The best solution is controlled regulation and through legalization, the decriminalization of euthanasia. The Voluntary Euthanasia Society has already established proposals for a voluntary euthanasia law. Some requirements are: the patient must be a mentally competent, incurably ill adult that is suffering unbearably; request must be in writing; must seek a second medical opinion and psychiatric assessment; the final decision must be the patient’s alone; and only a doctor may perform the act (Voluntary Euthanasia – The Basics, np). By decriminalizing the act of euthanasia, doctors no longer need to worry about prosecution and can freely choose to help or not to help a patient end their suffering. State laws or regulations governing physician-assisted suicide will be necessary to protect against abuse and ensure that assisted-suicide is conducted professionally and fairly.
The evaluation of regulated legalization as the best solution reflects that all criteria are fully met and compared to the other possible solutions, the best choice for all parties.
People will have a choice and there will be guidelines to help them and their physicians decide the best course of action. Religious and social morals would be upheld because euthanasia will be a legal but private decision. Physicians, no longer prosecuted, will be able to assist the dying.
With legalization, greedy actions by family members and the insurance industry will be paramount. Though it appears that legalization with regulation is the best solution, the effort to maintain the regulatory aspects will be difficult. There will be misuse of the guidelines. The health insurance industry will lobby and try to infringe their revenue generating beliefs into the process. And last, but not least of all, greedy family members hungry for their inheritance will try to coerce the dying and suffering into choosing euthanasia. We cannot regulate society’s or an individual’s values and morals. But by offering a legal alternative that provides for death with dignity, we are showing our faith in people to do the right thing for themselves and their family members.
The benefits of regulated legalization are numerous and apply not only to the physician and the terminally ill patient, but also to society. Decriminalization and establishment of guidelines will mean that society no longer will have to foot the bill for prosecutions and can feel safer that there are no more “Dr. Death’s” lurking in the background. The individual will no longer fear having to ask for the procedures and they can trust their physicians to utilize established guidelines. Physicians will no longer be prosecuted but will have a choice to participate with established guidelines to lead them.
To have a choice in death will mean that society can be educated and grow with the needs of its people as it has always been forced to do. The individual can understand the guidelines before utilizing them in their own private choice. Choice will also mean that physicians can choose to assist or not assist, as their own beliefs allow.
With medical technology advancing, along with an aging population, it is important that the controversy over euthanasia is resolved legally and morally or we may find ourselves at the mercy of opinionated people who will decide who dies and when they die. We cannot regulate values and morals for individuals and society. We can offer a legal remedy to a problem that continues to exist in hotel rooms and in the back of vans. We have all heard of people who suffer with a terminal illness or even commit suicide. This is not the best way to for a patient’s life to end. The agony of suffering is extremely demoralizing to the patient and to the family.
A better way to ease the misery and the suffering is to respect the individual’s right to choose the best course of action for their life and their death. Those who are pro-choice, as reported on Villanova’s internet page, believe “the decision how and when to die is one of the most intimate and personal choices a person can make in a lifetime, a choice central to personal dignity and autonomy. How a person dies not only determines the nature of the final period of existence, but in many cases, the enduring memories held by those who love him.” If nothing is done about the euthanasia issue, our society will continue to turn a blind eye to the issue and people will continue to seek alternatives behind closed doors. Society must become educated on the issue of euthanasia and lobby the politicians for effective and realistic changes to the law so that they can protect physicians from prosecution and individuals will finally have the right to choose death instead of misery.
“Australian Man First in World To Die With Legal Euthanasia.” The New
York Times Sept 26 1996: A5. Proquest Direct.
Bohlin, Raymond. Probe Ministries. “Euthanasia: The Battle for Life”. www.probe.org.
Choice in Dying. “Legal Developments”. 1998. Web@ choices.org.
Choice in Dying. “Issues: Background on the right to die”. 1998. Web@choices.org.
Daniel, Caroline. “Killing With Kindness”. New Statesman. Aug. 15 1997: v126 n4347 p16.
Dority, Barbara. “The Ultimate Civil Liberty”. The Humanist. Jul-Aug. 1997: v57 n4 p16.
King, P.J. Ohio Right to Life. “Forced Euthanasia?”. April 1996. www.ohiolife.org.
Newfield, Philippa. The Institute for Jewish Medical Ethics of the Hebrew Academy of San Francisco. “Euthanasia, Physician Assisted Suicide and the Dying Patient: Medical Status”. Webmaster.
