A thesis in support of physician-assisted suicide
- Introduction:
My Thesis for this essay is “The Right to Die.”
The “Right to die” is fundamentally the decision of if a person has the right to choose to die when her/his life could be extended by life support. Through this thesis, I attempt to make an argument for this issue. I believe that a person must have the right to make this choice, legally and ethically. For the purpose of supporting my thesis; I will explain the historical and current system on the topic, the laws regarding euthanasia, real-life examples, and my recommendation why euthanasia should be legalized.
- The History and Present of Physician-Assisted Suicide:
Over the years, there has been a lot of debate regarding the end of life. Legislative bodies, judiciary, doctors, scientists, and citizens have provided their opinions on the same. The question “should he terminally ill have the right to end their lives” is not a simple one to answer. “Aid in Dying” which is physician-aided suicide, is one in which medical professionals assist terminally ill patients to end their lives. This has been a frequently debated issue amongst the medical community and the law making bodies. After being penalized and condemned everywhere in the world, it has found limited success in the modern world. Post studies conducted in 2014, it has been recorded that euthanasia is only legal in the Luxembourg, Belgium, and Netherlands. Assisted suicide is allowed by the law in Germany, Albania, Switzerland, and Japan. In the US, it is legal in New Mexico, Washington, Vermont, Oregon, and Montana. New Jersey has legalized it very recently. However, many others are contemplating the legalizing euthanasia. American Encephalographic Society conducted a study, by which it was established that the patient is officially dead when their EEG flat-lines. The heart and lungs can be kept functional even after someone is pronounced “brain-dead” The Pew Research Center conducted a public opinion survey recently. According to this survey, American citizens are still divided on the topic f physician-assisted suicide. Forty-six percent are pro-euthanasia, and forty-five percent are opposed to it. Religious groups mostly oppose the practice with the exception of the Unitarian Universalist Association and the United Church of Christ. These two groups are in support of letting the terminally ill patients decide whether to end their lives. Some churches like the United Methodist Church have groups that are trying to change the mindset of their church.
Medicine has made tremendous advances. From cancer treatments to organ transplants, there are a lot of options available to extend our lives. We currently have sophisticated healthcare devices like the life support systems, defibrillators, respirators and pacemakers to extend the life even when there isn’t any brain activity. These devices help us prolong life for significantly longer periods of time. There are drugs such as morphine that are excellent painkillers and help to end lives painlessly. Nowadays a lot more people are dying in hospitals as compared to homes. In case a patient is not in a position to make a decision, advanced directives are documented appointing proxies to make a call. Such documents have specific directives and preferences for medical treatment for special cases. Terminally ill patients can choose not to be fed or given breathing assistance if they were to fall into a state of coma. Patients who are close to the end of their lives can sign do-not-resuscitate orders. Such orders instruct the doctors to not make any attempts to restart their hearts in the event of the heart failing. These documents are useful to avoid any chaos in situations of medical emergencies and provide structure for grieving families. If a patient’s wishes are known in advance, it reduces and feelings of guilt and regret amongst family.
It was in the 1950s when a group of writers started arguing the right to die. These arguments became increasingly popular in the 1960s because of the growing demands of autonomy and personal freedom. However, one of the most publicized cases of assisted suicide surface in 1999. Jack Kevorkian, a doctor from Michigan, claimed that he had assisted over hundred people to end their lives. He claimed to have done this by giving them a fatal drug dose. He was convicted for second-degree murder charges. In 2013, a woman from Pennsylvania helped her ill father to commit suicide by administering a lethal dose of morphine. The results in her case are still not final.
As mentioned above, there are a lot of complex questions regarding euthanasia that must be clearly answered before any laws can be passed. For example, in which cases should it be permissible for a person to be taken off life-sustaining treatments? Who should make this decision if the patient isn’t in a conscious and stable state of mind?
- Instances where euthanasia has been practiced:
In the 1970s, a twenty-one-year-old woman Karen Ann Quinlan fell into a coma. Doctors proclaimed her to be in a chronic vegetative state and judged that she would be unable to respire without an artificial respirator. Her family decided to shut down her life support system; however, their efforts were stopped by her doctor. This led to a lawsuit. As a result of which the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that a patient and her/his family will have the right to stop life support. Quinlan’s life support was removed in 1976, post that she continued to breathe on her own for another ten years. She remained in a vegetative state through these ten years, finally succumbing to death by pneumonia in the year 1985. This question resurfaced in a legal battle in 2005. The case was of a severely brain-damaged lady named Terri Schiavo. Her parents and husband were unable to come to a mutual decision regarding which of them had the right to decide whether her life-sustaining care should continue or be withdrawn. Such cases make a generic law on euthanasia extremely hard. Additionally there are dangers of it being used illegitimately and unethically. There can be chances of families and hospitals opting for it to save money and reduce liability. A lot of people believe that if euthanasia were to be legalized, it could result in health care cost containment and suicide contagion. Additionally, it is argued that it would not stay limited to terminally ill cases. There are several people with views against the practice. Some of these views are covered below.
