EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE

Our Dying Right

Cora E. Bissman

Lebanon High School

Introduction
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
2

Jonas was shocked when he heard about the Giver’s daughter, Rosemary, being released.

Being released is when someone receives a lethal injection and their body is disposed of. Jonas

thought this was horrible, and some people today would agree with him. While others would side

with the rest of Jonas’ society.

Euthanasia and other variants are defined as, “the acts or practices of killing or permitting

the death of the hopelessly sick or injured individuals in a relatively painless ways for reasons of

mercy,” (Webster Dictionary, 2016) such as to prevent further suffering

The term “Euthanasia” comes from the Greek, “eu-” meaning “goodly or well,” and

“thanatos” meaning “death.” But the term was first used in the writings of seventeenth- and

eighteenth-century English scholars (Webster Dictionary, 2016.)

In Euthanasia, a physician plays an active role in the death such as an injection. In

assisted suicide, the physician prescribes lethal medications but the patient must take the

medication themselves. Negative euthanasia is the practice of withholding or withdrawing

external means such as respirators or intravenous feeding that help to preserve the life of people

that may or may not be in irreversible comas. Positive euthanasia is when treatment methods

such as antibiotics, drugs, or surgery are withheld or that lethal medication is applied (Burling,

2016.)

Euthanasia has been practiced in many human cultures throughout history. The issue is

discussed in the writings of several early Greek philosophers, who considered it to be morally

acceptable. Soon after the fall of Rome, however, the rise of the Christian church and its sway

over civil law deemed mercy killing immoral and illegal (Gale, 2016.)

During World War II, as part of his mission to cleanse the German population, Adolf

Hitler authorized physicians to euthanize tens of thousands of mentally and physically disabled
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
3

children and adults. This lead to the death of millions of Jews, Romani (Gypsies), Catholics, and

homosexual people. After the war, revelations about Hitler's actions and devastation at the loss

of millions of people had a profound impact on public opinion regarding euthanasia (Gale,

2016.)

In the 1940s, medical technology was advancing meaning more of the physically sick and

dying could be cured or be able to prolong their life. The strict interpretation of the Hippocratic

Oath that was taken in this time meant that that doctors would try for as long as possible to

maintain a patient’s life even if it went against the will of the patient and their families (Gale,

2016.)

With the beginning of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, public discussion began to

include the removal of life-sustaining treatments. Many saw that it was not worth the money

when the people were going to die anyway (Gale, 2016.)

Today this seems to be popular topic of discussion within several countries. Countries all

over the world keep swaying back and forth, changing their laws. In Switzerland, as long as the

physician has no personal motive or gain for killing the person, it is legal (Karlamangla, 2016.)

That way people know that it was within good morals. This seems to be reflected in countries

from many different parts of the world.

Among many advancements in this discussion there has also been quite a few fallbacks.

This new generation will have a much different situation and viewpoints involving death than

previous generations. Mainly due to the continuing revolutions in medicine, technology and

philosophy. However there will always be the underlying wish of society for more time and the

fascination with ideals such as the Fountain of Youth.

Discussion
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
4

Euthanasia is not a black and white topic. There are all sorts of shades of grey and even

some reds and blues. Most viewpoints have terms and conditions to them. They place limitations

on how, when, and on whom, euthanasia should be administered. Doctors and humane boards

.all across the globe are coming up with answers to questions such as; How ill should they be?

How old must they be? Should doctors prescribe medicine or should they use lethal injections?

Which is more moral? These are parts of big discussions taking place all around us.

A study in the Netherlands lead to the surface of a handful of patients real reason they

wish to die; loneliness. In the Netherlands, Belgium, and Switzerland assisted suicides are legal

for people suffering from severe psychiatric problems. Canada cites the rights of people with

untreatable mental illnesses. Some states in America have passed laws that restricts assisted

suicide to only the mentally capable adults with terminal illnesses, not for untreatable mental

illnesses (Benedict, 2016.)

Even in the Netherlands they require that a person’s mental disorder be untreatable and

intractable. However sometimes the variety in the evaluation of these elements can prove very

problematic. “People are leaving their treating physician and going to a clinic that exists solely

for this purpose, and being evaluated not by a psychiatrist but by someone else who has to make

these very difficult decisions about levels of suffering and disease,” Dr. Appelbaum adds. For

example, one widow and her previous husband had decided that they would not live without each

other. Herself, the woman had no health problems but once her husband died in their late 70s she

deemed her life “a living hell” and did not try to look for happiness elsewhere so she went to a

clinic to have them end her life (Benedict, 2016.) This dulls the effect of the decision process and

can lead to unneeded Euthanasia and doubt in society of the need for it.
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
5

For contrast, many European countries have laws that allow assistance for any mentally

competent person with “unbearable” suffering regardless of the cause. Such as the Netherlands.

