Arif Taruz

8/7/14
Should Physician Assisted Suicide Or Euthanasia Be Legalized?
Most physicians would agree that the doing no harm is one of their most important duties.
However, what happens when the desires of a patient directly conflict with this? Perhaps no
other issue exemplifies this problem more than assisted suicide. The Canadian Medical
Association defines assisted suicide in the following way: Assistance in suicide means
knowingly and intentionally providing a person with the knowledge or means or both required to
commit suicide, including counseling about lethal doses of drugs, prescribing such lethal doses
or supplying the drugs.
Assisted suicide is often confused with euthanasia, a similar but distinctly different
practice. Euthanasia is the act of ending a persons life in order to ease pain or suffering, and can
also be referred to as mercy killing. Euthanasia can be voluntary, when a person asks another
to end their life, or involuntary, when a person ends someone elses life without their consent in
order to ease suffering. To put it simply, in assisted suicide, the patient ends their own life; in
euthanasia someone else ends the patients life.
The author of this piece would feel remiss if he did not also mention palliative sedation, a
practice which is similar to both assisted suicide and euthanasia. Palliative sedation is practice in
which a terminally ill patient is sedated for the last remaining days of their life in order to ease
their suffering. Palliative sedation can shorten a persons expected lifespan however, and some
consider palliative sedation a form of euthanasia. This author disagrees with that assertion, but
for now we will only go in depth on the main issues covered in this piece: physician assisted
suicide and euthanasia.

While the modern debate about euthanasia and physician assisted suicide is only a few
hundred years old, these practices have been a part of human history for thousands. Some of the
earliest known accounts of assisted suicide and euthanasia come for ancient Greece, not
surprising given that the word euthanasia comes from the Greek words for good (Eu) and death
(Thanatos). The Ancient Greeks tended to have a very tolerant view of euthanasia and suicide, in
addition to other acts that seem to modern thinkers as immoral, such as infanticide. Part of the
reason for this is that the Greeks did not have any strong belief in the inherent value of human
life.
Some Ancient Greek thinkers and physicians did however object to euthanasia. The
Hippocratic Oath, written by Hippocrates in the late fifth century BC, includes a section that
states I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel, which
clearly forbid physicians who took that oath from practicing both euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Few Ancient Greek physicians strictly followed the Hippocratic Oath though, so euthanasia and
assisted suicide remained a fairly common and acceptable practice in that era. The Romans, like
in almost all things, followed the Greek example, and during the Roman Empire, euthanasia and
assisted suicide were considered acceptable.
Historically, the real shift in attitudes toward euthanasia and assisted suicide came with
the arrival and spread of Christianity. To those who practice Christianity, all human life is sacred,
and any form of taking life, either your own or someone elses, is strictly forbidden. As
Christianity spread across the Western World, the practice of euthanasia slowly diminished. This
rejection of euthanasia continued with the rise of the Islamic faith, which also forbids the taking
of any life, including your own.

The modern debate about the morality of euthanasia and assisted suicide can be said to
have begun in the eighteen hundreds. In 1828, the first statute banning assisted suicide was
enacted in New York which prohibited 'aiding' a suicide and, specifically, furnishing another
person with any deadly weapon or poisonous drug, knowing that such person intends to use such
weapon or drug in taking his own life. Other states followed New Yorks example, and by the
time the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, most states had outlawed assisted suicide.
Assisted suicide and euthanasia did have some supporters in the early United States. In
the 1870s, Samuel Williams began to advocate publicly for the use of drugs to be used for
euthanasia. Samuel Williams was not a physician, but his views were respected and received
attention in medical journals and scientific meetings at the time. Samuel Williamss ideas
however, were rejected by the American Medical Association, and most physicians still regarded
euthanasia and assisted suicide as immoral acts.
Supporters of euthanasia also faced extreme setbacks during the 1940s. During World
War Two in Germany, the Nazi Party used involuntary euthanasia to end the lives of the mentally
and physically handicapped, in addition to others that they considered sub-human. This was a
huge blow to those in support of euthanasia, who now had to differentiate themselves from Nazi
murderers.
While World War Two was a huge setback for the pro euthanasia crowd, over time, the
public opinion about assisted suicide and euthanasia has begun to change. Increased desire for
patient autonomy and the right to die have caused people to reconsider their views, and a new
movement to legalize assisted suicide began in the late 20th century. Currently, assisted suicide

and/or euthanasia are legal in Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Estonia,

