Social/Historical/Rhetorical situation Euthanasia Movement in modern America faced
Dowbiggin (1) posits that survival for the fittest and dying for the less fit and the nineteenth century scientific innovations had a point of convergence with clamor for initiation of social reforms to enable Americans to embrace mercy killing in the last two centuries. Such a move had some similarity with the activities of the eugenics. Later in history, abortion, family planning, and birth control were linked to euthanasia movement. In the 1940s and the post war period, questions arose about the value of human life, and its termination. This necessitated heated public debates in the 1960’s. At that point in time, medical innovations ensured that patients lived longer but painful lives.
Emphasis was put on the quality of human life. Euthanasia was never seen as a social reform measure but as an entity anchored on personal choice. This elicited the use of the phrases ‘right to die’ and ‘the quality of life’. Dowbiggin asserts that it was not clear what the phrase the right to die exactly meant in the context of those who are old or chronically ill who are thought to be straining health care system. These issues elicited moral issues that divided supporters of the movement into advocates of passive and active euthanasia. The research paper seeks to illuminate social/historical/rhetorical situation the euthanasia society of America went through and how they used communication to their advantage in championing for their recognition.
Euthanasia movements in modern America perfected the art of rhetoric in their communication and this worked for them in terms of winning the heart of the public. This made sure that several legislations were effected in different states that favored these movements’ sentiments. Among the rhetoric they made use of was euphemism.
Euthanasia movement in America has undergone several transformations from time immemorial. In 1906 the first euthanasia bill was written in the State of Ohio. This bill was however not passed. Killick Millard in 1985 organized the first euthanasia society called the Euthanasia legalization society of London. In 1938, New York swathe birth of the national society for the legalization of euthanasia. It changes its name the same year to Euthanasia Society of America (Derek 5).
The name change was kind of a communication strategy aimed at blurring the vision of the general public from the actual activities they were taking part in. Euthanasia society of America in 1939 came up with a legislation limited to voluntary euthanasia. The society contemplated coming up with a legislation that allowed mercy killing to be done on non volunteer patients who could not be helped through conventional medical procedures.
Foster Kennedy the president of the society during that time addressed the Society of Medical Jurisprudence when he underscored the need for legalization of euthanasia in case where a child is born with a defect and is scared to remain so rather than allowing people who have incurable illnesses to opt for euthanasia. In 1952, pope Pius XII said that a major contrast in the words extraordinary and ordinary lied in sustainability of life. The pope was trying to clarify the blurred definition of ordinary and extraordinary that was advanced by euthanasia proponents. In 1965, the supreme court of the United States gave a ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut that guaranteed a right to privacy on contraceptives use.
The right soon embraced elements of euthanasia, homosexuality and abortion. This necessitated the starving to death of children who had spina bifida and Down syndrome. Sick adults who had sense of speech, sight, hearing and thought were subjected to involuntary euthanasia after that land mark court ruling. In 1967, the Euthanasia Society of America founded Euthanasia Education Fund later called Euthanasia education Council. The council was exempted from paying taxes.
The release to the general public of the modal ‘Living Will’ in the same year promoted debates on Euthanasia. Water Sackett’s effort to introduce a bill ‘right to die’ was futile. The Bill was anchored on the premise that the State of Florida spent much money on the children suffering from Down syndrome. In 1969, the state of Idaho adopted voluntary euthanasia bill. A publication by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross titled On Death and Dying made the public to critically interrogate issues pertaining to euthanasia and suicide. The book had heavy euphemistic undertones. In 1970, the state of Washington legalizes abortion on demand. This was orchestrated by the peoples vote.
The leader of the ballot initiative was among others Ralph Mero, the director at that time of Compassion in Dying an organization that promoted assisted suicide. The name was symbolically used. On the surface value it appeared to be toothless but had several death messages. He was an active proponent of imposed death. Later in life Mero was the leader of Hemlock society. He rallied for legalization of aid-in-dying. In the same year, the Euthanasia society began pushing for the ‘Living Will’ agenda. The ushering in of 1973 witnessed the release of Humanist Manifesto II. It directed that in order for freedom and dignity to be enhanced, one had to experience civil liberties.
The manifesto provided for recognition of ones right to die with dignity, mercy killing, and ones right to suicide. The supreme court of America ruling in Roe v Wade was used by many lower courts to validate euthanasia and infanticide. In 1974, a hospice was opened in New Haven by euthanasia crusaders. In 1975 there was change of name of Euthanasia Society of America to the Society for Right to Die. This was a euphemistic strategy. In 1976, the New Jersey Supreme court ruled in favor of proponents who advocated for removal of respirator that kept a patient alive. The court cited that the right to privacy encompassed patient’s right to turn down the use of life saving devices that are not extraordinary.