One of the most recent and publicized examples of dying with dignity is of Brittany Maynard. Brittany Maynard, a twenty-nine-year-old advocate, chose to end her life in November, 2014. After just a year of marriage, she was diagnosed with aggressive brain tumor. In order to stop the cancerous growth, she underwent a partial resection on her temporal lobe and a partial craniotomy. Unfortunately, she learned that her cancer resurfaced and was more aggressive than before. The doctors gave her a prognosis for six months. She was prescribed full brain radiation due to her tumor being very large. After researching about the side effects of the treatment, she learned that she would lose all her hair, and her scalp would suffer first-degree burns. After accepting the fact that there was no treatment that would save her life (at least a good quality life), she and her family reached a decision of ending her life and sparing her the misery. Being at California, she had to move to Oregon, as that is one of the states that allow the death with dignity. She met the conditions in Oregon. However, in order to take any advantage of the law she had to find new physicians, get voter and driver licenses, find a new home, etc. Additionally, her husband had to make numerous changes too. Brittany made all these changes in her last days to pass away on her terms. Her story begs the question, should such a decision really be out of a suffering individual’s hands?
- Views against euthanasia:
Like any controversial topic, this debate too has people opposing assisted death. Opponents are the American Medical Association, almost all American religious groups like the Jews, Catholics, Southern Baptists, and advocates for disability rights. People who oppose euthanasia argue that the suicide is not a personal choice, rather a personal tragedy. They say that problems like depression, excessive pain that lead to a person to chose euthanasia can always be managed. According to C. Ben Mitchell, who is a professor of moral philosophy, most of the cases of physician-assisted suicide happen due to the result of the families or the health care systems failing. They also make points of how such laws can be abused and misused. Patients may be forced into ending their lives y families who don’t want to care for ailing relatives or those who want to save money. Furthermore, they contend that allowing assisted suicide is a very dangerous slope. It could lead to seriously handicapped and chronically depressed people resorting to involuntary euthanasia. If the society begins to send a message that some lives are less worthy than others, it opens doors to much worse possibilities.
All the views which oppose the practice of euthanasia are from an individual’s perspective. It cannot be fairly judged whether excessive pain, chronic depression or a deteriorating body is manageable until one is in that position. In order to avoid any misuse of the practice, strong laws can be put in place and followed completely.
- Laws in place for on Assisted Suicide:
As it is clear from the data above, the laws allowing assisted suicide are not easy to manipulate. Other states can follow these examples and include well-defined clauses to make sure that the practice is not abused. Furthermore, special officials can be trained to authorize, oversee and track these practices. Such officials can then be assigned whenever a case like this arises
- Conclusion:
The Hippocratic Oath mentions a clause that “I will provide no deadly medicine to any person if asked, nor suggest any such counsel” (Hippocrates)
This shows us how old this issue really is and how complicated it is to come to a unanimous decision. It is true that if all the states and countries were to legalize euthanasia, it would get extremely difficult to track any abuse of the laws. However, not allowing a person to make this choice on their own and forcing them to live in miserable conditions is an equal if not bigger crime. A profound fact of the human race is that no matter how dearly we love someone we cannot feel the physical pain or mental agony they feel when they are ill. If someone is going through unspeakable pains of cancer, watching their bodies crumble and losing any livable quality of life, can someone else truly make the decision of whether such pain is manageable?
The aim of legalizing euthanasia never has been to say that some people’s lives are more worthy than others. Taking this view of the situation is faulty. The basic idea behind assisted suicide is freedom. Freedom to refuse to suffer unimaginable pain and the freedom to die a dignified death. Legalizing euthanasia does not make it mandatory for anyone in such a condition to end their lives. It simply provides them with the option. This option itself is a big relief for some people as they are not looking at innumerable days as a vegetable or countless moments of ruthless pain. Legalizing it is built on the premise that unless someone is in that position, they cannot judge what they would want. For instances in which the families decide to take their loved ones off the life support systems, it is essential to make certain that no foul play is work. This requires clear laws, defined procedures and proper tracking of these procedures by physicians and legal counsel. Such measures can be put in place as they have been with other issues. It is my strong opinion that courts and people need to take strong actions and allow people a dignified end of life.
Works Cited:
Masci, David. "To End Our Days." Pew Research Centers Religion Public Life Project RSS. 21 Nov. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. <http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/to-end-our-days/>.
Maynard, Brittany. "My Right to Death with Dignity at 29." CNN. Cable News Network,3Nov.2014.Web.5Dec.2014. <http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/07/opinion/maynard-assisted-suicide-cancer-dignity/>.
"What Do You Mean "death with Dignity" ?" Highlander RSS. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. <http://www.highlandernews.org/15088/what-do-you-mean-death-with-dignity/>.
"Supreme Court's Decision in Gonzales v. Oregon: High Court Rejects Federal Regulation of Physician-Assisted Suicide." Pew Research Centers Religion Public Life Project RSS. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. <http://www.pewforum.org/2006/02/01/supreme-courts-decision-in-gonzales-v-oregon-high-court-rejects-federal-regulation-of-physician-assisted-suicide/>.
"Defend Dignity. Take Action." Death with Dignity National Center. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. <http://www.deathwithdignity.org/>.
"HippocraticOath." MedicineNet.Web.5Dec.2014. <http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=20909>.
"Euthanasia is Everywhere." Insert Name of Site in Italics. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2014 <http://euthanasia-everywhere.blogspot.com/_br>.
