Ariana+On+Kevorkian+and+Euthanasia

“What is more justified and logical--end a person's life with his/her consent, or prolong the life of a long-suffering patient without his/her consent?” This question was asked as a response to the article written about Jack Kevorkian by CNN. I find it extraordinarily hard to try and argue that it is more moral and justified to keep a suffering patient alive when they only wish to be at peace and want to die with dignity without living through the unimaginable pain of living with a terminal illness. Take individuals like Terri Schiavo, Ramon Sampedro, and Chris Hill for example, their lives were ended in their eyes with their injuries, and in the case of Terri Schiavo it was even found that her brain had lost most function in the end. They suffered through everyday, and after years of struggling their patient autonomy was expressed, through their ending of their own lives or one helping to end their lives.

Many of you may not know that I am physically handicapped, and I experience pain everyday. However, some people fail to realize truly how much pain and suffering one must feel to want to end their own life. My physical disability for example has never even forced me to consider wanting to end my life, and I think that the argument stating that it will make the disabled feel more insecure is incredibly wrong. It is not neo-Nazi like, because it is no way is telling people who are disabled that they are less of a person. Having a disability is suffering, but it is the type of suffering that makes you stronger, that hurts but is forgettable, because you are able to live on and get through it still functioning in someway. Yeah, it is true that options in life may be limited, but not ALL options are ever limited for those. However, when you get to the point where life with the terminal illness is so unbearable and that this new pain is so terrible that thinking isn’t even an option, I believe there needs to be a way to help. Some find the will to power through and do as best they can but for those who can’t live on in their condition they should be able to die without having to suffer through all that a terminal disease entails. They should have the ability to truly control their lives, up until their death.

Pieter Admiraal said, “ as doctors we have two primary duties: to ensure the well-being of our patients, and to respect their autonomy.” I tend to agree, We pride ourselves on putting patients first, but that is in no way seen for the patients, when patient autonomy is completely disregarded the well-being of the patient is forfeited, their needs to be a way in which the patient can have the final decision, and their voice ultimately heard. It seems as if doctors and purely extending the life of the patient, causing them more excruciating pain and an unnatural and unwanted extended life. Would you want to live to see your body completely deteriorate, with one organ shutting down after the other? I know I wouldn’t, and Chris Hill obviously did not want that either. He expressed his hatred of life, and with a clear mind he wrote that he “decided to take [his] own life for reasons detailed in the accompanying note. It is a fully considered decision made in a normal, rational state of mind” He continued to speak of how it was a decision that was well thought out and completely made on his own. He made sure that it was known that he believed suicide is not a crime and that he has the ”right not to be handled or treated against” his will. The only thing Chris Hill wanted was to finally have peace with the life he had lived, not wanting to continue living in a state that he utterly despised.

I find it incredibly interesting that all those that respond to the article on CNN, who have seen a friend or family member go through an excruciatingly painful terminal disease, fully support Kevorkian. No one wants to see people suffer, and I believe that physician assisted suicide would end that. I unlike Kevorkian, however, believe that direct injections to the patient are not the way physician assisted suicide should be done, except for in extremely rare cases. I believe the devices and pill methods used previously are the right way to go. They allow for the patient to make the final decision, having the ability to back out at anytime. I acknowledge the fact that sometime there will be patients who do not have the ability to help themselves to die, and I think that the direct involvement of a doctor, then, and then only should be taken into consideration. When an individual makes the decision, after being diagnosed with a terminal disease, and having thoroughly thought through the choice, I believe that it truly should be their choice, and therefore doctor involvement would take some of the choice away, allowing for people to argue that doctors and pushing for the deaths of their patients.

“Ever wonder why death with dignity and ending a life is "playing God" but extending a life through intubation/medications/GI infusions isn't? When you decide to administer that first dose of Lasix to a patient with CHF you are effectively "playing God" (if you believe these fanatics logic and the when it's your time to go fallacy...) Bottom line...if we didn't intervene it would be their time to go...they're lungs would fill with fluid and they would die. Everyone should have the right to decide when they have had enough intervention.” I for one believe this is true, it is not fair to continue to shove tubes down ones throat, and mess with their bodies, to the point where they can’t even move. When this was never wanted. The official catholic stance on euthanasia says that in the case of extreme injury, “what a sick person needs, besides medical care, is love.” I don’t think anyone is denying that love of the patient will help, however love can’t medically conquer all the pain felt by the individual. I believe that the religious groups believe solely in the value of human life, and I by no means am trying to belittle the value of human life, however, the value needs to be measured by the individual, not others, and therefore I believe that it is the individuals choice to decide whether or not their life should be continued. No one else can feel what the patient is feeling and I think people need to realize that and respect others opinions.

In the end I believe that Dr. Kevorkian has a valid points in pushing for the legalization of physician assisted suicide, as other people have also found, he is not advocating euthanasia as a suggested treatment for terminal illness, and he believes in palliative care and counseling, in order to make sure that the decision made is well thought out and wanted. It is not a slippery slope as many seemed to mention, it is a clear personal decision made by a patient and nothing else. Dr, Kevorkian is brave for being the first to take a stand on such a huge issue, but I definitely do not think he is the last to fight for physician assisted suicide, I believe that it is something becoming more “accepted” and will soon be an issue in the spotlight. I am in no way advocating the death of individuals or pushing for those in tough situations to commit suicide, I am simply stating that the patient is entitled to making decisions in their own lives.