Assisted Suicide
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Assisted Suicide
Introduction
Globally the medical fraternity is occasionally presented with a conundrum in regards to making life-threatening decisions involving terminally ill patients. In many jurisdictions, medical professionals are barred by the law to aid patients in abetting suicide. Physicians are expected to make difficult decisions amid the suffering of the patients and the need to adhere to the professional code of conduct. Assisted suicide for terminally serves a purpose-last resort- and its use requires regulation to curb its abuse.
Firstly, there is a need to define assisted suicide to exhaust the topic. Assisted suicide implies the act of deliberately helping an individual to kill him or herself, usually arising from the inability to perform the act alone (Ababneh, 2018). Individuals who resort to assisted suicide many a time have a disability or lack cognizant about the appropriate and effective mechanism to execute the desires. Physicians execute assisted suicide by providing individuals with high doses of sedatives to help end their lives. Although it is criminalized in many countries, assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland (BBC, 2019). Individuals who have protracted and unresolved healthy complications of nearly six months can request a doctor’s lethal dose or self-administered lethal dose to terminate their lives. Besides, in some jurisdictions, assisted suicide is permissible only to adults over 18 years of age who are capable of communicating health decisions and diagnosed with terminal nearing six months. England, for example, the law bans medical practitioners and individuals from assisting or encouraging others to commit suicide. It so grave that those found culpable are liable for sentencing up to 14 years of imprisonment (BBC, 2019). Assisted suicide should not be confused with euthanasia. Rather euthanasia refers to the act of intentionally terminating the life of an individual to relieve suffering, usually involving unconsented administration of lethal injection by a physician.
Physician aided suicide to apply in extreme cases. The long-suffering and painful death includes one of the traumatizing experiences in the contemporary world. In the wake of those mentioned above, assisted suicide has come in handy to alleviate the long-suffering of patients with terminally ill diseases in countries that have permitted physician aided suicide. The terminally ill patients have had to contend with chronic and needles pain with no signs of hope, loneliness, depression. Besides, the agony of terminally ill patients has not been their preserve; their families as well are engrossed dilemmas resulting in the suffering of their beloved ones. According to Gorsh (2006), there are circumstances under which the medically assisted suicide may be warranted for patients with the terminal ailment. For instances a situation where medical procedures only delay the inevitable death of the patient. However, such steps must only be done after thorough consultation with the patient as well as the family. The patients are required to be informed of the potential dangers associated with executer procedures. It is also important to let the patient know the procedures that only prolong the patients suffering from which they can be assisted to select from the available options.
In jurisdictions where assisted suicide is legal, the patient has the right to choose the type of treatment they find suitable for themselves. For instance, Washington’s Death with Dignity Act, 2008, Vermont’s Patient Choice and Control at the End of Lice Act and Finland legislature allowed medically assisted suicide. In certain instances, physicians may withdraw life-supporting systems in the medical facilities with a disclaimer requiring patients to sign, thus protecting the doctors from prosecution in the court of law should any matter arise. Some proponents are in favor of this position to save resources if only death is inevitable for people with terminal ailment. The resource can be channeled to save other lives than to live resources to go waste (Ababneh, 2018).
The reasons against physicians pertain to a number of conflicting factors, such as patients’ psychiatric state. Patients may exhibit certain psychiatric symptoms that may trigger or encourage patients to resort to medically assisted suicide. Research shows physician-assisted suicide has been linked to female gender who experienced vulnerability to emotional instability such as living solitary and being divorced. Substantially, there has been rife in incidences of medically assisted suicide cases from 3per 1000 deaths to 11 per 1000 in the USA at the onset of the last two decades (Ababneh, 2018). Consequently, the medical code of conduct prohibits the physician from being compelled to fall to such psychiatric symptoms manifesting in their patients. A plethora of nations has banned medically assisted suicide in their jurisdictions. The list includes England, China, and the devolves states in the United States, such as Colorado, New Mexico, Vermont, Washington, Michigan, and Nebraska (Ababneh, 2018). The argument behind the ban relates to the fact that some patients may have a psychological disorder that can be treated through counseling and rehabilitation (Gorsuch, 2006).
Some patients resort to assisted suicide for flimsy reasons arising from incurring humongous hospital bill. Ethically, such reasons defy not the medical code of conduct but also the negates the law as well as the religious principles. Terminating lives because of monetary implication resorts to self-desire as envisaged in holy books and basic principles of life. Most religious communities are in agreement that Only God has the prerogative of making determinations on human life. Additionally, the opponents of physician-assisted suicide to enjoy the support of The International Code of Medical Ethics that requires physicians to adhere to and respect human life. The code further emphasizes the need to respect the patient’s autonomy by physicians as well as the consideration of other guiding principles and ethics beyond medical spheres such as spiritual tenets and religious backing. For instance, Ababneh argues that it is morally unacceptable in the Quran for Physician or an individual to encourage others to commit suicide because human life is sacred and valuable. It is only God who can create and end life, and the human being must not interfere with the life of another person as enshrined in AlMaeda tenets( Ababneh, 2018).
Moreover, Ababneh suggests that there is a need for the sensitization of the stakeholders-those affected with terminal ailments – on the existence of a Palliative case as an alternative to physician aided suicide. In the United States, nearly 90 percent of the population are not conversant with palliative care and its benefit. However, people were willing to embrace the adoption of palliative care for the family members instead of resorting to medically assisted suicide (Ababneh, 2018).
In the light of the discussion, physician aided suicide conflicts the principled of medical code conduct, and as such, it should be regarded as last resort and only in extreme instances. The physician must be persuaded by the principles of the right to life and the rule of law. Besides, the physicians must be opened to the alternatives of physician aided suicide including; Palliative for treating the symptom of terminally ill patients, improving the palliative programs to increase its reach to the poor and sensitization of the masses on the effectiveness of palliatives.
Conclusively, physician-assisted suicide remains a grey area because of its legal, ethical, and spiritual implications. Physician-assisted suicide must only be applied if death is inevitable, and patient terminally with needless pain. More research should be done on Palliative care as an alternative to suicide to safeguard the right and respect for human life.
References
Ababneh, M. T. (2018). Physician-Assisted Suicide for Terminally Ill Patients: An Argumentative Essay. J Palliat Care Med, 8(337), 2.
BBC (2019).What’s the difference between assisted suicide and euthanasia? https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47158287
Gorsuch, N. M. (2006). The future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. New Forum, 21(1), 227-308.