Editorial

Physician Assisted Suicide is it murder or a right? 

NPR and ABC Action News

THE RIGHT TO DIE IN PEACE

By Desirae Tainatongo

March 12, 2013

In physician-assisted suicide (PAS), physicians allow terminally ill adults to end their own life with the aid of a prescription for a fatal dose of oral barbiturates. When it comes to PAS Americans are almost split in half on the subject, with 55% for it and 45% against it. Some are for PAS because it relieves the terminally ill of their pain, while others are against it because it is against their religion. The subject being a controversial topic is only legal in three states (Oregon, Washington and Montana) of the United States of America’s (USA) fifty states.

In the USA there are many rights the people have including those stated in the First Amendment such as the right of free speech and free exercise of religion, however the right to die without suffering is not found in any amendment or found in all states. Although Americans have free exercise of religion, why are Americans making decisions about PAS based on religion? The terminally ill and those without religious beliefs or with different religious beliefs should not be limited to their rights to die in peace because of religion.

As the younger population ages it seems with time PAS might become legal in more states. Based on a survey done by NPR, the 65 years and older people who were surveyed were mainly opposed PAS (44% for and 56% against), but with the younger group of 35 years and younger were mostly for it (59% for and 41% against). These findings are probably because the younger population is becoming more tolerant with being more exposed to different views through the education. The same study showed that “People in households that made $100,000 or more a year were more likely to support doctors helping terminally ill people to commit suicide. Same for people with at least a college education.” (NPR, 2012)

Although the younger crowds are more for PAS, it does not mean that they also don’t have religious beliefs when it comes to homicide/suicide. With the younger population being more tolerant to PAS, it it possible that they understand that people have different views and beliefs and whether those are the same as their own or not “people deserve the right to end their lives on their own terms, without pain and suffering.” (ABC, 2013) Or that the younger population is more educated about the criteria that must be met in order to die with the aid of PAS. ABC has provided the criteria for Oregon’s PAS below.  

For example, to participate in Oregon, an individual must be: 

• 18 years of age or older 

• A resident of Oregon 

• Capable of making and communicating health care decisions for him/herself 

• Diagnosed with a terminal illness with only 6 months to live 

The attending physician decides if the criteria have been met, but further requirements are then necessary. Some of those include: 

• Two oral requests by the patient, at least 15 days apart 

• A written request by the patient signed by two witnesses

• Confirmation of diagnosis and prognosis by the attending doctor and a consulting physician 

• The attending and consulting physician must determine whether the patient is capable of making health care decisions for him/herself 

• Patient must be informed of feasible alternatives 

• Attending physician must request the patient to notify their next-of-kin of the prescription request 

• Physicians must report all prescriptions for lethal medications to the Oregon Health Authority, Vital Records

As shown above, PAS is not something one can easily do just to escape hardships like other forms of suicide. In NPR’s article Dr. Marcia Angell argued for PAS by mentioning that her own father killed himself with his pistol because he could not take the pain his prostate cancer was causing him any longer.

PAS is not "a choice between life and death… It's a choice of the exact timing and the manner of death, because these patients are dying." - Dr. Angell.

To the terminally ill it is the only peaceful way to end their suffering, shorten the time of their inescapable death, and not burden loved ones with excessive medical bills. The terminally ill and those without a religion or with different religious beliefs should not be limited to their rights to die in peace because of religion.

  

desitainatongo@gmail.com