Every individual’s tolerance and perceptions on life versus death vary based on past experiences and their current circumstances. Choosing to fight against a disease or an illness is a tough and life altering decision that many people across the globe are having to face everyday. The other option is Euthanasia — literally translated, it means “a good death”. It is a practice of providing painless death to a patient suffering from a painful and incurable disease, or of someone in an irreversible coma. Also called “mercy killing” and “physician assisted suicide”, the suffering patient makes the decision of whether to terminate their life or not. Debates on what qualifies a patient to make this decision continue to rise amongst bioethicists, explaining why euthanasia is legal in only 33 countries and parts of the United States.
Dating back to BC, euthanasia was practiced in Ancient Greece and Rome and was supported by Socrates and Plato, Green philosophers. Ironically, Socrates was put to death by hemlock — a poisonous plant. However, Greek physician, Hippocrates, wrote against the practice, “I will not prescribe a deadly drug to please someone, nor give advice that may cause his death” noting that there may be an ethical misuse of euthanasia. Multiple centuries later, many physicians continue to oppose euthanasia as it contradicts the natural human instinct for survival. Tactics for euthanasia varied from bleeding out, suffocating, or placing them on cold ground.
Euthanasia can be performed in various ways. Active euthanasia involves actively giving the patient the necessary sedatives to kill them — viewed as “murder” by some religious groups. In the 1990s, Dr. Jack Kevorkian, American physician, used active euthanasia to help over 130 terminally ill people die using his self-invented suicide machine. A tube connected to the suicide machine and was inserted into the patient’s arm; the patient pressed the button that released the chemical solutions, instantly stopping the heart and killing the patient. His first patient, Janet Adkins, was a 54-year-old female in the early stages of Alzheimer’s. Using his homemade suicide machine, he assisted Adkins’ death in an old Volkswagen van at a local park; he claims ”my ultimate aim is to make euthanasia a positive experience. I’m trying to knock the medical profession into accepting its responsibilities, and those responsibilities include assisting their patients with death”. This unforeseen case of euthanasia (not legal at this time), alarmed many bioethicists and confused many legal experts. The case rose the particular legal issue of what establishes assisted suicide and the more broad philosophical question of what role, assuming any, physicians should play in aiding their terminally sick patients with death. Adkins had made her decision to die a year prior, when she got diagnosed, and was in the right state of mind which is why no charges were pressed. However, over the next decade, Kevorkian was charged multiple times with second-degree murder, first-degree murder, witnessing a suicide, etc.
The other form of euthanasia is passive euthanasia, where the withdrawal of artificial life support, such as a feeding tube or a ventilator, is used to intentionally let the patient die. If a patient is in an unconscious state and the doctors declare that they won’t come back, they can order a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR), banning CPR on the patient, if ever required — this is an example of passive euthanasia.
A main cause of assisted suicide is the unbearable chronic pain the patient has to live with till either a cure is found or they die. Pain affects one’s physical, mental, and emotional states and can greatly impact their concentration and memory. If a terminally ill patient is choosing to die due to the pain, are they really in the right state of mind to make this important decision? What if they are choosing to die due to a terminal brain illness? With a compromised thinking and decision making center, should patients with such illnesses be eligible for euthanasia?
From the point of view of the doctor, is assisting in ending a patient’s life compatible with their role of being a healer? In February 2017, the Washington D.C. Death with Dignity Act went into effect and was implemented by June 2017. Health officials estimated 10 patients annually exercising their right to die, but only two patients did (as of 2018). It may not be that there are no patients who want to die, but the lack of support from the physicians; of the 11,000 licensed doctors in D.C. only three had volunteered for the program. As healers, it is required to do what is best for the patient and if the patient is requesting for a form of euthanasia, then isn’t it their job to assist?
When a pet or an animal is diagnosed with a terminal illness or with a disease that will cause great pain and suffering, we put them to sleep. This act is seen as an act of kindness, we are relieving them of their unbearable pain. Shouldn’t this act of kindness be granted to humans as well?
Arguments against euthanasia highlight how euthanasia may weaken society’s aspect for the gift of life — a religious perspective. Should humans even have the right to choose on issues of life and death? By practicing euthanasia, are you interfering with God’s path? At the core of these debates are the different ideas that individuals have about the meaning and significance of human existence.
Several, so called, “rare” ailments don’t have treatments, either due to lack of innovation or due to lack of funding to find a cure — as the large pharmaceutical companies’ bottom line won’t be served by investing in these cures. Does it mean that euthanasia is a way out for such patients who are terminally ill with painful ailments? Is euthanasia the patients’ decision? Yes. Is it required? No. So then should lawmakers have a say in a voluntary practice? Bioethicists are looking at euthanasia through an interdisciplinary lens, which includes religion. Most of the lawmakers belong to major religious groups who may not be in favor of euthanasia, impacting their ultimate conclusion. So then should an atheist patient be denied euthanasia because the lawmakers’ beliefs are against it? With every controversial addition to the medical field, bioethicists and lawmakers are put to a difficult and timely “test”; their decision will affect the lives of thousands.
References
About us. (2021, March 30). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.deathwithdignity.org/about/
Belkin, L. (1990, June 06). Doctor tells of first death using his suicide device. Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/06/us/doctor-tells-of-first-death-using-his-suicide-device.html
District of Columbia. (2020, June 30). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.deathwithdignity.org/states/district-of-columbia/
Ethics – euthanasia: Ethics of euthanasia – introduction. (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/overview/introduction.shtml
Euthanasia and assisted suicide: What are they and What do they mean? (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/182951#controversy
Euthanasia. (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/euthanasia
Jack Kevorkian. (n.d.). Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jack-Kevorkian
The New York Times. (1996, February 25). Kevorkian jury watches tape of patient who chose suicide. Retrieved April 03, 2021, from https://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/25/us/kevorkian-jury-watches-tape-of-patient-who-chose-suicide.html
One Response
Excellent. Want to discos further.