Within the past decade, Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) has become a controversial topic within the medical field. However, many people are not entirely aware of the terminology regarding PAS (3). PAS is when a physician provides the necessary means and/or information to enable the patient to perform a life-ending act (Opinion 2.211). To get a better understanding of physician assisted suicide, the history behind it will be addressed. In regards to physician assisted suicide there are many positive and negative arguments that can help us decide for ourselves on how we feel about PAS.
Physician assisted suicide, also known as physician assisted death, dates back to the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans. During this time, there was an oath known as the Hippocratic Oath. This oath stated that regardless of circumstances, doctors were not allowed to take part in euthanasia or PAS. Even though this oath was sworn by many, it was never upheld. Many felt that it was necessary to support the voluntary death rather than to leave an individual in an agonizing state of pain. Later on, during the middle ages and in the 17th century, people started to oppose this point of view. As a result, a law was formed prohibiting assisted suicide in America, and in 1828 the first US Statute was composed outlawing assisted suicide in New York. As a part of this statute, a criminal code was drafted prohibiting the “aiding” and “furnishing” of a suicide. Due to such a code it was later on established by many territories and thus became the outline that many states used to form their own statutes in the 19th and 20th century (Hollinger).
However, as times were changing, there were those who felt that physician assisted suicide should have been allowed. To render a change, Ohio tried to seek to pass two bills dealing with PAS. In 1905 and 1906, the first bill was constructed to legalize euthanasia. The following bill was also constructed to legalize euthanasia but not only in a sense of the terminally ill but also for those who were grotesquely damaged or unintelligent. Even though these bills were an attempt to legalize euthanasia, they were not passed (Hollinger).
In 1938, an organization was formed known as the National Society for the Legalization of Euthanasia. This organization was formed based off of the belief that physician assisted suicide would soon be legalized within the United States. Unfortunately, due to the reign of Hitler and his involuntary use of euthanasia, this belief had disappeared. Even though the idea of legalizing PAS had slipped away, it was soon to be reborn again. Around the time of 1972, many individuals had grown tired and outraged due to the fact that their loved ones were suffering from what seemed liked a prolonged death. As a result, in 1973 the Patient’s Bill of Rights was fabricated as a means to allow patients to deny treatment. As a continuation of moving progress, a Right to Die Bill was assembled in California in 1976. This simply means that anyone who was terminally ill had the choice and right to decide if they wanted to stop medicinal use when death was perceived to be inevitable. The Right to Die Bill was soon embraced by multiple states including North Carolina. Soon enough the development made towards legalizing PAS became more and more realistic. During the time period of 1994-2008, three states within the United States (Washington, Oregon, Montana) had successfully passed a law legalizing the use of physician assisted suicide (Hollinger).
As of current, there are only five states that have legalized the use of physician assisted suicide within their medical facilities. Those five states are California, Montana, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. Even though PAS is legalized within these states there, are still stipulations and protocols that must be taken. The first step is eligibility. In order to be eligible for PAS, one must be eighteen years old or older, have required residency within that state (i.e California), have six months or less to live, and must be able to make decisions. These are just the basis for eligibility. Some states may have more requirements as to what would qualify the use of administering PAS (State by State Guide to PAS).
Once an individual is eligible for physician assisted suicide, the physician must take caution and follow the protocols placed before him. The foundation for physician protocols are as follows: 1) The physician must be licensed in the same state as the patient. 2) The physician must have come to a conclusion that the patient is terminally ill and will only have six months or less to live. 3) Another physician must be able to consult and certify that the analysis is accurate and that the patient is able to convey their choices. 4) If it seems that the patient is unable to make a decision then he/she must have a cognitive examination. 5) Lastly, the patient must be informed of all other options such as palliative care (State by State Guide to PAS).
The final steps before executing PAS is to review the patient’s request timeline. The timeline must consist of the first verbal inquiry to the doctor, a fifteen day waiting period, a second vocal request to the physician, and a written document requesting PAS (State by State Guide to PAS). If every single requirement is met, then the use of PAS can take place to end a patient’s suffering.
Even though there are certain measures that take place, there is still the fact that many people find it to be unethical, morally wrong, and that it goes against religious beliefs. From an unethical and moral standpoint, PAS goes against the Hippocratic Oath. As mentioned earlier, the Hippocratic Oath is an oath that proclaims under no circumstances will a doctor take part in the practice of euthanasia or physician assisted suicide. If someone is aiding suicide, this not only violates the oath but it is seen as an act of being inhumane. From a religious standpoint, it is believed that we should not have the right or power to make such a judgment call, for we are not God and that the life he bestows upon us is sacred. Many people believe that when the time comes for us to leave Earth, it will be God’s doing (Pew Research Center).
