Having looked at the PAD debate from either side of the argument, and having known what leads terminally ill patients to consider PAD, it is wise to consider whether the choices made by the terminally ill patients are worth the risk of having their lives terminated. By the time many of them are making the decision to have their lives ended, they will have made conscious and informed comparative searches and arrived at the decision to have someone help them end their lives. Many are the times when these patients are put on life- saving medical treatments without which they could be dead already. Some patients look at their accumulating medical bills that keep rising every day, and it comes to their realization that even with the treatment they receive they will not recover. For them, the treatment may not be worth the sacrifice and the debts they will end up leaving their families. That is the point when physician-assisted suicide makes a lot of sense to them. Some patients will choose to make the choice to withdraw from life- saving medical treatment even when they are well aware that their action might lead to their death.
The choice to end one’s life by being assisted poses no legal or ethical problems if the patient is of sound mind and that physicians are only acting according to their wishes. In fact, in the face of unbearable pain and suffering, it defeats logic why people would sit by and watch another suffering. Justice dictates that terminally ill patients are accorded the right to determine the path their lives will take more so when they cannot bear their pain. It is, therefore, their legal right to choose whether to live through their pain or not. But it is imperative to note that it is hard for society to understand their predicament and more especially because people do not know what it means to be in pain. For instance, if Jahi McMath’s mother could reconsider her choices, she can allow PAD be done on her daughter so as to save herself from prolonged suffering having to watch her daughter lie in a coma for such a long time. It is only wise to have decisions about ending one’s life remains personal decisions because it is only the patient who understands their predicament; physicians are only witnesses to the pain. Other people may never understand the reason one may choose to die a premature death.
There are states where physician aid in dying is legal, and they include Oregon, Washington and Vermont. In Oregon, the citizens passed the Oregon Death with Dignity Act in 1997. In Washington, the people passed The Washington State Death with Dignity Act in 2009, and other states are following suit. What that means is that the United States is waking up to the realization that the death with dignity Act is gaining momentum and citizens are beginning to appreciate the fact that patients should be accorded permission to die a dignified death. But that does not mean that anyone can just decide to ask for help to die because there is a serious eligibility criterion that is used. Some of the things that are looked at include the age of the patient, an oral request by the patient, and a written request among other things. When that is the case, it becomes easy to determine who deserves to ask for PAD and whether they qualify.
It is imperative to acknowledge that PAD is only administered by certified persons who are knowledgeable about issues of medicine and the medical conditions of patients. For instance, in Oregon, the only person eligible to intervene when a patient request for assisted suicide is a doctor of medicine or doctor of osteopathy; and they have to be licensed by the Board of Medical Examiners for the State of Oregon. Washington too has the same criterion. Other health care providers, nurses, physicians, pharmacists and other persons are not allowed to give qualified patients the prescriptions. That means that there are strict rules of regulation that have been put in place to ensure no one abuses this law. Necessary steps have been enacted to ensure that patients are protected from unscrupulous medics and family members who might want to hasten their deaths for personal interests. For instance, the Washington Death with Dignity Act stipulates the duties and responsibilities of the physician. Also, the patient is made aware of the relevant facts about the laws and knows his diagnosis, prognosis, and the risks that come with taking the lethal prescription, the results of taking the lethal prescription as well as the alternatives to the assisted suicide.
People often confuse physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia because both are aimed at relieving patient suffering by choosing to end life. The line is drawn between the two by the person who administers the prescription. In euthanasia, it is the physician who is actively involved in the death of a patient say by administering a lethal injection. In PAD, it is the patient who is involved in ending their lives. Even so, what stands out is the justification that patients always make informed choices especially when they are of competent mind and would rather they are given permission to chose the course of their lives. The point is that when unrelenting pain and suffering is the common factor, no one should point an accusing finger questioning why a person should be allowed to commit the crime of suicide.
Today some medical professionals ask their patients to consider palliative care and not PAD, but there are terminally ill patients who prefer to end their lives instead. One of the main reasons this is the case is that even if palliative care reduces their suffering, it does not offer them total relief as most of them are left pondering about the constant heartache and suffering they are causing their loved ones. It is also imperative to note that in countries or states where death with dignity is not permissible, patients take matters into their hands and commit suicide. They die a more painful death than the case could have been if they were assisted to die. Their actions are way too gruesome as compared to having a lethal injection. Some patients get overtaken by emotions and their suffering, and this is one thing that those who are against PAD ignore. The thing is that it is far much better to lead short but fulfilling life rather than leading a long life that is riddled with pain and suffering emanating from ill health.
According to Howard Ball, the values upheld by society evolve much to the benefit of the people. It is on that same ground that it can be argued that physicians could not stop themselves from administering penicillin when it was discovered because it was bringing about healing and a comfortable life free from pain. The same case applies to all other medical breakthroughs the world has witnessed over the years. It is on that same ground that society should acknowledge that times change and that individual liberty keeps evolving just like everything else. If people are accorded other rights such as committing abortions and having same sex marriages, then terminally ill patients should be given their rights and privileges on matters that affect their decisions whether to end their lives or to continue to suffer from their terminal illnesses until they meet their natural deaths. It is about time, and there is a possibility that in the near future terminally ill patients all over the country and the rest of the world will be allowed to determine the course of their lives. If only society stopped its overreliance on laws and ethics that do not make a lot of sense anymore! It is logical that humanity showed compassion to one another if it means compassion defines allowing a terminally ill person to determine their death so be it. They deserve to die with dignity while facing death with courage.
Bibliography
Ball, Howard. “Physician Assisted Death in America: Ethics, Law, and Policy Conflicts.” A
Hofsess, John. “By the time you read this, I’ll be dead.” Toronto Life, 2016.
Neumann, Ann. "Redefining Death: Can a Brain-Dead Teen Claim Religious Freedom? The
Starks, Helene., Dudzinski, Denise and White, Nicole. “Physician Aid-in-Dying: Ethical Topic in Medicine.” University of Washington School of Medicine, February 18, 2016.
