Ill Patients And Their Attitudes Towards Euthanasia example essay topic

Euthanasia: Murder or Mercy? Suppose I am terminally ill. I have no hope for the future, no hope for survival, no hope for happiness. I wish to die and I am incapable due to my disability to end my own life. I am in indescribable paid and torment all day long and my only wish is to end this misery. Should I have the option of euthanasia existent to me?

Put under such broad and pitiful circumstances, most Americans would say yes to the previous question. Indeed, statistics continually show, dating back to 1978, the two thirds of Americans support euthanasia when asked a question that has been phrased similarly to the one I have given here. This misleading statistic shows only half the story. When the statistics are further scrutinized we find that in fact America is split into thirds on the issue, as shown in an article that appeared in Atlantic Monthly by Ezekiel Emanuel. This showed that when the statistics are further examined, a third of America support euthanasia under numerous circumstances, a third oppose it under any circumstance, and a third approve of it in few cases but oppose it in most. This can be further explained by this quote, appearing in the same article: Other, more carefully designed questions can elicit majority support for physician assisted suicide and euthanasia, but only when patients are described as terminally ill AND experiencing unremitting physical pain.

Support dwindles when the public is asked about physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in virtually any other situation. Two thirds of Americans oppose physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia when a terminally ill patient has no pain but wants to die because of concern about being a burden to his or her family, or because he or she finds a drawn-out dying process meaningless. The most accurate characterization of the survey data is that a significant majority of Americans oppose physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia EXCEPT in the limited case of a terminally ill patient with uncontrollable pain. So, one may ask, what is the main cause for euthanasia? Of course it would be the relentless, unforgiving pain, right?

Wrong. Numerous sources and research studies have come up with the conclusion that the main reason for terminally ill patients choosing to undergo euthanasia is depression, a symptom which is hardly life-threatening. In a survey conducted by The Journal of the American Medical Association of terminally ill patients and their attitudes towards euthanasia, they concluded that "depressive symptoms and other psychological factors, such as feeling unappreciated, appear to be more determinants of both patients' personal interest in euthanasia and PAS (physician-assisted suicide) and the instability of this interest". The actual statistics show that in individuals who showed depressive symptoms, 19.5% showed a personal interest, compared to only 8.7% who showed no depressive symptoms; furthermore, in those feeling unappreciated 22.0% showed a personal interest in PAS, while a mere 8.4% showed interest in those feeling appreciated. Take into account these are actual terminally ill patients who must seriously consider this option for their own well-being that gave the previous results. These are not the opinions of bystanders who try to pretend they know what the reasons are for patients undergoing euthanasia or PAS.

One other interesting result that came of this survey was the precariousness of the patients' decisions to undergo euthanasia for themselves. In the initial interview of 988 terminally ill patients, 71 had seriously considered euthanasia for themselves. In a follow-up interview six months later, 35 patients still seriously considered euthanasia for themselves, 36 patients changed their mind and 29 new patients were seriously considering it. This alarming statistic is the most pivotal reason why opponents of euthanasia form their opinions.

One such opinion is that of Ezekiel Emanuel, ethics chief of the National Institutes of Health, who said - regarding researchers who have failed to prove that pain is the essential reason for the terminally ill to use euthanasia - "To the contrary, all such studies have documented that physical pain plays a very small role in motivating patients' interest in or requests for euthanasia. Depression, hopelessness, anxiety, and the like are why patients request aid in dying". Indeed, the law has even taken this stance, as depicted by a New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, which appeared in Issues and Controversies on File. The task force unanimously recommended keeping New York State's laws forbidding the practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, citing that depression tended to be the main purpose for patients receiving euthanasia.

They further described depression as a treatable disorder that should not be reason for death by lethal injection. Who can value the worth of a human life? One who wishes more than anything to be dead at the beginning of the month may desire more fully than ever to live by the end of the month. Knowing this is it morally, ethically, or legally permissible for us to take their requests for death at face value? Should we jump on the opportunity to end someone's life based upon "mercy" or should we in turn give mercy by allowing them time to reconsider their decisions? By ending ones life we are only brutally destroying an individual in their time of utmost need and confusion.

We are praying upon the sick and disabled; perpetually exterminating them at an alarming pace. We tend to view them as less of humans due to their crippling diseases instead of patients with needs. Perhaps instead of killing them off, we need to concentrate on giving them psychological help to deal with their unrelenting difficulties. As Ezekiel Emanuel points out in his article appearing in the Atlantic Monthly, "Our usual approach to people who try to end their lives for reasons of depression and psychological distress is psychiatric intervention - not giving them a syringe and life-ending drugs". In Issues and Controversies on File, the reasonable point was brought up regarding what the ultimate goal of the medical profession should be? Is it not "to help people survive and overcome illness?" By destroying these lives are we not violating society's most basic code of conduct that all killing is wrong?

As described in a book by James D. Torr entitled Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints, how are we assisting the disabled by injecting them with a completely separate and deadly disease from the one they already suffer? Are we not simply assuring their demise when there is always the open door for survival? How many times have we have heard of or even witnessed someone who was told they would not survive to see another year but miraculously continued to live beyond anyone's expectations? How can we take away the potential for such miraculous recoveries? Indeed, they are by no means typical; however, they are by no means unheard of. As James D. Torr exhibited, people like Kathleen Foley, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center's renowned pain control expert, can testify of why patients deserve the right to live.

Stories show of how suicidal patients once convinced euthanasia was right for them, after much caring talk with a physician changed their mind, had their hopelessness relived, and spent the last months of their life becoming closer to friends and family. Our goal should not be to rush into legalizing euthanasia, but in preserving the safety of the patients. Many supporters of the euthanasia movement cry out "Its already being committed anyway. Why not legalize it and be able to set restrictions and guidelines upon it?" This logic possesses only one fault. Daniel Callahan, president of the Hastings Center, an organization assisting terminally ill patients to make decisions regarding euthanasia, said it will when he said, "Why should we expect new statues to be taken with greater moral and legal seriousness [than the ones currently in place]".

Doctors are continually ignoring the laws and guidelines of what is currently established, so how is it at all realistic that we should not expect them to commit the same violations when new laws are passed? In the end, we must consider what is best for those who actually face daily a struggle between life and death. Through studies we have been able to understand why people choose to undergo euthanasia and we must decide whether this is a legitimate reason for the practice to take place. Is depression, although painful and difficult, reason for ending another's life? Should be pass laws encouraging such rituals to occur? Or, should we concentrate on offering counseling and attention to those suffering, instead of immediate death?

The answer is simple really. Value others and other's lives enough to grant them the ability to live, because you never know when they may change their mind. Always remember, once the death decision is made, there is no turning back.

Bibliography

1. Torr, James D. Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego: Green haven Press, 2000.
2. "Attitudes and Desires Related to Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide Amount Terminally Ill Patients and Their Caregivers". The Journal of the American Medical Association. 15 Nov. 2000: 2460-2468.
3. Emanuel, Ezekiel. "Whose Right to Die?" Atlantic Monthly. March 1997: 79-79.
4. "Euthanasia". Issues and Controversies on File. 5.4. 3 March 2000.
5. Help Me Die. Videocassette. Fanlight Productions. 1991.