Issues in Health Care - Right to Die

Definition
Pro's
Con's
Related Links
Return to Home

Return to HotSprings

Definition

The issue of euthanasia has been given many different names since its development as a politically hot topic. The most common terms are "euthanasia," "right-to-die," and "physician-assisted suicide." Legally, those in favor of the right to die might define it as the right of an individual to die in a dignified, controlled manner when faced with a possibly painful or undignified death. Within the broad category of euthanasia, three distinct levels may be discerned:

One sort of euthanasia involves the patient who is comatose or brain dead. In these instances, doctors are often asked to "pull the plug," or remove the patient from mechanical life support. This is generally considered the least controversial form of euthanasia.
The next sort of euthanasia involves the administration of respiratory depression drugs (Morphine) to hospitalized patients in the painful final stages of terminal illnesses (cancer, AIDS).
The final category of euthanasia includes those patients, still in comparably good health, who wish to end their lives before the onset of terminal or debilitating illnesses (Alzheimers, cancer). This is generally considered the most controversial form of physician-assisted suicide.

Pro's

The main argument for euthanasia relates to the idea that people should have the right to die with dignity. They should be able to die with all their senses intact, and they should be able to die free of debilitating pain. Supporters of this issue ask, "If people with terminal illesses are comatose or going to die in pain, why prolong their suffering?" Legalized physician-assisted suicide would allow doctors to provide patients with such relief. Other supportive arguments focus on the cost for futile care, or care of comatose patients on life support.

Con's

The primary argument against euthanasia revolves around the slippery-slope effect. This theory states that physicians and policy-makers will have difficulty deliniating the line between acceptable and unacceptable euthanasia. Already, at least three categories of physician-assisted suicide exist. Based on the slippery-slope effect, lawmakers argue that no policy would be able to effectively govern the scope of the right to die. While no official account exists of the number of euthanized patients, one might argue that many more patients who could have been provided with palliative treatment might be euthanized.

Additionally, opponents argue that verification of patients' true wishes is difficult in most cases since many patients in question are unable to communicate effectively . Finally, opponents claim that physicians--and patients--should not be given the freedom to play God, or to decide when patients' lives should end. They claim that more work needs to be done in providing palliative, or comfort, care to dying patients.