“Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”: Who Said Anything About the Right to Die?
Since 1990, the “assisted suicide” controversy has sparked many debates in the United States. Under usual circumstances, assisted suicide is when a physician helps a terminally ill patient commit suicide when that patient has decided that he or she wants to end his or her life before the illness does. Of course, the issue is much more complex than that. While advocates for the “right to die” would like people to believe that patients who die under assisted suicide are all people with zero chance of surviving their illness and wish to die because of physical agony, that is not always the case. Many who request assistance in their death actually have a good chance of recovering, or do not even have a terminal illness at all. Individuals with disabilities often request the prescription of lethal drugs, wanting to end their social rather than physical suffering. There are many people on the side of assisted suicide, although the majority of Americans still oppose it. Only two states to date have legalized this act, Oregon and Washington (“Assisted Suicide”). Other states have attempted to pass bills similar to those in Washington and Oregon, although none have been successful thus far (Susan W. Enouen). However, just because only two states have passed bills allowing the essential murder of patients does not mean more will not follow in the future. Now, while in some cases assisted suicide does seem like a humane and compassionate choice, the issue is largely a negative one that could end the lives of people well before they lived to their full potential, as well as potentially cause healthcare providers to invest less time and money into their patients.
By far the most serious problem with assisted suicide is the fact that many patients could very well continue to lead happy lives. Those with physical or mental disabilities are often viewed by society as pitiful beings unable to live fulfilling lives. This is a serious misconception that has no doubt driven many with disabilities to end their lives. According to disability theorists, people with disabilities who show dissatisfaction with their lives attribute their unhappiness to problems that the majority of healthy people struggle with, such as bad relationships and financial trouble (Adrienne Asch). Society does not realize this, however, and when the majority believes something to be true, they can be highly influential. A prime example of social delusion’s influence on an assisted suicide is the case of a man who had impaired mobility for 40 years and who then developed breathing problems that required him to use a ventilator. The ventilator made speech seemingly impossible for him. Because of this, he decided that he would prefer to live no longer. His family, physicians, and the hospital ethics committee agreed that this was the correct route to take (Asch). It seems justifiable to say that the fact that his family and doctors did not in any way help the man to overcome his newfound disability furthered his want to end his life. Their immediate support of his decision to die certainly only made his decision that much more concrete. After all, if the very people who should want him to live, and who should try to make living as easy and gratifying as possible, suddenly do not want this, why would he not want to die?
Patients with disabilities are not the only ones who, if properly supported, would not have to consider suicide; even terribly ill patients could recover. When a critically ill patient properly requests assisted suicide according to state law in Oregon or Washington, he or she will receive a prescription for lethal drugs by a physician. There is little to no opposition from the professional. Only four to five percent of patients between 2003 and 2005 had undergone psychoanalysis to determine whether or not the true reason for their decision was medical or simply one of treatable depression (Enouen). State law in Oregon requires the patient to verbally request death twice, and these requests must be at least two weeks apart. This is to ensure the avoidance of hasty decisions (Enouen). Interestingly enough, many patients have received prescriptions from physicians who have known them for one week or less. Obviously, this goes against the state’s law (Enouen). If a 100 percent accurate administration of lethal drugs is to be guaranteed, the prescription should be made by the patient’s trusted doctor. However, the doctors of most patients who request assisted suicide do not want anything to do with the act. In fact, 90 percent of those in Oregon who wish to die under the Death With Dignity Act, must go through an assisted suicide advocacy group (Enouen). Considering that these groups do not know the patients they deal with personally, how can they properly judge whether or not the patient is absolutely unable to recover from his or her condition? Yes, medical records can be provided, but a personal physician is the one who can make the most accurate judgment. Evidence of this appeared in one of the first assisted suicide cases. Doctor Kevorkian, an original advocate for assisted suicide, aided in the death of Marjorie Wantz on October 21, 1991. Wantz had claimed to be suffering from a highly painful pelvic disorder; however, autopsies never found any evidence of the disorder (Richard L. Worsnop).
