 
|
|||||||||
              
|
Think Tank: A life-and-death decision Panelists worry legalizing euthanasia could open the door to many more ethics issues Sunday, May 27, 2001
Euthanasia is alive in the Netherlands since the legalization of physician-assisted suicide last month. Nearly three decades in the making, the law gives a doctor immunity from prosecution and sanctions a terminally ill patient's right to suicide.
But on this side of the Atlantic, Americans continue to debate the moral and ethical implications of euthanasia. Today, in spite of or maybe because of imprisoned daredevil assisting physician Jack Kevorkian, Oregon is the only state to sanction euthanasia.
Should the terminally or chronically ill have the right to die by their own hands or those of a doctor? That's the question our senior citizen panelists consider this week in Think Tank.
No matter how ill he might be, Elmer "Elmo" George of South Franklin said he dislikes the thought of killing himself.
"I would not want to commit suicide, even if it's in the sterile environment of a hospital," he said. If no other option were available, George said he would want to proceed only under a doctor's supervision and to "have ample time to ensure that my family understands what is taking place."
Still, George wondered how can one person take another person's life. Furthermore, given the nature of medical research, one never knows when a cure could be found for a particular affliction, thereby making a suicide unnecessary.
If a patient has not discussed euthanasia or has no living will, George acknowledged a patient's wishes are difficult issues to consider. If no relatives are available to consult, doctors are committed to keeping patients alive.
Maya Patch of Carroll also has a hard time imagining committing suicide. It's sometimes called the coward's way out, but to her the act is anything but cowardly.
"For me it's hard, because I don't think I could kill myself. Of course I don't know how I'd feel if I was in excruciating pain," she said.
But given the medicine available today, there's no excuse for anyone to experience excruciating pain, said Bill Brna of Carroll. To him, the Netherlands' advocacy of euthanasia is disturbing.
Under the recently approved Dutch law, the patient has to have been suffering irremediable and unbearable suffering, must have consulted a second doctor, and must have been advised about alternatives.
Still, physician-assisted suicide reminds Brna of Nazi Germany's wanton killing of Jews, the mentally retarded, homosexuals and Gypsies. Once the gates are opened, he fears there's no closing them. If the sick can be killed today, who's to say the mentally retarded aren't next?
"Let's go to the other side. [Perhaps] I want to die," Patch said.
"Well, hold your breath," Brna said in jest. Turning serious, he asked, "How do you want to die?"
"I want someone to do it for me," she said, indicating she would want to be administered a lethal treatment.
"If someone assists in the suicide, it's not suicide. It's homicide," he said.
If assisted suicide is legalized, Brna predicted people won't go to their doctors because they may fear for their fate at the hands of family members. Suppose relatives no longer want to care for an ailing family member. He sees physician-assisted suicide as a way out of the burden.
But public opinion appears to be on the side of those looking for an escape from chronic, unbearable pain. Bernie Hobach of Washington said studies throughout the world indicate people favor an easy way of escaping relentless pain.
"Personally, I wouldn't want to do it," he said of suicide.
Brna questioned what's to stop health-care professionals from claiming they mistakenly overdosed someone, when in fact it's physician-assisted suicide.
Arguing the issue from another point, Sam Cushey of Peters said he disagrees with prolonging life, especially in hopeless cases or those in which someone has been in a coma for an extended period. But like other Think Tank members, he pointed out "if you have another person doing it, it's not suicide."
And while Patch found killing herself unimaginable, Cushey said, that's easy to say when one is healthy.
In addition to the ethical-moral euthanasia dilemma, he also is concerned about living wills. He had signed a living will until he learned of its unexpected drawbacks. Suppose someone has a heart attack and is taken to a hospital. Once signed, a living will governs all treatment decisions, meaning a heart attack victim might not be revived even though it would save the person's life. Because of such repercussions, Cushey has rescinded his living will.
There have to be safeguards. More than one person, and especially one's doctor, should sign off on the will, Cushey believes.
Verteree Johnson of Clarksville questioned whether those who participate in assisted suicide experience guilt. On the whole, though, Johnson admires the Dutch sensitivity for allowing patients to die with dignity.
She acknowledged, however, people sometimes get depressed and seek a way out of the situation. People ought to consider the finality of suicide.
Brna also considered it unwise to cut off one's options. New cures for life-threatening illnesses are always on the horizon. What used to be terminal illnesses no longer are, he said.
In the final analysis, George said, it's not up to him to decide for another person if she has the right to die. "I would not be afraid of making that decision for myself or my family."
|
||||||||
