People in contemporary society wrestle with ethical decisions daily. Debates over social issues bring to light the different moral reasoning that individuals apply on different issues. This helps to understand why there are no unanimous decisions made on social issues as everyone has their unique opinion, which they can defend. Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) and euthanasia are among the world’s most debated social issues. PAS entails patients administering their lethal drug prescribed by the physician, while euthanasia deals with the physician administering the lethal drug to the patient. These acts are either seen as a kindness to patients who are suffering or viewed as individuals playing the role of God and deciding when to end life. I believe that PAS and euthanasia should be administered at the request of a terminally ill patient as they are acts of kindness that showcase our love for them.
Summary of the Issue
PAS and euthanasia are two distinct actions that result in the death of a patient with the help of a physician. In euthanasia, the physician or someone else will administer a lethal drug to the individual, which causes their death (Barsness et al., 2020). With PAS, a physician will prescribe a patient a drug that they will ingest to cause their death to relieve unacceptable quality of life or symptoms (Barsness et al., 2020). Euthanasia is illegal in the US, while PAS is legalized in 8 states and the District of Columbia, while other parts of the world have varying views on the two (Houghton, K., & Kaiser Health News). For instance, Belgium, Portugal, and Luxembourg already allowed euthanasia under specified conditions by the laws governing the land. Spain and New Zealand recently voted on euthanasia laws that approved the practice making it legal (Berlinger & Watson, 2020). PAS and euthanasia are seen as a right and not an obligation only offered to the individual.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The steps taken by these countries have been viewed differently. Some see it as a kindness that allows people with terminal diseases who are expected to suffer excruciating deaths to have autonomy over their bodies (Goodman, 2021). However, others see these nations as having chosen death over medicine. They further explain that the laws would foster distrust between the patients and those in charge of making medical decisions once they are incapacitated (Goodman, 2021). The Vatican strongly condemns euthanasia and PAS, citing them as intrinsically evil acts in every situation and circumstance. For the Vatican, these acts are seen as crimes against human life and must not be tolerated (Gallagher et al., 2020). Evidently, the issues of PAS and euthanasia bring about heated discourse among proponents and opponents.
My Opinion on the Issue
PAS and euthanasia are some of the main ways in which physicians can get involved in the death of a patient. When patients face unbearable pain and are waiting to succumb to death caused by their terminal, debilitating conditions, I see no wrong in facilitating PAS or euthanasia. I believe that every individual is entitled to decide what is done to their body, provided no one else is harmed. I accept that all patients should have the right to protect themselves against battery which can occur in the form of receiving medical treatment that they do not want (Rae, 2018). This may occur in the form of receiving treatment for terminal diseases that only work to prolong their suffering. Patients with such diseases are often in constant pain and can see their bodies waste away as they approach their inevitable deaths. In such cases, PAS or euthanasia provides the best outcome as it ends the patient’s pain, relieves the family’s anxiety on the patient’s health outcomes, and prevents more financial drain to the family.
For me, PAS and euthanasia are complex practices that should only occur at the request of the ailing individual. While some patients may want to have everything done to prolong their lives, others simply want to die and proceed to the next stage. Most end-of-life treatments are known to be too burdensome to patients and only increase their level of suffering (Rae, 2018). I do not see why families and physicians should work tirelessly to increase the level of suffering for a patient even after they have requested PAS or euthanasia. In other cases, these end-of-life treatments are very expensive and are likely to leave the patient’s family in great debt after their death (Rae, 2018). Although it may appear unethical to compare preserving life against the financial burden of treatment, it is prudent to have this in mind. It will have long-lasting effects on the family after the patient eventually succumbs to their disease.
Biblical basis for My Stance
The bible provides its readers with advice on how to approach everyday situations. Different bible verses offer different advice depending on how people interpret what they read. As such, many Christians argue against PAS and euthanasia because they see it as a form of suicide, giving people God’s power to take life. However, I see PAS and euthanasia as a kindness extended to these patients. According to Luke 10:27, Jesus instructed his disciples to love their neighbors as they love themselves (The Holy Bible, 2019). This bible verse asks Christians to be kind and treat others as they would like to be treated. I cannot speak for everyone, but I would not want to be suffering daily knowing that I would eventually die even after all medical interventions were tried. I think that patients who have no hope of getting better should be shown this kindness and love and be helped to end their lives at their time of choosing. Furthermore, in the book of Ecclesiastes 3:19-21, death is seen as an inevitable experience where all that comes from dust return to dust (The Holy Bible, 2019). As such, I do not see why death has to be prolonged, especially if it only serves to extend the pain and suffering of a loved one.
References
Barsness, J. G., Regnier, C. R., Hook, C. C., & Mueller, P. S. (2020). US medical and surgical society position statements on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: a review. BMC medical ethics, 21(1), 1-7. https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-020-00556-5
Berlinger, J., & Watson., A. (2020). New Zealand votes to legalize euthanasia for the terminally ill patients. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/30/asia/new-zealand-euthanasia-intl-hnk/index.html
Gallagher, D., Borghese, L., & Woodyatt., A. (2020). Vatican strongly condemns euthanasia, calling it ‘an act of homicide.’ https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/22/europe/vatican-euthanasia-intl-scli/index.html
Goodman, A., I. (2021). Spain approves euthanasia law. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/18/europe/spain-euthanasia-law-scli-intl/index.html
Houghton, K., & Kaiser Health News. (2021). Getting a prescription to die remains tricky even as aid-in-dying bills gain momentum across the U.S. https://time.com/5950396/aid-in-dying-2021/
Rae, S. (2018). Moral choices: An introduction to ethics. Zondervan Academic.
The Holy Bible. (2019). King James Version. http://www.o-bible.com/kjv.html