Although, all around the world it seems to be a common theme that mentally ill patients are not

capable of fully comprehending Euthanasia and are therefore restricted from being authorized for

it.

Obviously there are still many differences in opinion around the world and also variety in

those varying views. For example, compelled by their religion and morals, anti-Euthanasia

advocates argue that every moment of life is precious and we cannot take that away from

someone no matter how much pain they are in. Some will say that “you get what you deserve,”

God punishes us for sinning with disease and poverty. In an article posted in 2015, Stanley

examined the case of Nathan Verhelst, a 44 year old man that was left authorized for lethal

injection when he was left traumatised by a bollixed genital reconstruction surgery. Nathan has a

tragic story, he was born into an identity he could not stand, his mother abandoned him and he

never got what he wanted. Nathan was revolted by the doctors horrible work. He was in a deep

state of depression but Stanley argues that the most tragic part was perhaps how his story ended.

By suicide with the help of the state. He agrees that while Nathan was clearly in a lot of pain, the

solution was not death, but human sympathy and kindness that did not come in the form of a

lethal injection.

This is the story of a man who went through hell and wound up hating himself, lonely

and inclined to give up life altogether. But there was still hope. He just needed someone to reach

out to his desperate soul, convince him that he is still beautiful because all humans hold beauty

within themselves, and to let him know that he is not going to go through this alone. He did not

need death, he needed love and we failed to provide him with that says argues Stanley.
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
6

All doctors are required to take the Hippocratic Oath when they get certified. The

Hippocratic Oath reads “First do no harm.” Advocates against Euthanasia argue that euthanasia

and such clearly violates this sacred oath with the ending of a life even if it keeps the patient

from further harm and suffering (Karlamangla, 2016.)

Defenders insist that they are simply expanding individual freedom. That the right to

choose whether you live or die is the ultimate expression of free choice. Euthanasia appeals to

the people who like to be in control. Who have been control of every part of their life so far and

they want control of this too. In the United States alone, of all the people who chose assisted

suicide, more than half of them said they did so because they were concerned about losing their

autonomy and their dignity. They also see that the patient’s quality of life has plummeted

dramatically and ask why they should be forced to continue to live in suffering. Also compelled

by their religion and personal beliefs it is morally wrong to let someone suffer for unnecessary

reasons. Human life is precious and it should not be ruined by disease and suffering. The patients

are in extreme pain and sorrow, the patients are “old, limbless, bedridden, ulcerated, in a puddle

of waste, gasping for breath, loopy on morphine, hopelessly demented in a sterile hospital room,

completely dependant on the beeping, ticking machines and the nurses" (Goodman, 2015.)

For example, Brittany Maynard was terminally ill with glioblastoma, commonly known

as brain cancer at the age of 29. Her life was a tragically beautiful collage of hour long doctor’s

visits, useless surgeries and medical examinations in the grave name of research. In January of

2014 they removed her tumor. But in that same April, she learned that it had come back, and

more aggressive than ever. Doctors gave her a prognosis of 6 months to live but continued with

the next step of treatment, full brain radiation. Full brain radiation would cause her hair to be

singed off and the rest of her scalp to be covered in first degree burns. From this point on she
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
7

knew that her quality of life was completely gone. She would live these last 6 months in

excruciating pain. Even with medicines she would suffer through personality changes and verbal,

cognitive and motor loss of any kind. She would fade away completely. Her family could not

bare to see her suffer like that. It would quickly become a nightmare for everyone she ever knew,

so in November of 2014, with the help of her physician, Brittany ended her life (Maynard, 2014.)

Brittany’s death is still incredibly controversial today and often impacts several opinions

of not only the public but of lawmakers and the press. News about Brittany’s decision spread

around the country. To some people, she was a hero. She received letters from people different

states, thanking her for her bravery and people wishing they had that opportunity for their loved

one to have gone in peace (Maynard, 2014.) But to others, she was an enemy. For anti-

euthanasia fighters, her story informed many on the serious topic of Euthanasia which in most

cases lead to sympathy and pity for Brittany, she received tons of support on her decision, tons of

people joined the fight for Euthanasia. Today, most people accept the dea of Euthanasia with

certain limitations but those who are against it completely are far and few.

