Introduction
With the current scientific innovations, more so in the world of medicine, medical practitioners have the capability of saving numerous lives, a case that was contrary some few decades ago, because of the absence of life-supporting technological equipment and medicines. Although such technological innovations have given medical practitioners the power of saving lives, through providing remedies to health complications that lacked cure and mechanisms of prolonging lives, some medical complications, for example, cancer still lack a remedy.
That is to say, although current technological innovations in medicine have helped to save lives, some medical conditions are irreversible hence, regardless of the technological equipment used; such endeavors to prolong life will only mean lengthened suffering to patients with degenerated health conditions.
For example, consider a case of a skin cancer patient; although there exist medical remedies that can ease (but not cure) their suffering, in extreme cases the pain is unendurable hence, prolonging such an individual’s life will only increase their suffering. Another case is of a patient with un-curable respiratory tract infections; the majority of these like patients must always be under a breathing support machine (Doyal and Doyal p.1).
Hence, considering the pain that these patients go through, and the fact that most critically ill patients with incurable diseases rarely survive, there is a need for societies to legalize assisted suicide.
Why Assisted Suicide should be a Patient’s Decision
Maintaining critically ill patients is one of the costly activities that families have to incur in their endeavors to save the lives of their loved ones. Hence, because of the costs associated with maintaining patients under these machines, after the death of such a patient most families face a financial crisis, a case they could have prevented had they assisted their loved ones to end their lives.
Considering this, and because in the long run, such individuals will finally die after prolonged suffering, although the law prohibits assisted suicide, there is a need for the law to respect patients’ requests. This should be the case primarily because, regardless of the ethicalness of assisted suicide, all individuals have a moral obligation of determining the course their lives should take, on condition that, their choices have no detrimental effects on others and that in making such choices nobody forced them (Doyal and Doyal 1).
Most communities have illegalized assisted suicide, as most individuals view it as an immoral act and an undignified way of ending life. Although this is the case, one thing that most of these individuals fail to recognize is that some medical conditions are irreversible; hence, prolonging individual’s live means increasing their suffering and hopelessness.
Assisted suicide is the general practices of helping the terminally ill and suffering end their lives, on condition that the request for the same. Depending on the available means of ending life and the prevailing conditions, assisted suicide can involve removing individuals from life-supporting machines or using specific medicine that shutters the functioning of the body systems (Weir 79-90).
It is important for societies to note that, although some individuals may have the will to end their lives because they cannot endure any more the suffering associated with their health condition, most individuals lack the power to do so, because of their condition. Considering this, it is necessary to respect such individuals will, for they have all the rights over their bodies, but all they lack is the strength to do whatever they wish.
Lying in most health institutions are individuals going through extreme suffering, because of their medical conditions, conditions that have rendered them incapable of meeting their wishes in a respected and humane way. Majority of anti-assisted suicide campaigners rarely recognize this, as most of them fail to realize that these individuals are extremely suffering; hence, require an external helping hand in achieving their desired will.
Yes, no one can deny that it is purely immoral to end another person’s life; however, why should individuals prolong another person’s life even when they are very sure that it is their medical complications are irreversible (Caplan and Snyder 5-22).
To some extent, the argument by anti-assisted suicide campaigners that, by allowing individuals to terminate others lives when requested may pose great dangers to terminally ill patients is correct, as most doctors may misuse that opportunity. However, it is important to for them to note that, for doctors or any sought source to help the suffering individuals end their lives, there must be a signed agreement or a spoken authorization; hence, such individuals act on compassion grounds in helping them achieve their desired will.
In addition, the majority of individuals who seek external assistance to terminate their lives understand their medical conditions or know the expenses their un-curable diseases, for example, respiratory infections may cost their respective families. Hence, denying them such a request greatly violates their fundamental rights to decide on the direction their lives should take; something they could have done was they healthy (Drickamer, Lee, and Ganzini Para. 4-12).
Another thing that assisted suicide opponents to fail to realize is that, even if the society fails to help to terminally ill individuals whenever they request for it, in the end, majority of these terminally ill individuals never survive.
That is, although societies may fail to help them, in the end, their medical conditions cannot allow them to live for long; hence eventually they are bound to die after suffering for very long periods. Considering this, it purely beats logic on why the society should be very much obsessed with the natural death concept, by overlooking the nature of pain sick individuals must endure before they die (Drickamer, Lee, and Ganzini Para. 3-9).
Although no human being has the authority of taking another human being life, why should individuals disobey the suffering individual’s wishes to die, but instead opt to see their health conditions deteriorate as each new day dawn in the name of saving a life? The human belief that life is precious has clouded and colonized the human mind to the extent that individuals rarely see other peoples’ sufferings.
In normal societal settings, as most individuals prefer, it is better to prolong a suffering individual’s life than assisting them to end their lives, for emotional gratification. No one can deny that; everybody should aim to preserve life; however, is it not selfish to see others go through unbearable pain for personal reasons and gratification?
Therefore, because it is the sick who know what they are going through, they should have the power to decide the directions their lives should take; hence the need to respect their call whenever they seek assistance to terminate their lives (Hajj 1).
Conclusion
In conclusion, because no individual may understand what experiences the sick are going through and the nature of pain accompanying such experiences, the law should allow the sick or suffering to have the power of deciding the right time to terminate their lives. Also, every human being recognizes that life is consecrated; hence, no one has the right to force other individuals to decide the fate of their lives; hence, patients should make personal choices.
On the other hand, because some individuals or doctors may force patients to make this like a decision against their will, it is necessary for the government to legalize assisted suicide and draft tough legislation to govern the practice. Finally, on compassion and humane grounds, there is no need to prolong a suffering individual’s life, when everybody is very sure that chances of such individuals surviving are minimal, because of the complex nature of their health complications.
Works Cited
Caplan, A., and Snyder, L. Assisted suicide: finding a common ground. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2002. Web.
Doyal, L. and Doyal, L. Why active euthanasia and physician assisted Suicide should be legalized. BMJ, 323 (2001): 1079-1080. Web.
Drickamer, M., Lee, M., and Ganzini, L. Practical issues in Physician Assisted suicide. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2010. Web.
Hajj, M. The right to die. The Guardian, 2010. Web.
Weir, R. Physician-assisted suicide. Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1997. Web.