now considering or assuming as unworthy of continued existence. Thus, many adherents of suicide assert that upon people attaining maturity, they should already have control over all their decisions in life. Since people on earth came into this world without predetermined consent, it is only fitting now that as rational individuals, they should be given full discretionary power to decide and act according to their best interest as autonomous beings. Family members of those who undergo commit suicide are even more thankful for having physician-assisted suicide because it is already nearly impossible for these kind of people to even live normal lives, much less continued existence. Self-infliction of death is like a sweet smelling aroma for these peoples’ souls once they finally become detached from their earthly lives that are only full of pains, hardships, challenges, loneliness, un-lovingness, disgrace, and so on. (Note, however, physician-assisted suicide violates their “oath to do no harm) (Gholipour).
Second, pro-suicide advocates insist that to avoid great economic burden, wastage of health, medical, and other resources, patients who really intent to kill themselves should rather be allowed to die, especially if they already had numerous attempts to commit suicide or the tendency to do so because they believe that they have the suicide gene. The reason why allowing these people to annihilate themselves is to help conserve a variety of other mental health and other related financial, social, educational, etc. resources for other hundreds or even millions of indigent individuals who need more immediate help and treatment for curable diseases. Apparently, pro-suicide individuals believe that there are more people from many underdeveloped and calamity-prone countries who need the most financial services (such as, healthcare, medical) – so why bother for consultation and various therapy sessions these people will have given the fact that they already became detached from the reality as normal people know it to be? If more scarce resources are saved, thousands or even millions of people will be cured to live healthy and meaningful lives and become productive members again of their society (such as when money is allocated on research for the cure of a particular disease). Since some individuals who suffer constantly mental breakdown and related excruciating pain (whether mental or physical), if they wanted to die anyway, so be it. It is best instead to allot human assistance or economic support to those who want to, which is less of a burden for those who care (e.g., loved ones or healthcare professionals involved in end-of-life decisions) (Seale 198). With more and more people committing suicide, there is no need to administer to them expensive medications and other amenities as compared to those who have a greater chance of recuperating from common diseases (such as in the use of vaccine). If normal people or those who are mentally deranged would really like to kill themselves through various means, pro-suicide people even urge technologists and inventors to make a device that would help these individuals perform the supposed ‘ritual’ of killing themselves, just like hara-kiri where a samurai is used. Because these suicidal individuals will die anyway, it is better if they do it now while they have the gut to do it. In the same vein, whether they are in their proper minds or not, if they acquire a disease that is nearly impossible to cure, they will still consider killing themselves later on. So, why wait? Consider that people, for example, who are comatose, terminally ill, or in vegetative states, continue to live for years or decades, suffer the more, and remain as burdens of their families and society, will have suicide or assisted suicide as their only option then. Thus, why should not we rather give these individuals what they want or deserve (that is, self-destruction).
Given the arguments above by pro-suicide groups/individuals, if suicide is legalized, many people can then choose the right time and place to die as an alternative or for their best interest. With laws, suicide or assisted suicide would be practiced legally by anyone who wish to perform it at their own volition without impediment of any kind. When it is legalized, it might become a “trend” and would imply proper regulatory measures for medical practitioners (DebateWise: Where Great Minds Differ). Thus, instead of a person committing suicide in secret or licensed doctors performing suicide clandestinely to a person (but with the consent of family members), it will not be the case anymore because they will not get punished by the government or met with social stigma. Just like prostitution, gambling, abortion, etc. in other countries, because they are legal, there is no problem for individuals and their professional practitioners to engage in it. Individuals who plan to commit suicide are not stigmatized, rehabilitated, incarcerated, thought as freaks, made as outcast, and so on. People who opt to do such self-killing freely will do so lawfully. Since suicide or assisted suicide happens anywhere anyway at any time across the world, pro-suicide claimers push for its lawful implementation as the only possible best solution for people to be free to do what they consider beneficial for them on the long run. With suicide being legal, many more physicians would then practice assist in killing people who wish to die without much burden to conscience. Since death is a part of the normal cycle of life, why should we not rather have suicide as an alternative? Should we rather allow it to be neutrally legal/illegal, or in the case of assisted suicide, illegal so that more people will be incarcerated for being assistive to others? Are not other countries have harsher laws, who kill others for the sake of their tradition (e.g., beheading other human being whose religious practices are contrary to theirs)? Why should not rather legalize suicide so that individuals and healthcare professionals have to follow utmost professional standards in performing the killing of their fellow human beings? And, this polemical and taboo topic is open to discussion (The Canadian Press). However, before delivering my final statement about this polemical matter, let me proceed with those who are against the legalization of suicide.