In 1977, California passed natural death act raising a white flag for ‘Living Will’. The Euthanasia Education Council in 1978 changed its name to Concern for Dying and became autonomous from the Society for the Right to Die. This was intended to make the public think that they were separate entities. In actual sense they derived motivation from encouraging euthanasia. The 1979 play ‘Whose life is it anyway?’ contributed to cases of assisted suicide. Jo Roman in the same year commits suicide in the presence of his friends after protracted fight with illness. The suicide was given publicity by the New York Times and public televisions.
In 1980, the Declaration on Euthanasia by the Catholic’s Congregation for the doctrine of Faith gave guidelines on catholic theology and actions that healthcare professionals are supposed to do pertaining to end of life. In the same year the Hemlock Society published a guide to how to suicide called Let me die before I wake. In 1983, Oklahoma Children’s Memorial Hospital physicians evaluated who were born with spina bifida and declared 33 of them unworthy to live. Parents of the 24 obliged to the doctors recommendations and the children were the starved to death. Elizabeth Bouvia who was suffering from cerebral palsy sued a California hospital for having refused to starve her to death while she was admitted at the facility.
She lost her suit but later appealed. By 1984, 22 states had adopted the legislation on ‘Living Will’. In 1985, the Supreme Court ruled that food and water were in the same category with artificial respirators hence needed to be classified as extraordinary measures and finally withdrawn. It is during this time that the patient who was disconnected from a respirator died- a record nine years down the lane. Proponents of Montana State House of Representatives Bill 137 make fruitless efforts to legalize mercy killing. The Bill was intended to be a spat on the stand the religious took on euthanasia.
Betty Rollin a journalist with a television station published Last Wish an account of how she helped her mother to die. ABC later showed the movie version of the book. In 1986, the American Medical Association came up with a policy that the life of a patient in comma cannot be reversed and it is therefore ethically right to terminate life prolonging medical care. Hemlock Society forms a group called Americans Against Human Suffering whose aim was to entice the federal government to legalize aid in dying. After successful appeal, Elizabeth Bouvia is allowed to refuse forced feeding but refuses to take advantage of the court ruling (Derek 7).
She lived for more than ten years thereafter. In 1987, the American retirees gave a node to euthanasia citing that they worked tirelessly to ensure that the Living Will Act enactment. In the Modern Maturity issue the American retirees association promoted Hemlock, and other pro euthanasia organizations. In Nancy Ellen Jobes’ case the court ruled that the family had a right to refuse a patient access to medical care even when the patient does not indicate his or her wishes. In the year 1987, the total number of suicide cases in America got past 30 000 mark. The Americans against Human suffering in the 1988 California polls unsuccessfully campaigned for aid in dying.
This would have strengthened the already existing ‘Living Will’ in enabling doctors to kill the terminally ill patients if they requested for that. The same year witnessed publication of an anonymous article It’s over Debbie in the Journal of American Medical Association. The publication talked about a doctor who was administering a lethal injection to a patient suffering from cancer of the ovary. Efforts to apprehend the physician were fruitless. This is a perfect example of use morphism being used by euthanasia proponents to woo people into accepting euthanasia when they are suffering from incurable diseases.
The same year saw the first religious organization passing a resolution in support of euthanasia. This was the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations. In 1990, Jack Kevorkian assisted Janet Adkins an Alzheimer patient to commit suicide to spare her the pain she had suffered. He does the same act for more than 120 people before he is apprehended and locked up in jail. All these acts prompted the Iowa University law class to come up with Aid-in- dying Act to legalize assisted suicide. The Act allowed even minors to be assisted to die. The Supreme Court ruling on Cruzan case allowed competent adults to refuse treatment.
The congress also adopted Patients Self Determination Act. This legislation compelled the hospitals that received federal funds to inform the patients that they are entitled to refuse or accept treatment. The patients were therefore allowed to commit him or herself to medical procedures by signing a form (Lehr 2). Some referred to the Act as a deficit cutting bill. In 1991 there was a merger between the Society for the Right to Die and Compassion for Dying to form Choice in Dying outfit. This was a pang of euphemism. Hemlock Society supported initiative 119 but failed by a margin of 54 against 46.
