Physician Assisted Suicide

Introduction

The term “Physicians Assistant Suicide” is also callled “Euthanasia”. It is derived from the Greek eu, 'good,” and thanatos, 'death” , literally an easy or good death. Despite attempts to develop a reasonably adequate definition, the term remains ambiguous and tends to be used persuasively in the literature. It is often lexically defined as “the act or practice of putting to death another person or animal suffering from incurable conditions or diseases, typically in a painless manner.” But even this characterization has its share of difficulties. Arguably, its major advantage is that it is morally neutral in that it allows us to distinguish between moral (or permissible) and immoral (or impermissible) acts of euthanasia, and to place impermissible acts (like opportunistic or Nazi-like acts) in the latter category.

Discussion

An act of euthanasia differs from an act of suicide ('an uncoerced act of intentionally and consciously taking one's own life”) and from physician-assisted suicide ('an act of suicide whereby a patient ends his or her own life with a dose of medication or other lethal means requested of and provided by a physician for that purpose”) (Dworkin, 142). The difference is that in the case of euthanasia death is induced by another person, while in the case of suicide, death is self-inflicted. Another important difference is that arguments which purport to establish the dangers of physician-assisted suicide do not, in themselves, establish the hazards of euthanasia as do, for example, the implications of the practice of assisted suicide for the medical profession. Yet it is also true that most of the ethical arguments supporting suicide and physician-assisted suicide have been used in making the case for voluntary euthanasia. (Snyder, 68)

The concern here will be primarily with voluntary and nonvoluntary active euthanasia. Active euthanasia occurs when one does something directly to end life of another being. An act of euthanasia is involuntary if the intended recipient refuses or opposes the proposed killing. A nonvoluntary act occurs when the intended recipient is not mentally or physically free to choose (as in the case of infants or the permanently comatose), and a proper legal guardian acting on the individual's best interests gives consent, or, when this is inappropriate (as in emergency situations), a representative acting on behalf of the individual gives consent. (Swann, 545-49)

Arguments for Euthanasia

There is controversy both about the ethics of euthanasia per se and about the moral distinction between active and passive versions. The moral argument for euthanasia is normally put in terms of voluntary active euthanasia, that is, when persons are terminally ill and no longer have any hope of recovery, are in pain or distress, are considered competent, and ask for someone to end their lives, the argument is that these individuals have a right to die based on respect for their autonomy. Surely, the argument goes, if individuals should have control over anything, they should have it over their own bodies, although it may be argued that there is an inconsistency in using an autonomy argument ...