Euthanasia: Matter of Life and Death

In the words of Dr. Jack Kevorkian, “[Euthanasia] could never be a crime in any society which deems itself enlightened.” However, assisted suicide is not an issue that everyone can agree on. In an effort to understand the controversy that surrounds euthanasia, I have conducted research on the topic. Assisted suicide is not only ethical, but a human right. In order to analyze euthanasia, one must understand what it is (and conversely what it isn’t), the support for euthanasia, and the obstacles surrounding the topic.

Assisted suicide is the act of a physician helping a person who has come to the conclusion that they want to end their life. Assisted suicide is thought to be many things, but I have come to the conclusion that out of the methods of death, physician assisted suicide is one of the most compassionate. The method used by physicians is not in any way brutal or barbaric, but instead the patient can be given a drug which will allow them to die peacefully. Alois Geiger is a member of a group called Dignitas. This group performs physician assisted suicide and has expertise in the field. Geiger explains in the article “Assisted Suicide is a Valid Medical Decision,” that Dignitas uses sodium pentobarbital which he describes as a way of “allowing a person to swiftly and gently pass away”. In using sodium pentobarbital, which has been approved for other uses, the patient is dying in a painless and completely nonviolent manner. Assisting a patient is committing suicide cannot be done by just any amateur. Instead, an actual professional physician only helps a patient commit suicide.

Contrary to what every person who is opposed to assisted suicide may claim, euthanasia is not murder. Instead, cases of assisted suicide are simply a physician helping out a patient who no longer wants to live- no malicious intent. Another belief about assisted suicide is that it is an “easy way out.” People holding this type of view value the quantity, rather than the quality of life. This misleads them to assume enduring a terminal illness is somehow the correct path, and anything else shows lack of character. In his article “Euthanasia Is a Rejection of God’s Gift of Life”, Matthew Percy claims that “Euthanasia demeans the sanctity of human life”. The sanctity of life is not measured in the years of a life, but instead by the experiences lived and memories made. Living out your final years in agony does nothing for the value of life.

With a clear grasp of the definition of assisted suicide, one can begin to look at the support for assisted suicide. Thomas A. Bowden can be quoted as saying “suicide is a human right” in the article “Individuals Should Have a Legal Right to Choose Death”. This means that individuals have the right to make choices about their life. Any democratic government should not interfere with this principle of liberty. Physician assisted suicide can help prevent any further suffering by ending a terminal illness. Assisted suicide is not entirely about the patient who wants to die. The patient’s family has time to spend with their loved one and prepare for their death. This eliminates the tragedy of losing someone suddenly to a terminal illness. Instead of dying slowly from a terminal illness, the patient gets to choose when they die.

Where it is legal, physician assisted suicide is very well regulated. For example, in Oregon the patient must be mentally competent, consult two physicians and endure a mandatory waiting period. Neither the patient’s relatives nor doctor can apply for the patient, and the patient administers their own dose (Bowden, 2009). Patients must have a legitimate reason, assisted suicide is not for someone who is just love sick or is feeling a little down. Instead, assisted suicide is an option for the mentally competent with a terminal illness.

In spite of the benefits of assisted suicide, some obstacles block people for exercising this right. One of the biggest obstacles is religion. Religion is an obstacle because Christianity and other religions abhor suicide and deem it a sin. But these unfair and subjective religious principles should not dictate everyone’s lives.

Another obstacle is the way that the suicidal are perceived as “mentally ill”. The option to want to end your suffering does not make you mentally ill, but rather human. Oddly enough, we consider people healthy when “they continue to live because of countless risky surgical interventions and aggressive treatment,” (Geiger, 2010). The argument that people recover from terminal illness is addressed by the regulations of euthanasia. As I mentioned before, the patient must meet with two physicians and receive their expert opinions. Also, there is a waiting period before drugs can be prescribed. It’s unfair to make the majority of people wait for miracles that happen only to a small number of people. Additionally, some people say that assisted suicide is impersonal, but all medicine is. Doctors aren’t supposed to become attached to their patients because it could impair their judgment.

While complex, the issue of euthanasia is clearly ethical and a viable option for the terminally ill. By examining what assisted suicide is (and isn’t), the support for the issue and illogical opposition, one can see the benefits and necessity of euthanasia for those whose quality of life has significantly diminished. Jack Kevorkian has fought for this issue his whole life and I hope that one day governments will recognize this human right.

Bibliography

Bowden, Thomas. “Individuals Should Have a Legal Right to Choose Death.” San Diego:
Greenhaven Press. 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 21. March 2011.

Geiger, Alois. “Assisted Suicide is a Valid Medical Decision.” San Diego:
Greenhaven Press. 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 21. March 2011.

Piercy, Mathew, “Euthanasia Is A Rejection of God’s Gift of Life.” The Right to Die. San Diego:
Greenhaven Press. 2010. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. 21. March 2011