In the same year Derek Humphry rolled out an article Final Exit which became New York Times best seller. The author said the book gave accounts of how, where and when to kill yourself. Again this was an effective way of use of morphism to further their ends. In 1992, presidential hopefuls embarked on the need for rationing rising costs in health care. In 1993, Christine Busalacchi got starved to death. She was suffering from brain damage. In 1994 Barbara Rothstein became the first federal judge to deduce that the American constitution allowed one to aid another person’s death. Death with Dignity in Oregon allowed physicians to assist in suicide.
However, court order that was issued outlawed the use of Measure 16. In 1995, Pope John Paul Encyclical Evangelium Vitae confirmed the Catholic Church teaching against Euthanasia. In the same year the ruling on Compassion vs. Washington was overturned by the court of appeals ninth circuit. In 1996second circuit overturned New York state laws that outlawed assisted suicide. Disability rights group was formed. In 1997 the United States Supreme Court gave a ruling that rendered assisted suicide illegal. In April of the same year president Bill Clinton signed the assisted suicide funding restriction act to ensure that no federal monies were used funding assisted suicide.
The act however allowed monies to be used in encouraging death by starvation and dehydration. Between 1995 and 1997 a total of 50 bills that intended to allow assisted suicide by pro- euthanasia groups had been advanced. On November 4 1997, the state of Oregon voted against Measure 51. From the time of inception of Death with Dignity Act in Oregon a total of 292 people had died. It is feared that even many must have died but their records not in public domain.
In 1998, Michigan passed a legislation that incriminated assisted crime. Oregon Health Services Commission posited that money used in aiding physician assisted funding could actually come from state funds to avoid discrimination of the poor. In the year 1998, efforts to legalize physician assisted suicide through a poll in Michigan hit a snag when measure B was defeated by a margin of 70 to 30 per cent. In 1999, the man who assisted over 120 people to commit suicide, Jack Kevorkian was locked behind the bars for a quarter of a century on charges of second degree murder on Thomas Youk after a video of his death by lethal injection was premiered on television (Lori 3).
28 more people succumbed to death in Oregon on grounds of physician assisted suicides. In 2000, citizen’s ballot initiative which aimed at approving physician assisted suicide was defeated narrowly at the ballot. A total of 27 people died in Oregon out of physician assisted suicide. Oregon health department said that 63 per cent of those who died in the year 2000 intimated that they wanted to die because they saw themselves as a burden to their families. In 2001 it was learnt that 13 per cent of American population was 65 years old or older a complete contrast to 1935 five per cent. This showed that the average life expectancy leapt from 62 years to 76 years between the years1935 to 2001.
In 2005, Terry Schiavo was starved to death in Florida despite having shown signs of improving health. In 2007, Jack Kevorkian walks out of prison after serving only years of the 10 to 25 years sentence. He said that he would not engage in aiding people to kill themselves. He however confirmed that he would be a crusader for legalization of euthanasia (Derek 10). The people whom their lives were claimed as a result of Oregon Death with Dignity Act reached a record 300 in the year 2007.
Rhetorical Strategies used by Euthanasia movements
Some of these strategies were used by groups supporting voluntary euthanasia to further their courses. During the year 2005 academy awards, Million Dollar Baby scooped a total of 4 Oscars while the foreign based The Sea Aside won an Oscar for the best foreign film. These films had heavy euthanasia undertones. Million dollar baby was centered about a woman boxer who was quadriplegic. Her trainer was a practicing catholic who on realizing she didn’t want to live any longer assist her to commit suicide. The film depicted anti euthanasia crusaders as being so cold to the plight of the suffering and was a form of protest to their ‘ingenuity’.
The film Sea Aside was a real life story of Ramon Sampedro who was aided to die after becoming paraplegic. These films are strategically used to show the disadvantages of being paralyzed and the inability of law to address issues related to personal autonomy. This is a rhetorical strategy that has been used by many euthanasia films to win public sympathy by persuasion of people to support their ‘worthy course’ and to try to woo legislative bodies to change laws that touch on voluntary euthanasia (Eddy 179). A German artistic piece I Accuse features a beautiful woman of a renowned medic who is suffering from multiple sclerosis.
Her husband finally helps her in committing suicide by giving her poison. The woman tells the husband of her desire to die; the husband retorts that she was surely going to die. On hearing the news of her death, the woman reassures her husband of her love for him. The man answers back and says he surely loved her. The drama tries to persuade the legislative bodies to come to accept the wish of the patients with incurable diseases to take away their lives (Cranford 1). The husband is later arrested and taken to court where he testifies to have killed his wife because her disease was incurable. He is released without incarceration.