Okie, Susan. “Country’s Doctors Remain Divided Over Physician-Assisted Suicide”. Washington Post, January 8, 1997. Sec A15
Peres, Judy. “Assisted-Suicide Bans Upheld”. Chicago Tribune. June 27, 1997. Section News.
Smith, Wesley J. “Death Wars: As Euthanasia advocates press their case, the moral
health of the country is at stake”. National Review. Jul 14, 1997: v49 n13 p36.
Stark, Albert. “Building a National Consensus on Assisted Suicide”. The Trenton Times.
March 31, 1996. America Online.
The Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy, 96 C.D.O.S. 1507. “US 9
Compassion in Dying vs. State of Washington”. America Online.
Voluntary Euthanasia Society. “Voluntary Euthanasia – The Basics”. America Online.
1994 Health ResponseAbility Systems. America Online.
1997 Christian Medical Fellowship. “12 reasons why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized”. Webmaster@Cmf.org.uk.
Annotated Bibliography
“Australian Man First in World To Die With Legal Euthanasia.” The New
York Times Sept 26 1996: A5. Proquest Direct. This article describes the actual
procedure used when Australia’s new law was first used to aid the dying.
Bohlin, Raymond. Probe Ministries. “Euthanasia: The Battle for Life”. www.probe.org. This
online article, written from the viewpoint of a Christian organization talks about what
the Bible says in relationship to living and dying. It also points out the supposed fallacy
of the laws in Holland
Choice in Dying. “Legal Developments”. 1998. Web@ choices.org. This is a very good
eight page online article about the legal battles currently being fought in different
states.
Choice in Dying. “Issues: Background on the right to die”. 1998. Web@choices.org. This
six page online article from a major organization involved in the euthanasia issue
provides background on the right to die. It discusses the different types of euthanasia,
the medical futility, and the facts about end-of-life care.
Daniel, Caroline. “Killing With Kindness”. New Statesman. Aug. 15 1997: v126 n4347
p16. This cover story shows that people’s sentiments are changing in the United
Kingdom about euthanasia. Many organizations are requesting the government to
legalize the procedure.
Dority, Barbara. “The Ultimate Civil Liberty”. The Humanist. Jul-Aug. 1997: v57 n4 p16.
Ms. Dority, active in the right-to-die movement discusses the moral issues involved
with physician-assisted suicide. She knows there will be many complications with
legalization.
King, P.J. Ohio Right to Life. “Forced Euthanasia?”. April 1996. www.ohiolife.org. This
is a good three page online article about the insurance insurance industry’s impact on
euthanasia.
Newfield, Philippa. The Institute for Jewish Medical Ethics of the Hebrew Academy of San Francisco. “Euthanasia, Physician Assisted Suicide and the Dying Patient: Medical Status”. Webmaster. This eight page article provides an overview of euthanasia and discusses the religious, medical, and legal aspects of legalization.
Okie, Susan. “Country’s Doctors Remain Divided Over Physician-Assisted Suicide”. Washington Post, January 8, 1997. Sec A15. Ms. Okie discusses the Supreme Court
rulings and the effects as seen primarily from the opponents to euthanasia viewpoint.
Peres, Judy. “Assisted-Suicide Bans Upheld”. Chicago Tribune. June 27, 1997. Section News. Ms. Peres provides comments on the Supreme Court rulings with discussion based on each of the justices opinions.
Smith, Wesley J. “Death Wars: As Euthanasia advocates press their case, the moral
health of the country is at stake”. National Review. Jul 14, 1997: v49 n13 p36. The
prominent nature of the debate is due to court cases. Public opinion favors legalization.
Stark, Albert. “Building a National Consensus on Assisted Suicide”. The Trenton Times.
March 31, 1996. America Online. This Special to The Times article provides
background on the euthanasia legal issues in the past and the current legal status.
The Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy, 96 C.D.O.S. 1507. “US 9
Compassion in Dying vs. State of Washington”. America Online. This 84 page online
article fully discusses the Supreme Court case, the background, the plaintiffs’
viewpoints, and the opinions of each of the justices. This was very interesting reading.
Voluntary Euthanasia Society. “Voluntary Euthanasia – The Basics”. America Online. This
two page online article from a major international organization involved in the right to
die issues provides information on the organization and it’s plans to change the United
Kingdom’s suicide laws.
1994 Health ResponseAbility Systems. America Online. This two page online article
discusses Oregon’s new law also known as the Death With Dignity Act.
1997 Christian Medical Fellowship. “12 reasons why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized”. Webmaster@Cmf.org.uk. This religious organization believes that legalization should be avoided because the risk to society and patient autonomy is too great.