Not only does assisted suicide have the potential to kill non-terminally ill patients, it could also lead hospices and other healthcare providers to neglect patients. Taking care of a severely ill person requires much time and money, but the majority of the public would agree that these expenses are worth it. After all, a human life is at stake. However, money driven health services such as hospices could potentially see the benefit of ending a patient’s life instead of providing them with care. The American Medical Association noted this issue, saying that assisted suicide is “inconsistent with the physician’s professional role” (qtd. in Mark Taylor). According to the AMA, if a patient requests death, his or her needs have clearly not been satisfied by his or her health care provider (Taylor). Basically, if a physician or nurse took enough time and care to ensure the patient was comfortable physically and emotionally, assisted suicide would no longer be the “compassionate” choice.
While most evidence makes assisted suicide seem like a mistake, there is one circumstance in which it might actually be the most humane choice. If the patient is old, nearing the final stages of terminal cancer, and in severe, uncontrollable physical pain, and he or she absolutely does not want to live any longer, then a quiet, induced death could be the best answer. For instance, at the age of 79, Percy Bridgman was all of those things. He did not live in a state in which assisted suicide was legal, so he had to do it himself. His method was to shoot himself in the head. Knowing the trauma his family would have to go through in finding his gory remains, he had no doubt been highly desperate (Thomas A. Bowden). In a case such as this, a less dramatic, agreed upon death assisted by his physician would have been easier and less painful for everyone involved. The issue with this, though, is that only a small percentage of patients who request suicide assistance do so because they are in pain. The three most common reasons for assisted suicide are losing autonomy, being unable to participate in enjoyable activities, and loss of dignity (Enouen). All of these reasons are psychological rather than physical, which indicates that these are fears that could be eased by therapists or family members. The fact that the majority of assisted suicide deaths were of people who could have turned their lives around is a sad one.
48 out of 50 states still oppose assisted suicide, but that could very well change in the future. People need to hold to their beliefs that assisted suicide will cause more harm than good to humanity. Those with disabilities or with illnesses that could recede should not be allowed by their physicians to commit suicide, even in states where it is legal. The risk that many patients could simply have treatable depression in assisted suicide cases should keep professionals from even considering assisting in death. The lives of human beings should not be thrown away like this. Not only are these serious problems with the Death With Dignity Act, the bill has also caused organizations like The Final Exit Network to come into existence. This organization helps with and even promotes suicide in physically healthy as well as ill people, and it actually charges for its “services”. If a suicidal individual contacts this group, the group makes no attempt to convince them to not choose death, essentially adding to the individual’s reasons to die. The group argues that those who commit suicide under their supervision do everything themselves, however undercover researchers have found that members of the organization will actually hold the victim down in case he or she decides to change his or her mind during the suicide process (Robbie Brown 1). This seems a bit extreme, does it not? If a person suddenly realizes that he or she wants to live, no one should stop him or her. After all, everyone has the right to life. The Final Exit Network is evidence that the assisted suicide controversy no longer only affects terminally ill patients, it affects everyone.
Works Cited
Asch, Adrienne. "The Wish to Die Is Based on Social as Well as Medical Issues." Assisted Suicide. Ed. Karen F. Balkin. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
"Assisted Suicide." Current Issues: Macmillian Social Science Library. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
Bowden, Thomas A. "Individuals Should Have a Legal Right to Choose Death." Assisted Suicide. Ed. Karen F. Balkin. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
Brown, Robbie. "Arrests Draw New Attention to Assisted Suicide." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Mar. 2009. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
Enouen, Susan W. "Legalized Assisted Suicide May Lead to Legalized Euthanasia." Life Issues Connector (July 2007). Rpt. in Assisted Suicide. Ed. Karen F. Balkin. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Current Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
Taylor, Mark. "The Legality of Oregon's Physician-Assisted Suicide Law Is a Victory for Patients and Doctors." Suicide. Ed. Paul Connors. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007. Current Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.
Worsnop, Richard L. "Assisted Suicide Controversy." CQ Researcher5.17 (1995): 393-416. CQ Researcher. Web. 27 Oct. 2010.