His release without imprisonment is a form of vilification to those opposed to euthanasia as people who are cold and insensitive to the plights of others. The artistic piece is also a manifest of criticism as a rhetorical strategy used by euthanasia movements. Such films were used by pro euthanasia activists to popularize voluntary euthanasia among the masses. The mass media communication theory strategy was strategically used in this aspect where ones opinion about euthanasia was shaped by the kind of the films he or she watched. Emotional response theory also find a perfect landing in this aspect as one would try to make decisions based on the emotions that the film he or she has watched evoked in him or her.
Apart from the use of films, proponents of euthanasia have perfected the art of use of euphemism. They have evolved and quite often use word s like compassion, choice and dignity in their advocacy. Pro euthanasia movements in America like the Euthanasia Society of America has undergone myriad name changes to earn positive public image like in the year 1976, the Euthanasia Society of America was named Society for the Right to Die. In 1991, the Society became known as Choice in Dying. In their advocacy they no longer use the terminology mercy killing. This term is nowadays widely used by their antagonists. They have even come up with vague meanings for the word euthanasia in their quest to have it legalized.
Meanings of words they use in their advocacy have kept on changing and shifting. They have shown renewed strength in making the unpalatable palatable (Marker 5). The proponents of euthanasia strongly believe that roads for euthanasia are built by definitions. When the campaigns to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide epitomized in California and Washington, euthanasia proponents used the phrase ‘Aid-in-dying’. Such words implied adjusting the people for the sick, wiping their brows and holding their hands. But the meaning of the phrase was more than the above stated meanings. It actually meant taking away the life of a patient.
Administration of lethal doses was concealed like the Friends of Initiative 119 were advised not to go into details of lethal injections as one of the avenues used in aiding in dying. Initiative 119 was touted as a movement that was interested in protecting the rights of patients. The general populace was told that such movements were interested in correcting flaws that were there in the Living Will law. News programs described such initiatives as geared towards clarification of ambiguity in the living will. In California, voters did realize that ‘aid in dying’ was sugar coated version of murder hence failure by the proposal to gain public approval.
After the California and Washington incidences proponents of euthanasia reframed their rhetoric. With Oregon being their next destination, a poll was commissioned by Euthanasia Research and Guidance Organization in 1993 to ascertain whether euphemism really aided their resolve to have euthanasia legalized. Findings of the research showed that people would only vote for laws having heavy euphemistic undertones. Sixty five per cent of people interviewed liked laws that used the term dying with dignity. This later became known as measure 16 hence the origin of Death with Dignity Act of the state of Oregon. The first draft was written by an attorney to Oregon Right to Die lobby group who was also a legal advisor to Hemlock Society (Eddy 179).
As euthanasia campaigns intensified, certain words and phrases had to be done away with. The phrase aid in dying was totally done away with in the titles, definitions, body and subheadings of their proposed legislations. Use of ambiguous phrases like death with dignity, dying a dignified death, and words humane and dignified became synonymous with euthanasia movements and the potential impact of use of these words on voters were critically looked at. Previous drafts had the phrase informed consent a word used in medical field to imply that the patient has full knowledge of whatever is to transpire during medical operations. When the proponents of euthanasia realized that the use of informed consent would present some problems they opted for use of informed decision.
Euthanasia and Assisted suicide have always euphemistically found a perfect replacement in gentle landing and deliverance respectively. Definitions of euthanasia and assisted have continued to be blurred. One word can be used to give many meanings. Such words are terminal, treatment, and care. To a lay man the word terminal means that death cannot be avoided despite the medical innovations that come into place. Proponents of euthanasia posit that accelerated death is only applicable to people with terminal illnesses. This influences the perspective of media coverage as was evidenced in Compassion in Dying v. Washington and Quill v. Vacco.
Here the mass media theory communication strategy is used to shape opinion. Laws also obscure meanings of specific words as seen in the interpretation of the word terminal by several courts and medical fields (State committee on Euthanasia 10). Policies like those relating to Veterans allow for patients who have minor complications like arthritis and mental illnesses to fall under the category of the terminally ill. Interpretation of the word treatment has also been pretty difficult.
Proponents of euthanasia have also taken advantage of this to further their courses. The word morphing coined from metamorphosis was extensively used by extensively to popularize euthanasia. It involves transformation of one image into another so that it becomes difficult to know the exact look of things. It is used in visual symbolism. Linguistic morphing was used by proponents of euthanasia as a persuasive approach. It frustrated efforts to subject issues euthanasia proponents advanced to critical analysis. It endeavored to change public perception of euthanasia. Efforts were made to baptize lethal injections and overdoses prescribed to willing parties o be categorized as treatments.