The consequences of allowing PAS would be that it would endanger the weak, corrupt the practice of medicine, destroy patient-doctor relationship, compromise the family, would go against the idea of dignity and equality (Anderson). To get a better understanding of what this means, each point will be addressed.
1) PAS endangers the weak by offering an accelerated death. This is due to the fact that the measures that were to be used in minimizing such risks have either been a failure or society has not taken much interest in them and just eliminated them altogether (Anderson).
2) If PAS is allowed then it would change the manner in which medicine is exercised. The tools that were meant for healing and helping others would soon become a weapon for mass destruction. Not only would that occur but the trust and respect between the patient and the doctor would cease to exist, for the physician would soon forget about his or her commitment to help heal those in need. This in return will allow the lack of trust from the patient (Anderson).
3) PAS would distort our way of thinking, and we would soon see our loved ones as burdens and damaged goods because of their condition. Our true compassion and cohesion would soon be threatened (Anderson).
4) Allowing people to commit suicide and placing each other above the law demonstrates a profound disrespect and goes against our rights for equality. If we approve of letting others take away their life and we place them above the law due to their condition, then we are going against everything that we fought for and we are sending out a message saying that it is acceptable (Anderson).
Even though these are all valid points, there are still many positive aspects surrounding the practice of physician assisted suicide. Those aspects can range from ending someone’s pain to dying with dignity. To show the positive qualities of physician assisted suicide several different points will be talked about.
1) As death approaches, the individual grows more fearsome and their pain becomes more unbearable. By using PAS, their suffering will cease and their family will have closure (NYLN).
2) With letting the patient decide to use PAS, it gives them a dignified death. They will have the right to decide what is best for them and they will be able to have their support system throughout the process (NYLN).
3) Once the family has been informed of the patient’s decision, it will make it easier for the grieving process. Family members would have been given the opportunity to get reconciliation thus giving the patient a peace of mind (NYLN).
4) From a financial perspective, the cost will be cheaper. The longer a patient stays in the hospital the more expensive, their bill gets. PAS is the cheaper option when it comes to death (NYLN).
Physician assisted suicide is a decision that most individuals would like to have. Some may disagree but others would agree for that they would want to be in control and accountable for what will happen to them. Having the freedom and right to decide what happens to one’s life is the relief that they get. Take a look at Linda’s Fleming statement before she took her last breath.
I am a very spiritual person, and it was very important to me to be conscious, clear-minded and alert at the time of my death. The powerful pain medications were making it difficult to maintain the state of mind I wanted to have at my death. And I knew I would have to increase them. I am grateful that the Death with Dignity law provides me the choice of a death that fits my own personal beliefs. (Linda Fleming)
As you can see, Linda Fleming felt the same way as many others. She wanted to be able to control her life and decide what to do. She wanted to have that freedom and right. She didn’t want to be controlled and she didn’t want someone else making decisions for her. For most, PAS is just a way to escape their pain and suffering but it is also a way to do something for themselves. It is a way to give them independence.
In conclusion, there are many negative and positives arguments that have been made in response to physician assisted suicide. PAS will always be a controversial topic for there is no right or wrong answer. No one can conclude that it is destructive let alone that it is not. But one can use the materials and tools presented to help them decide for themselves on how they feel about PAS.
Works Cited
“Doctor Assisted Suicide Pros and Cons List.” NYLNorg. N.p., 13 July 2015. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://nyln.org/doctor-assisted-suicide-pros-and-cons-list>.
“Four Problems with Physician-Assisted Suicide.” The Heritage Foundation. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/03/four-problems-with-physician-assisted-suicide>.
Hollinger, Victoria Jade. “Physician Assisted Suicide: An Unbiased Review.” PDF. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://usa5.org/p/physician-assisted-suicide-an-unbiased-review-w26213>.
“JURIST – Cancer Patient Commits Physician-assisted Suicide under Washington Law.” JURIST – Cancer Patient Commits Physician-assisted Suicide under Washington Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://www.jurist.org/paperchase/2009/05/cancer-patient-commits-physician.php>.
“Opinion 2.211 – Physician-Assisted Suicide.” Opinion 2.211 – Physician-Assisted Suicide. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics/opinion2211.page>.
“Religious Groups’ Views on End-of-Life Issues.” Pew Research Centers Religion Public Life Project RSS. N.p., 21 Nov. 2013. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://www.pewforum.org/2013/11/21/religious-groups-views-on-end-of-life-issues/>.
“Sequim Gazette.” First ‘Death with Dignity’ -. N.p., 27 May 2009. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://www.sequimgazette.com/news/251019781.html?mobile=true>.
“State-by-State Guide to Physician-Assisted Suicide – Euthanasia – ProCon.org.” ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Apr. 2016. <http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000132>.