Conclusion

Rosemary was clearly in a lot of pain and there was nothing society could offer her to fix

it besides to just end her life, which was a common solution for them, so it was not double sided.

But here, there are two sides. Neither side realizes that they are arguing for the same morals, to

protect human life, but each are interpreting their ideas involving death differently, which creates

ambivalent opinions. Neither approach is morally wrong, which makes this such a difficult topic

to discuss and come to a successful agreement on. Along with that, each argument brings forth

valid questions that few people move to solve. Euthanasia should be limited to the terminally ill
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
8

to ensure that they do not suffer for no apparent reason and that the quality at the end of their life

does not get flushed down the drain.

Humans are extremely dignified and like to have autonomy, when this is taken away in

the hospital it has deep effects on the patient. For bedridden patients sitting in bed for endless

hours has extreme health dangers. Pressure ulcers can form and eat away the skin, exposing

bone. Nurses must come every few hours and rotate their bodies for that ulcers do not form. Life

in the hospital is an awful experience, patients become completely dependant on nurses and

doctors, losing their dignity. They want this choice, because they want their whole life to be in

their hands and do not want to be seen as weak.

In some cases for the terminally ill, the suffering they will experience in the time they

have left is not worth the extra time. Brittany Maynard had 6 months to live that would be full of

far stretched treatments that would damage her brain, she would lose her cognitive abilities to

communicate. Her family would have to witness her slowly fade away. Brittany’s suffering

would have been for nothing, she had 6 months to live that would destroy both her and her

family who could not bear to see her suffer like that.

Religion has a lot to do here, they have very strong ideals on death that sometimes

outweigh their more humane morals. Many people of a variety of different religions are

connected by the thread that their version of a higher being is almighty and controls everything

including when and how you die. They are also concerned that this is a morally wrong thing, to

purposely cause the death of a fellow human. They would rather watch people live a complete

life full of not only personal suffering but force their families to watch them go through that as

well. The argument could be made that God and only God has the power to decide when your

time is up. Our job is to keep living and keep writing our stories, God is the editor and he decides
EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
9

when and how it ends. People who believe this can sometimes push away and ignore the

perspective of the suffering patient. They have the right to decide what to do with their own life.

Imagine if the patient were a dog, it would not be considered humane to force them to suffer for

the rest of their life. Most likely we would put them down because we cannot bear watching

them suffer. We understand that they cannot take the pain and that their time is limited, we have

sympathy. But when it comes to involve our fellow humans we can be incredibly selfish in our

values.

Euthanasia should be used to prevent the useless suffering of the terminally ill. It is

incredibly challenging to live everyday knowing that your time is running short, harder than any

of us can ever imagine. Some people say “live your life to the fullest” but some illnesses prevent

that by making life a living hell for the patient and somewhere along the line for one reason or

another, they lose their dignity and it becomes impossible. So, try to see things from the patient’s

perspective, have a little sympathy.

Works Cited

Burling, S. (2016, 07/06). Few seek help in dying, study finds. Philadelphia Inquirer.

Carey, Benedict. (2016, 02/11). Study questions the use of doctor-assisted death. New York

Times.

Euthanasia. (2016). In Gale Student Resources in Context. Detroit: Gale.

Euthanasia. (2016). In The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™. New York: Columbia

University Press.

Euthanasia. (2016). Retrieved December 07, 2016.

Goodman, J. C. (2015, 10/15). California's new law advances the right to die with dignity.

McClatchy - Tribune News Service.

EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE
10

Injecting a poison-filled syringe into the arm of a 17-year-old, a Belgian doctor killed the patient,

the first minor to be legally euthanized in Belgium, which in 2014 revised its laws to eliminate

all age restrictions on the practice. (2016, October 10). National Review, 68(18), 12.

Karlamangla, S. (2016, 06/06). Aid-in-dying law has many doctors uneasy. Los Angeles Times.

Karlamangla, S. (2016, 06/10). Groups sue to repeal end of life act. Los Angeles Times.

Maynard, B. (2014). My right to death with dignity at 29. Retrieved December 07, 2016.

Pesta, D. (2016, October 10). Making doctors kill: the Tyranny of State-enforced euthanasia:

proponents of euthanasia have longed claimed that it is ridiculous to assume that allowing

limited euthanasia will lead to a slippery slope, but recent events show otherwise. The New

American, 32(19), 23+.

Stanley, T. (2015). Euthanasia Should Not Be Allowed for Emotional Suffering. In M. Haerens

(Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. Euthanasia. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted

from n.d.)