This was an attempt to create a bridge between the traditional meaning of treatment which meant an attempt to cure and fatal version that means killing. Heated debates have emanated on grounds of whether patients who are suffering from conditions like brain damage should be provided with food and fluids and whether removal of the foods and the fluids should be considered as removal of treatment (Van der Maas 13). This has necessitated the administration of lethal doses to patients under the pretence that the medical staff is providing treatment. Denial of nutrition is a sure way killing many biologically vulnerable patients.
Right to die activists capitalized on the removal of nutrition for the extremely sick patients whom their systems could not synthesize such food by saying that death b starvation and dehydration is so painful that patients wish to be given lethal injection should be granted. Denial of food and fluids was replaced with a more appealing removal of treatment. Proponents of euthanasia claimed that the use of gastronomy tube that is basically used to nourish patients in nursing homes and hospitals is risky and invasive yet it is a very simple medical procedure that can be done under local anesthesia. This was a perfect example of use of confrontational rhetoric. This trivialized the use of gastronomy tubes. Manipulative terminologies were used.
The meaning of the word treatment and care was blurred by euthanasia proponents. Food received through gastronomy tube was referred to as artificially implanted nutrition and hydration. This was meant to create an impression that food and nutrition are exotic medical remedies (Merritt 731).
Boundaries of treatment have been widened by euthanasia crusaders as to classify oral feeding as a medical intervention. Such crusaders advocate for the removal of oral feeding from the frail, patients with brain diseases who are non -dying. Even feeding of a patient with the aid of a spoon was classified as an artificial means. Euthanasia Educational Council now known as Choice in Dying listed dehydration as one of the ways used in ending life. They purported that the law allowed one to end his or her life by refusing to take food and water and a tray of food was taken to mean treatment. They said patients had a right to refuse to take food. Researches later showed that one who chooses to get dehydrated dies a honorable death.
After inception of Measure 16 in Oregon euthanasia’s rhetorical architects sprung into life as strategies were being put in place to come up with a label for the death producing medical interventions. Questions were asked about issuance of death certificates for patients who had died after being given lethal doses. In Oregon, phrases like compassion for dying were used to refer to people who were providing suicide assistance. Phrases like medical treatment or medical function was used to refer to actions that had consequences of death. Other communication theory strategy that were successfully used by the euthanasia movements in modern America included social process theory, cognitive theory, ideation theory, and stage/step theory to woo people to their side.
Conclusion
As witnessed above sensationalism, euphemism, open defiance to law, and trying to relate certain activities to fiery historical figures like Hitler of the Nazi Germany achieve the intended goal of wooing your unsuspecting converts into accepting your ideologies.
This is witnessed in the American Euthanasia Movements ability to win public sympathy by use of morphosis to render the meaning of treatment ambiguous. Films were effectively used to appeal to authorities to allow people who have incurable diseases to be assisted to die. The inability of legal and medical system to come up with proper meanings of treatment and termination has been a leeway for perpetrators of euthanasia. Other rhetorical strategies used though minimally were protests and internal rhetoric.
Works Cited
Cranford, Ronald. “Termination of Treatment in the Persistent Vegetative State,” Seminars in Neurology. 4 (1984). 41.
Derek, Humphry. A twentieth century chronology of assisted suicide and physician assisted suicide 1906-2000. NY: AUP, 2005. Print.
Dowbiggin, Ian. Merciful end: Euthanasia movement in modern America, NY: OUP, 2003. Print.
Eddy, David, “A Conversation with My Mother,” Journal of the American Medical Association. 272,( 3), 179-181. 1994.
Lehr, Dick. Supporting those who want to die: A Seattle group, including doctors and clergy, offers help and advice for the suicidal. Boston Globe, 1994.
Lori, Montgomery. The options – legal and not. Detroit: Detroit Free Press, 1996. Print.
Marker, Rita and Smith, Wesley. The Art of Verbal Engineering. Steubenville, OH: Law Review, 1996. Print.
Merritt, Tracy L.. “Equality for the Elderly Incompetent: A Proposal for Dignified Death,” Stanford Law Review, vol. 39 (1987), p. 731.
State Committee on Euthanasia.Report on Euthanasia. The Hague: Government Printing Office, 1985. Print.
Van der Maas, Paul J. Euthanasia and Other Medical Decisions Concerning the End of Life. Amsterdam; New York: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1992. Print.