ENG 110
Brandon Henry
24 October 2017
Physician Assisted Suicide
Imagine the doctor solemnly coming into your hospital room, and saying the cancer had spread, you only had three weeks to live. In those three weeks, you are going to endure overwhelming physical and, consequently, emotional pain. Would you want a way around that? Would you want the doctors to stop poking and prodding you with “new and improved” medicine? Would you want to have something accessible to you that would keep you from living your worst nightmare? This is what physician assisted suicide means for people who are going through this hell everyday. According to Euthanasia Research & Guidance Organization (ERGO), physician assisted suicide otherwise known as PAS is defined as, “Medical doctor helping patient to die by prescribing a lethal overdose.” This has been a hot topic of debate over the last few years. Personally, I am for the global legalization of this procedure. No one suffering from an unimaginable amount of pain should have to go through the agony of their last few weeks, ultimately knowing their fate. Not everyone has the same opinion on the topic that I do. Some pharmacists, people of religion, and authors have articulated that they believe how physician assisted suicide should remain an illegal act. In this paper I am going to address the group and the counterarguments that they have related to PAS.
During the process of physician assisted suicide, physicians are not the only contributors in the medical field that are affected by PAS. Pharmacists play a big role, and some select pharmacists are against physician assisted suicide as well. According to the article titled, “Physician assisted suicide: Ongoing challenges for pharmacists,” Jennifer Fass mentions that the American Pharmacist Association “does not endorse a specific moral position on the issue of physician assisted suicide”(848). This statement concludes that each pharmacist has the right to form their own opinion, like everyone else on PAS. The Fass study asked different pharmacist’s about their feelings about assisted suicide and they study showed that most say it can be permissible under the reign of set rules. But only one third of them said they would be willing and able to fill the prescription. (Fass 848). This demonstrates how pharmacists understand the benefits for the patients, but they still are not able to participate because of personal morals of beliefs.
In the article, it also states the factors that could influence the pharmacist’s stance on the debate. One of them tie into religious affiliation. If a pharmacist has closer ties to a certain religious group, then there is a higher chance that he or she will be against PAS (Fass 848). This influences whether or not the pharmacist is willing to produce and provide the lethal drug used in physician assisted suicide to a customer or patient. In addition to this, Fass point out that the “pharmacists’ attitudes on the practice may be influenced by personal experiences.” This study shows that pharmacists have feelings too and their feelings cannot be regulated because of their profession.
Certain religions have firm beliefs that affect their opinion regarding PAS. The two religions that I will be mainly focusing on in this paper are Protestant and Catholic. According to the scholarly journal entitled “Religion and Attitudes Toward Physician Assisted Suicide and Terminal Palliative Care,” conservative Protestants and most Catholics are against PAS (Burdette et. al. 81-83). The author examines the thoughts of the conservative protestants on PAS and link their opposition to the fact that they go to church regularly. (BUrdette et.al. 81). Because of the church attendance, many church-goers are known to interpret the words and philosophies of the Bible much more literally (Burdette et. al. 81). According to the protestant religion Physicians assisted suicide is an act of “playing God.” (Burdette et. al. 81). In simpler terms, they think that changing the course of a person’s life, the plan that God had for the individual has been interfered with. In essence, it is seen as a way of saying that want to use PAS think that their plan is better than the one that God has for them. The authors also mention that conservative Protestants have “the belief that God has a malicious nature” (Burdette et. al. 81). This means that since people are going against God’s wishes, then they will be punished by him.
According to the authors, Catholics have made public statements addressing their stance on the use of physician assisted suicide (Burdette et. al. 83). They have made it known that they condemn this procedure (Burdette et. al. 83). Although the Catholic church as a whole has announced its disdain for PAS, there are people who belong to the religion who have differing opinions. The amount of pushback from the Catholic church is greatly linked with one thing in particular. The author states that the opinion of a Catholic individual on the use of PAS is directly related to the strength of their relationship to the church and the amount of times they attend church (Burdette et. al). If one goes to church more often, he or she is more likely to interpret the Bible in a stricter manner and would say that PAS is an act against God. This is reasonable because a churchgoer would hold the word of God as something to base their morals off of.
In the article “Physician Assisted Suicide: A New Look at the Arguments,” J.M. Dieterle lists off all of the arguments against PAS that he found in different academic articles. He first talks about how PAS is considered to be a “slippery slope”(Dieterle 128). By this he means that if it is made legal, it will lead to the legalization of involuntary euthanasia; this is when someone has made it clear that they do not want to be euthanized, but it is done anyway. Another argument that Dieterle notes is the potential of corruption in the medical field (133). If doctors know that PAS is an option, they might not try as hard to save someone’s life that is most likely going to end in the near future. They may feel like their efforts are not necessary and they would not personally benefit, ultimately giving the patient the only option of assisted suicide.
A third argument mentioned by Dieterle is that “improvements in palliative and terminal care will cease” (134). Some believe that if PAS is made legal then everyone who has a terminal illness that is killing them and causing their life to be less than manageable will turn to this procedure as the answer instead of palliative care. Palliative care is when a patient receives medical attention with the goal of easing pain with the and increasing comfort in the last months of the patients lives. If no one is using this form of care, nobody will strive to improve the methods of end of life care.
There are several stakeholders in this issue and all are impacted immensely. The group that is affected the most would be the elderly, terminally ill patients. If physician assisted suicide was made legal they would have more of a choice when it comes to how they deal with the end of life care. If they decide the pain is too much, they can use PAS to finally lay to rest in comfort. Patients would have full control over their lives and body. The other two stakeholders would be both in the medical field. Those people would be physicians and pharmacists, physicians would be affected because they would be the ones allowing people to participate in PAS. They would have to determine whether or not a patient is eligible for this procedure. If they decide that they will allow their patient to partake, they send the prescription for the lethal drugs to the pharmacist. Pharmacists are stakeholders because of this as well, they are the ones ultimately distributing the lethal drugs, and basically signing the patient’s life away. All three of the stakeholders would be greatly affected by physician assisted suicide.
Work Cited
Burdette, Amy M, Terrence D. Hill, and Benjamin E. Moulton. “Religion And Attitudes Toward
Physician Assisted Suicide and Terminal Palliative Care.” Journal For the Scientific Study of Religion 44.1 (2005): 79-93. Web. 6 October 2016.
Humphry, Derek. “Definitions of Euthanasia – Assisted Suicide” Assisted Suicide. Euthanasia
Research & Guidance Organization (ERGO), 19 Jan. 2006. Web. 01 Dec. 2016
Dieterle, J.M. “Physician Assisted Suicide: A new look at the arguments.” Bioethics 21.3
(2007): 127-139. Academic Search Complete. Web. 12 October 2016
Fass, Jennifer and Andrea Fass. “Physician Assisted Suicide: Ongoing challenges for pharmacists” American Journal of Health System Pharmacy: AJHP: Official Journal of the American society of Health system Pharmacists 68.9 (2011): 846-849
Web. 11 October 2016