Anti-Suicide Individuals
The refutation to the above first pro-suicide argument is that anti-suicide groups argue that despite people having rights, freedom, or free will, it is limited. God has the Sole Authority to take people’s lives. Since God is the Provider of Life and Everything, He alone is the Rightful Claimer of the life of any person. Despite the fact that individuals die in different manners, God has the final word when it is time for human beings to rest in peace. In other words, anything that people call freedom is limited because of being mortal beings only. Unlike God who is Immortal, although He takes again people’s lives, He alone can resurrect them. No one, for that matter, is above The Almighty. People should not use their freedom to do anything that is contrary to the normal flow of nature (that is, suicide or assisted suicide). Hence, many anti-suicide groups argue that no argument is best to justify the killing of oneself, even with other people’s consents, no matter how good a person or other people’s reasoning and intentions are. Anti-suicide people assert that no person is as wise and loving as God. Because human beings will die anyway, let alone God decide when it is time for people to face death. Further, individuals who like to legalize suicide will only weaken respect for the sanctity of life. The fact that there are unscrupulous and evil-minded individuals means that they will advance their own self- or vested-interest to make other people’s lives miserable, such as making a person ill when given a drug that will cause normal mental functioning or impairment; thus, the tendency for the victims to commit suicide. In some cases, even when someone who hopeless (e.g., due to terminally ill or vegetative state) does not yet really want to die, that is, should he/she be given the chance to exercise his/her normal thinking, he/she may not concur with the supposedly ‘assisted suicide’ inspired by these evil people. As the cliché goes: I living dog is better than a dead lion because the former may still have hopes of surviving. Somehow, many individuals still believe in life changing miracles, that they do happen. So, as believers of God, they do wait and see rather succumb to futility.
Second, for anti-suicide groups, killing oneself or assisting a person to kill him-/herself to conserve psychiatric, financial, medical, etc. resources is simply a foolish idea of evil-minded individuals. People’s lives are more precious than all the material possessions in the world. Likewise, if an individual simply him-/herself as no-good, there are other people who can give good or even excellent advice to keep living despite anything to the positive vibes in life. If suicide or assisted suicide is made legal, some people may be forced to commit suicide at the expense of precious lives. More ethical and associated problems and issues may ensue in the process or later on. Professionals and other practitioners may abuse the authority given to them by law to get rid of their enemies, mentally ill patients, and other individuals seen as burdens only of our society. When people kill themselves or others help them to kill themselves, is there humanity or human compassion in doing so? Can we bring people’s lives back should there suddenly be a solutions or treatments to their problem, diseases, etc.? Instead, people opposed to assisted suicide prefer to have a suicidal person to lessen its “distressing symptoms so that [they] can both live well and die well” (British Broadcasting Corporation).
In conclusion, I am not in favor of legalizing suicide or assisted suicide because I strongly believe that God will not allow life’s sanctity to be diminished of its true value. In addition, suicide might only lead to other unexpected outcomes and disadvantages (e.g., more ‘murders,’ coerced death, non-voluntary euthanasia, etc.) (O'Steen and Balch). Moreover, it can be used for more inhumane acts never before thought of, such as killing oneself in exchange for a person’s family member to have the insurance money. Further, legalizing suicide would undermine more and more the people’s lives because not all professionals will act in the name of laws, good conscience, etc., although in other cases, because of pressure (Andre and Velasquez). Some selfish individuals who value money more than lives will have more chance to perform assisted suicide intentionally for their own evil purposes and gains. Therefore, suicide or assisted suicide will be much more unfavorable to anyone who live but once; so, why not rather value life despite anything to it? Yet, I still want to leave the question with you or talk about it with others, locally or nationally: Should suicide or assisted suicide be legalized? It is yours to decide and people you love to consider doing. Would you rather lose them?
Works Cited
Andre, Claire and Manuel Velasquez. Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong? 2010. Web. 22 November 2013.
British Broadcasting Corporation. Perspectives: Should the law allow assisted suicide? 13 May 2013. Web. 22 November 2013.
DebateWise: Where Great Minds Differ. Assisted suicide should be legal. n.d. Web. 22 November 2013.
Ganzini, L., E. Goy and S. Dobscha. "Prevalence of depression and anxiety in patients requesting physicians' aid in dying." BMJ (2008): 337. Web.
Gholipour, Bahar. Should Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? Poll Shows Divide Among Experts. 12 September 2013. Web. 21 November 2013.
Grish, Gaye. "World Federation of Right to Die Societies: ensuring choices for a dignified death." Right to Die News Letter 3 April 2009. Web. 21 November 2013.
Huxtable, R. Euthanasia, Ethics and the Law. New York: Routledge Cavendish, 2007. Print.
O'Steen, David and Burke Balch. What's Wrong with Making Assisted Suicide Legal? n.d. Web. 22 November 2013.
Seale, C. "End-of-life decisions in the UK involving medical practitioners." Palliative Medicine 23.3 (2009): 198-204. 198–204.
The Canadian Press. Ottawa willing to talk assisted suicide, but won't legalize it. 3 October 2013. Web. 22 November 2013.
