Legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide

The first time I took Ethics as a high school senior, I found it difficult to understand what why Euthanasia was introduced as a controversial topic. What I brought into that discussion was the memory of my Grandmother's Irish Setter who was "put to sleep" the day before my 8^th birthday. As she and my Grandpa explained, it was the humane thing to do, since she was suffering in so much pain. Although I was saddened by the news, I never questioned my Grandmother's decision to ease the pain of my dying dog.

Although as a society, we place a higher value on a human life, it seems evident that we actively protect loved ones from physical pain when they are unable to act for themselves. I doubt anyone would argue that my Grandmother made such a decision for reasons other than to protect my dog, Mandy, from the excruciating pain brought on by her cancer.

Clearly, anyone forced to make a decision about the quality of one's life is faced with an awesome responsibility that inherently demands some sort of value judgment in when considering life's options. Few would argue that anyone should be subjected to unbearable pain when there is a viable option available. However, despite advances in modern medicine, the American Medical Association (AMA) reported just last week that 40% of people are still dying in chronic pain.

Perhaps this is a reflection of the intolerable pain Dean Welsh of Vanderbilt Law School in Nashville, TN, described of his mother's last days-- where attempts to obliterate extreme pain with medication brings on potentially dangerous side effects. We clearly recognize the tragedy of this situation, and can acknowledge that no matter what we wish for the patient, pain remains the reality. At this point, medical doctors and loved ones face a difficult decision in finding the best way to manage the patient's pain.

After hearing multiple arguments-both for and against Physician Assisted Suicide, my thoughts and feelings on the topic remain the same: Everyone deserves a humane, pain-free, dignified ending in life. What did change after hearing 3^rd year Law and Medical students debate the ethics and kegal issues surrounding physician assisted suicide was who I felt should should make such decisions.

Although apparently an unpopular idea, I felt more comfortable with the notion of "Philosopher Assisted Suicide" than any other options presented in my Bioethics class. Clearly, "physician" assisted auicide adds a component of scientific validity to the situation, and the idea of government regulated bureaucracy adds sterility, corruption, and the potential for abuse and/or incompetence.

The biggest source of concern with the legalization of physician assisted suicide remains in the tainted profit motives of HMOs and health insurance companies. Given a situation where an illness may be successfully treated with an expensive course of treatment, utilization review may be tainted if physician assisted suicide were to become a viable option in the eyes of the law. This may interfere with the legislative intent to spare individuals last days from excruciating pain. In light of this fact, I feel more comfortable with the situation we have now which places the patient at the forefront of the decision making process and yields slightly more protection against abuse in the system.

If, as stated in by local mmedical, legal, and bioethics experts (Nashville, Tennessee) physician assisted suicide is more common than it would appear by the publicity surrounding the Dr. Kavorkian case, then I would opt for the status quo as a preferable solution to government intervention and regulation.