Why Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized - Research Paper Example

Euthanasia should not be legalized due to its adverse effects on the sanctity of life and the wellbeing of patients and medical practitioners. Euthanasia or assisted suicide should be a last-resort option in the absence of other treatment options. The practice is based on the principle of self-determination where patients reserve the right of being euthanized or not, and it should only not be used to alleviate suffering. Some of the countries such as Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Belgium have legalized euthanasia or aided therapy while in the United States, the practice remains largely illegal except in the Oregon and Washington. Even then, the issue of whether euthanasia or assisted suicide should be legalized remains divisive among the medical fraternity, legislators, the judiciary, interest groups, and academics. This paper proposed that euthanasia should not be legalized due to its adverse effects on the sanctity of life and the wellbeing of patients and medical practitioners. One of the reasons why euthanasia should not be legalized in based on the ‘slippery-slope’ concept. According to this concept, acceptance of one sort of euthanasia would eventually lead to other less acceptable forms of euthanasia. Just to illustrate, if the practice was legalized, there is possibility that it will be abused be the medical professions by failing to adhere to the applicable provisions of law. This is already happening as evidenced by the situation in The Netherlands. Initially, only adults were allowed to access euthanasia, but the law has since been amended to include young children, infants and persons suffering from dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Some of the patients are also being euthanized without prior consent, and physicians are not reporting cases of euthanasia as required by law (Cohen 437). In 2005, 500 patients were given lethal injections without request, which means the law is being abused by the physicians (438). Regrettably, there are other countries where physicians have more say over the patients’ lives, and as a result a disproportionate number of vulnerable persons are being euthanized. Following this argument it seems that euthanasia has lost its initial purpose, and will lead to negative outcomes if is accepted in all the countries. Another reason why assisted suicide should not be legalized is because life is god-given and only the creator has the authority to decide when, and how one should die. This position is shared by all major religious groups where all forms of suicide are condemned. Among the Christians, it is widely accepted that committing suicide is a grave sin, and the same maxim is promoted by the Vatican’s 1980 Declaration of Euthanasia. Among the Jews, suicide is considered a sin worse than murder, while in Islam, those who commit murder are denied paradise and sentenced to hell. Legalizing assisted suicide or euthanasia also weakens society’s respect for the sanctity of life. In addition, it affects other people’s right, not just the concerned patient. A case in point, a parent can apply for euthanasia in which case the children are likely to be affected by the ‘death’ of their mother or father. Equally worse, a child can apply for ‘euthanasia’ in which case the parents are likely to be left distraught. From a moral point of view, human life has an inherent value, whether one is terminally sick or not. Killing oneself can then be equated to disrespecting one’s inherent worth, and it is on this basis that most of the doctors do not support euthanasia. The study involved 3,733 medical practitioners and majority of them do not support the legalization of euthanasia (Seale 205). According to Seale opposition against euthanasia is particularly high among the palliative specialists (208). They believe that the duties of a physician are to promote life and well-being and not to assist patients to kill commit suicide. Instead of killing elderly patients, specialists suggest that they should be kept comfortable as possible through pain-reliving medicine and narcotics. Based on these results, it is apparent that legalizing euthanasia will mean forcing physicians to conduct procedures that they do not support. More so, physicians are affected physiologically after participating in assisted suicide. Physicians participating in euthanasia are likely to report feelings of discomfort, and ‘burdensome’ feeling. In addition, some of them may be uncomfortable with the idea of writing the lethal prescription and administering the life-ending drugs. If some of the physicians are uncomfortable about performing these roles, then it is only fair that assisted suicide remains illegal. It is practically impossible to regulate laws related to euthanasia, thus giving the doctors a room to abuse the practice. As it is now, under the Death with Dignity Act, medical professionals are required to file a report with the Oregon Department of Human Services after conducting an assisted suicide. However, there is no guarantee that the physicians will report as there are no punitive measures for failing to do so. Even worse, the ODHS is not empowered by law to investigate the extent to which euthanasia is being practiced. In addition, the Death with Dignity Act only requires the patient’s written consent be witnessed by two people, but does not expressly describe who a witness. A patient could easily satisfy this requirement by inviting strangers from the streets without involving the close relatives. Likewise, in Belgium, although reporting is mandatory, the guidelines are never followed. In this regard, Smets, Bilsen, Cohen, Rurup, Mortier, and Deliens observe that 50% of cases of euthanasia are not reported to the Federal Control and Evaluation Committee (55). Smets et al. further observes that in most of the unreported cases, legal requirements are not met by the physicians (57). In The Netherlands, the situation is similar as 20% of cases of euthanasia go unreported (Cohen 437). These statistics provide us with irrefutable truth that physicians are not following the guidelines and so lives of many people will be at risk if euthanasia is legalized. The problem of lack of proper reporting mechanisms is further complicated by the involvement of nurses. This was established by Inghelbrecht, Blisen, Mortier and Deliens in a study conducted in Belgium where the practice is legalized. This study used a sample of 1678 nurses and 12% of them reported having administered life-ending drugs to patients without their consent. The involvement of the nurses contravenes the Belgium law which stipulates that only physicians have the authority to practice euthanasia. These results of this study illustrate the factors that affect the decision-making process and how it can lead to negative outcomes by involving unqualified personnel. Since it is impossible to have a full-proof process, then assisted suicide should never be legalized to avoid killing the ‘wrong’ persons. Besides lack of proper reporting mechanisms and participation of nurses in the decision-making process, there are other viable alternatives to assisted suicide. For instance, palliative care can be given to chronically ill patients so that they can enjoy life instead of ending it. This could be achieved by training competent personnel to ensure persons who apply for assisted suicide are helped to appreciate life. Providing care to patients should be a national health-care policy even in countries where euthanasia is legalized. Although there is compelling evidence to show euthanasia should not be legalized, the proponents suggest that euthanasia is a cost-effective way of treating the terminally ill. However, this argument is invalid given that life is very precious and cannot be quantified. Moreover, legalizing euthanasia is likely to discourage researchers from developing new cures that are likely to be beneficial to the terminally ill. In addition, legalization of the practice de-motivates the physicians from providing good care for the dying and suffering patients and exposes vulnerable patients to pressure to end their lives. In other words, the whole issue should not be about the costs incurred, because some of the patients may be encouraged to seek assisted-suicide services, particularly if they feel they are a burden to their families. In sum, euthanasia should never be legalized because there exist other alternative ways that can be used to rehabilitate the affected patients, and besides the majority of the physicians do not support the practice because their role is to promote life and not to ‘kill’ it. In addition, legalization of the practice will result in an increase in incidences of involuntary euthanasia as the case in Belgium and The Netherlands. Works cited Cohen, Almagor. “Belgian euthanasia law: a critical analysis.” Journal of Medical Ethics 35(2009):436–9. Print. Inghelbrecht, Els, Bilsen Johan, Mortier Freddy,and Deliens Luc. “The role of nurses in physician-assisted deaths in Belgium.” Canadian Medical Association Journal 182(2010): 905–10. Print. Seale, Clive. “Legalization of euthanasia of physician-assisted suicide: survey of doctors.” Palliative Medicine 23 (2009): 205—12. Print. Smets, Tinne, Bilsen Johan, Cohen Jochaim, Rurup Mette, Mortier Freddy, and Deliens Luc. “Reporting of euthanasia in medical practice in Flanders, Belgium: cross sectional analysis of reported and unreported cases.” British Medical Journal 341(2010): 55-57. Print. Read More