An Argument for Physician-Assisted Suicide and Against Euthanasia
The
article opens with the hypothesis that the default position that should
guide healthcare providers when treating patients at the end of life is
that patients opt for life. In the absence of an explicit request to
die, we may assume that patients wish to continue living. Thus the role
of the medical profession is to provide patients with the best possible
conditions for continued living.
The article makes a case for physician-assisted suicide legislation. It
examines the ‘quality of life’ argument, and the issue of the patient’s
autonomy and competence. It is argued that (1) quality of life is a
subjective concept. Only the patient can conclude for herself that her
quality of life is so low to warrant ending it, and that (2) only
competent patients may request ending their lives. Patients’ lives
should not be actively terminated by the medical team without the
explicit consent of patients.
The article then probes the role of physicians at the end of life,
arguing that medicine should strive to cater to the wishes of all
patients, not only the majority of them. Physicians should not turn
their backs to justified requests by their patients. Physicians are best
equipped to come to the help of patients at all stages of their
illness, including their end-of-life. At the same time, in ending life,
the final control mechanism should be with the patient. Thus
physician-assisted suicide is preferred to euthanasia in order to lower
the possibility of abuse and of ending the lives of patients without
their consent and against their wishes. As matters of life and death are
grave, they should be taken with utmost seriousness, requiring the
instalment of ample checks against abuse and facilitating mechanisms
designed to serve the patient’s best interests.
