Expanding the Right to Die
Some readers who commented on a Room for Debate forum about the dismal state of elder care said they wanted to be able to end their lives on their own terms to avoid a drawn-out, onerous death. A 29-year-old woman with terminal brain cancer has announced a campaign to support physician-assisted suicide leading up to her own death next month. Since Oregon became the first state to legalize physician-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients, Montana, New Mexico, Vermont and Washington have permitted it. Should the right to die be expanded further, and if so, what should the standards be?
* comment on ~ = ~에 논평하다/ dismal = 질 낮은; 음울한/ on one's own terms = 자기 생각대로(방식으로)/ drawn-out = 너무 오래 끄는/ onerous = 아주 힘든; 부담되는/ physician-assisted suicide = 의사의 도움을 받는 안락사/ lead up to ~ = ~로 이끌다, 향하게 하다/ legalize = 합법화하다/ terminally ill = 말기의, 위독한, 불치병에 걸린
죽을 권리가 더 확장되어야 한다면 기준은 무엇이 되어야 하나요?
1. Oregon Shows That It Can Work Sensibly and Fairly
Safeguards ensure that patients who are terminally ill make voluntary, informed decisions. There is no evidence of exploitation.
2. It Violates Medical Principles and Is Dangerous
Holland shows how such measures get out of control. While the state of dying in America is outrageous, two wrongs don't make a right.
3. Everyone Deserves to Die With Dignity
I watched my 66-year-old sister die in pain from Stage 4 liver cancer. It took five weeks and it was excruciating for both of us.
4. Too Many Questions Remain
This is not about compassion or choice or morality. Those are common currency to both sides of the debate.
5. Limit Agressive Treatments for the Sickest and Oldest
I see it all the time: sick, elderly patients being treated by a slew of specialists who aggressively order tests and procedures that result in physical (not to mention psychological and financial) harm.
6. Denying Someone a Peaceful Death Can Be Unethical
When doctors equate healing with quantity of life, they ignore the quality of life. If suffering is intolerable it is inhumane not to end it.
Sample Essay
Denying Someone a Peaceful Death Can Be Unethical
Sometimes it can be hard to let go. Nowhere do we see that more clearly that when it comes to a person’s right to die with dignity at the end of their life.
But perversely, sometimes the difficulty in letting go isn’t expressed by the person with a terminal disease. Instead it's expressed by their doctor. Doctors often fall back on medical ethics to defend their stance against euthanasia or assisted suicide. Some doctors believe that since their primary responsibility is to heal, helping someone along to a quickened death is contradictory to their oath.
But when doctors confuse or equate healing with the length of life, they ignore the importance of a person’s quality of life. When a patient’s end is near and suffering becomes intolerable, what’s the point of continuing that suffering?
Instead, it appears incredibly inhumane, insensitive and disrespectful of a person’s free will to deny them an end to their misery. It’s old-school medical paternalism at its worst: “I’m the doctor, and I know what’s best for you” — even when the patient may only have a few weeks left to live.
The doctors who rationalize and minimize such suffering — explaining that it can be “managed” with even greater doses of opioid medications — miss the point. If one of our doctors' primary jobs is to relieve suffering, they’re abdicating responsibility at this crucial moment. Doctors regularly undertreat pain complaints because they’re afraid to prescribe opioids at the levels necessary.
At the end of life, when medicine cannot help a person live any longer or stop a terminal disease, it seems in keeping with a physician's ethics to help an individual maintain their dignity and choose the date of their own death. Indignity and loss of independence can be viewed as forms of pain, even if they're not traditionally seen in that light. Ask any prisoner whether being imprisoned is a painful life experience, and I'm pretty certain what their answer will be. The same could be said for when we age — we can become prisoners of our own failing bodies.
If the mind is healthy (something mental status examinations by psychiatrists can determine) why not allow an individual the freedom of this one last, important choice?
