Last updated on November 22, 2022
Introduction
She was given fewer than six months to live in 2014. Brittany Maynard was a happy 29 year old who was diagnosed with grade 4 brain cancer. Because the laws in California forbade active euthanasia, Brittany was forced to move to Oregon to get access to the Death With Dignity laws. In a video interview, Brittany describes how it feels to have the opportunity to choose the time of her death: “I can’t even tell you the amount of relief that it provides me to know that I don’t have to die the way it’s been described to me, that my brain tumor would take me on its own.” But Brittany is not alone; there are millions of other Americans who suffer from terrible illnesses. To give these patients an oppertunity to die on their own terms, active euthanasia must be legalized in all 50 US states. To give these patients an oppertunity to die on their own terms, active euthanasia must be legalized in all 50 US states.
Definitions
The word “euthanasia” is a combination of the Greek: “eu” means “good,” while “thanatos” means “death.” Normally, people believe that death is bad because life is good. By taking away life from a person who has a good life, death would be considered “bad” because it takes away what is good: life. We consider life a “good” because it allows people to engage in activities that bring them fulfillment. Life allows people to develop meaningful relationships, participate in enjoyable hobbies, and experience intellectual and spiritual growth. However, when life no longer provides the opportunity for fulfillment and instead brings only suffering, death may be a good thing. For instance, when patients suffer from an incurable and terrible disease, they are no longer able to lead fulfilling lives. In such a case, life is no longer a “good”; instead it can be considered “bad.” If life is bad, then death becomes good. This is the basis of the concept of euthanasia, a “good death.”
Euthanasia is categorized in two ways—voluntarism and method. There are three different types of voluntarism regarding euthanasia: voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary. First, voluntary euthanasia occurs when “the patient is mentally competent and explicitly requests euthanasia.” Secondly, involuntary euthanasia occurs when the “patient is mentally competent but did not request euthanasia,” as when the patient is in a coma, for instance, and the doctor or family chooses euthanasia. Finally, non-voluntary euthanasia occurs when the patient is euthanized against her will. This form of euthanasia is highly controversial and often considered to be murder.
Additionally, there are two methods of administering euthanasia. The first method is passive euthanasia. Often called “pulling the plug,” passive euthanasia is characterized by the termination of “potentially life-sustaining treatments,” or by the withholding of medical intervention, in order to terminate a patient’s life. This form of euthanasia is legal in all 50 states within the United States. The second method is active euthanasia. Active euthanasia is currentlly legal only in Oregon, when “a person, usually a physician, actively and intentionally ends a patient’s life by some medical means such as injection of a neuromuscular relaxant.”
The Ethics of Active Euthanasia
The goal of ethics, or the theory of moral behavior, is to either refrain from causing suffering or to relieve it whenever possible. I will argue that active euthanasia accomplishes this ethical task far more effectively than passively. During active euthanasia, the patient dies far more quickly than with passive euthanasia. This is so because the patient dies as soon as the physician administers the lethal injection. As such, the patient’s suffering immediately ceases. However, when passive euthanasia is used, the physician takes the patient off life support, and the patient dies naturally. A natural death can take weeks, which means that the patient will continue to suffer as long as they live. It is clear, then, that if the goal of ethics is to reduce suffering, active euthanasia fufills this goal much more effectively than passive euthanasia because suffering is immediately stopped. Therefore, active euthanasia is more ethical than passive euthanasia and thus should be legalized in all 50 states.
Some people argue, however, that by allowing active euthanasia, physicians would be murdering their patients. In order to better understand the actions of the physician, we must first consider the distinction between “murder” and “killing.” Murder is defined as the unjust killing of an innocent person for whom life is a good. However, killing is defined as merely taking the life of a living thing. Euthanasia only occurs when it is used on a person for whom life is no longer a good. Additionally, because euthanasia can only occur with permission from the patient or family, it is not unjust. By definition, euthanasia can not be classified as murder.
Given this distinction, the physician is not murdering the patient when performing euthanasia; in fact, we may not even be able to say that the physician is killing the patient. Rather, the physician is facilitating a good death with the use of medical equipment, though the methods of facilitation are different. During passive euthanasia, the physician is merely taking the patient off life support. The disease is what kills the patient. The physician, then, has facilitated the patient’s death by choosing to withhold the use of medical equipment. During active euthanasia, the physician gives the patient a lethal injection, and that chemical in the lethal injection is what kills the patient. Here, the physician has facilitated the death by choosing to use medical equipment. In both cases, the patient would die, with or without the physician’s help. The point of euthanasia isn’t to harm the patient; rather, by engaging in euthanasia, the physician is helping a person for whom life is painful. As such, a physician performing either active or passive euthanasia is merely facilitating, not directly causing, a death that is in the patient’s best interest and should therefore be legal.
The Effects of a Terminal Illness
Cancer is just one example of a painful terminal illness for which passive euthanasia is often used. Unfortunately, dying from a terminal illness such as cancer is more common than people think. According to the American Cancer Society, “men have a 40 percent probability, or approximately a one in three risk of developing cancer in their lifetime. For women, the odds are slightly lower, at 37 percent.” Also, according to the American Cancer Society, “men have a 22 percent lifetime risk of dying from cancer, while the risk for women hovers around 18 percent.” As reported by Ranjana Srivastava, an Australian Oncologist, cancer will “[lead] to progressive weight loss and hence, profound weakness…Dehydration…rapid loss of muscle mass and weakness…distressing shortness of breath… severe infection…seizures, paralysis, bleeding or behavioural disturbance…fatigued and uninterested and [the patient will] rapidly grow frail. Swelling in the brain can lead to progressive loss of consciousness and death.” As we can see, Americans have a high probability of developing cancer and an even higher probability of suffering terribly from it.
Not only do patients suffer from their terminal disease, loved ones also suffer immensely. Their psychological well-being can be greatly affected by watching their relative die in such pain. According to a study done on the impacts of a cancer diagnosis on families, “Patients, partners and other family members can suffer from clinical levels of depression and severe levels of anxiety and stress reactions.” By legalizing active euthanasia, patients and loved ones suffering because of a painful terminal illness can find relief more effectively than they can while only passive euthanasia is legal.
Conclusion
The elderly population is only getting older and older. There are currently 74.1 million baby-boomers from the ages of 55–75 years old in the United States. It is imperative to address the issue quickly so that adequate care can be provided for the boomers. By legalizing active euthanasia in all 50 states, patients like Brittany Maynard can die in a more ethical and compassionate way. I strongly urge you to contact your local representative to ensure that all Americans can choose to die with dignity, on their own terms, by legalizing active euthanasia.
For more ways to help, follow the Student Alliance for the Legalization of Euthanasia (@saftloe) on Instagram!
Comments are closed.