Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide refer to a deliberate action taken to end a life to relieve persistent pain.

Euthanasia has long been a controversial and emotive topic.

The definitions of euthanasia and assisted suicide vary.

Euthanasia: A doctor is allowed by law to end a person’s life by a painless means, as long as the person and their family agree.

Assisted suicide: A doctor assists an individual in taking their own life if the person requests it.

Voluntary and involuntary euthanasia

Euthanasia may be voluntary or involuntary.

Voluntary: When euthanasia is conducted with consent.

Non-voluntary: When euthanasia is conducted on a person who is unable to consent due to their current health condition.

In this situation, the decision is made by another appropriate person, on behalf of the individual, based on their quality of life.

Involuntary: When euthanasia is performed on a person who would be able to provide informed consent, but does not, either because they do not want to die, or because they were not asked.

This is called murder, as it’s often against the person’s will.

Passive and active euthanasia

There are two procedural classifications of euthanasia:

Passive euthanasia is when life-sustaining treatments are withheld. The definitions are not precise.

If a doctor prescribes increasing doses of strong pain-management medications, such as opioids, this may eventually be toxic for the individual. Some may argue that this is passive euthanasia.

Others, however, would say this is not euthanasia, because there is no intention to take life.

Active euthanasia is when someone uses lethal substances or forces to end the person’s life, whether by the individual themself or somebody else.

Active euthanasia is more controversial, and it is more likely to involve religious, moral, ethical, and compassionate arguments.

What is assisted suicide?

Assisted suicide has several different interpretations and definitions.

One is:

“Intentionally helping a person take their own life by providing drugs for self-administration, at that person’s voluntary and competent request.”

Some definitions include the words, “to relieve intractable (persistent, unstoppable) suffering.”

 

Refusing treatment

In many countries, including the U.S., a person can refuse treatment that is recommended by a health professional, as long as they have been properly informed and are “of sound mind.”

Various arguments are commonly cited for and against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.
Arguments for

Freedom of choice: Advocates argue that the person should be able to make their own choice.

Quality of life: Only the individual knows how they feel, and how the physical and emotional pain of illness and prolonged death impacts their quality of life.

Dignity: Every individual should be able to die with dignity.

Witnesses: Many who witness the slow death of others believe that assisted death should be allowed.

Resources: It makes more sense to channel the resources of highly skilled staff, equipment, hospital beds, and medications toward lifesaving treatments for those who wish to live, rather than those who do not.

Humane: It is more humane to allow a person with intractable suffering to be allowed to choose to end that suffering.

Loved ones: It can help to shorten the grief and suffering of loved ones.

We already do it: If a beloved pet has intractable suffering, it is seen as an act of kindness to put it to sleep. Why should this kindness be denied to humans?

Arguments against

The doctor’s role: Healthcare professionals may be unwilling to compromise their professional roles, especially in the light of the Hippocratic Oath.

Moral and religious arguments: Several faiths see euthanasia as a form of murder and morally unacceptable.

Suicide, too, is “illegal” in some religions. Morally, there is an argument that euthanasia will weaken society’s respect for the sanctity of life.

Patient competence: Euthanasia is only voluntary if the patient is mentally competent, with a lucid understanding of available options and consequences, and the ability to express that understanding and their wish to terminate their own life. Determining or defining competence is not straightforward.

Guilt: Patients may feel they are a burden on resources and are psychologically pressured into consenting. They may feel that the financial, emotional, and mental burden on their family is too great.

Even if the costs of treatment are provided by the state, there is a risk that hospital personnel may have an economic incentive to encourage euthanasia consent.

Mental illness: A person with depression is more likely to ask for assisted suicide, and this can complicate the decision.

Slippery slope: There is a risk that physician-assisted suicide will start with those who are terminally ill and wish to die because of intractable suffering, but then begin to include other individuals.

Possible recovery: Very occasionally, a patient recovers, against all the odds. The diagnosis might be wrong.

Palliative care: Good palliative care makes euthanasia unnecessary.

Regulation: Euthanasia cannot be properly regulated.