When a patient with a terminal illness can no longer bear the pain, is ending the patient’s life an act of compassion or an act of murder? Should the patient have right to say “enough”? Who has the power? These questions underscore the one of the most controversial issues of our times.
Many organizations and individuals call for legislation to allow people who suffer from incurable illness and unrelenting pain to end their own lives with the assistance of a medical professional; others decry such efforts, saying they would lead to a slippery slope of potential abuse. Some speak of the right to die; to others, intentionally ending the life of a human being, under any circumstances, is murder.
Euthanasia or Assisted Suicide? The Final Act
Often used interchangeably, both euthanasia and assisted suicide refer to an intentional hastening of the death of a gravely ill person. There is, however, one important distinction between the two terms.
Euthanasia, also known as mercy killing, is the intentional taking of the life of another for the purpose of ending suffering. Assisted suicide, on the other hand, is the term used when the patient intentionally takes the action that causes his or her own death, after another party, typically a physician, supplies the means to do so.
For example, if a doctor provides a patient with a lethal quantity of pills or inserts an IV line containing a lethal dose of medication, but the patient swallows the pills or operates a switch that opens the IV, the act is an assisted suicide. If the doctor operates the switch on the IV, however, the act is euthanasia.
A Public Policy Debate
Not surprisingly, a May 2007 Gallup Poll reveals a sharp division among those surveyed regarding the moral acceptability of both euthanasia and assisted suicide. Still, according to the survey, a majority of Americans believe doctors should be allowed to help a terminally ill patient commit suicide if the patient requests it or to end a terminally ill patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and family request it.
Although an individual’s views on euthanasia and assisted suicide are often formed in the context of religious beliefs and cultural traditions, legal considerations move these end-of-life decisions into the realm of public policy.
In the U.S. today, patients have the right to refuse medical treatment and to request and receive medication to manage pain, and life-support systems may be withdrawn under circumstances specified by law. Because such actions have the potential to hasten the patient’s death, some think of them as a sort of “passive euthanasia.” Oregon is the only state that currently allows a doctor to actively assist in the death of a patient, however.
Comfort Measures Ease the Passage
As the public debate on euthanasia and assisted suicide continues, modern medicine continues to pursue ways to minimize pain and other debilitating symptoms experienced by terminally ill patients. Indeed, in recent years, pain management has emerged as a growing medical specialty.
Meanwhile, doctors in the Netherlands use an alternative to euthanasia known as continuous deep sedation—essentially, a drug-induced coma—when a patient has only a very short time to live and traditional methods of pain control have failed. Deep sedation is used only rarely in the U.S. at this time.
Making Your Wishes Known
In the end, whether or not you approve of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide isn’t the most important consideration. The most important thing is to communicate your wishes regarding your own end-of-life care.
If you haven’t done so already, consider making a living will that specifies your wishes regarding your medical care should you become incapacitated and unable to speak for yourself. Typically, a living will instructs caregivers about what should and should not be done, including use of life support machinery and administration of pain medications, food and water.
- Published in: End of Life|
- Discuss this article »|