Albania, the US states of Washington, Oregon and Montana.
Currently, the issues of assisted suicide are very contentious, with both the pro and con
sides stating firm beliefs and opinions on the issue.
The pro euthanasia/assisted suicide side generally bases their beliefs on the idea of
patient autonomy and the right to die. In terms of the patient autonomy argument, many feel that
a patients own desires about their health and life supersede the duties of a physician to protect
life at all costs. This desire for high levels of patient autonomy is fairly new developments, and is
opposed to the somewhat paternalistic ideas that people used to have in the past. A physicians
opinion was once much more highly regarded, but now the power in healthcare is shifting to
patients. With this strong belief in patient autonomy often comes the opinion that people should
be allowed to choose when and how they die.
On the pro side there is also the argument that people, typically those with terminal
illnesses, have the right to choose to end their lives. For many people with terminal illnesses,
their condition leaves them in excruciating pain, severely dependent on others, and with a greatly
reduced quality of life. It is argued that these people should be allowed to die with dignity
before these things can happen to them. Essentially, the right to die is based on the idea that
quality of life is far more important than the quantity of life.
The pro side of the euthanasia/assisted suicide argument also points to the fact that
assisted suicide would greatly eliminate the huge costs that come with the end of life care needed
for the terminally ill.

The side of the argument that is opposed to euthanasia and assisted suicide base their
belief on several points, notably the sanctity of life, the duties of a physician (including the
Hippocratic Oath), religious beliefs, as well as concerns that euthanasia/physician assisted
suicide will lead to a slippery slope that ends in unjust killings.
For many, there is a belief that all human life is inherently valuable, and that it should be
preserved at all costs. The sanctity of human life is a commonly held belief in the modern age,
and for people with this belief, taking a life for any reason at all is morally reprehensible.
The con side of the assisted suicide argument also point to the duties of physicians as a
reason to oppose euthanasia/ physician assisted suicide. It is a fairly common belief that the main
duty of a physician is to preserve life at all costs. In addition, it is stated within the Hippocratic
Oath that physicians are to do no harm, which seems to bar them from assisting in suicides or
practicing euthanasia.
In addition, the religious beliefs of many people are strictly opposed to the taking of life
for any reason. In the United States, most people self identify as Christians, and as stated before,
Christianity has a firm stance against the practices of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Even
outside of the United States, most major religions ban the ending of any human life for most
reasons. Islam, Judaism, and Buddhism all forbid mercy killings and suicide. Given that most
people in the world follow one of these major religions, the practices of assisted suicide and
euthanasia are going to have a hard time finding acceptance.
There is also a school of thought within the anti assisted suicide movement that says that
these practices would become a slippery slope. People fear that with widespread acceptance,
euthanasia would replace other forms of end of life care. It is also feared that with the

legalization of assisted suicide, many vulnerable groups such as the elderly and the disabled
would be pressured into ending their own lives.
I am of the opinion that assisted suicide and euthanasia should be legalized. The right to
die argument makes a lot of sense to me, in that terminally ill people who do not have long to
live should be allowed to end their lives with dignity and at the time of their choice. I am also a
string believer in the importance of patient autonomy, and a persons right to control their own
healthcare. Most of all, I try to put myself in the shoes of those with terminal illness and imagine
how they would want to be treated. I know that if I was dying in agony, I would want the choice
to end my life. I am also non religious, so I do not have any strong beliefs about the absolute
morality of taking a life; to me, there are some instances where taking a life, even your own, is
the right thing to do. It is my belief that the terminally ill and those with severe disabilities
should have the choice to end their lives.

Citations:
"Euthanasia." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 08 May 2014. Web. 06 Aug. 2014.
"Euthanasia - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Aug. 2014.
Levine, Carol. Taking Sides. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print.
Edge, Raymond S., and John Randall. Groves. Ethics of Health Care: A Guide for
Clinical Practice. Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning, 2005. Print.