Dating back to ancient Greece and Rome, the debates concerning the procedure called euthanasia have been among the debatable ones and have become one of the most investigated subjects of bioethics. Despite the advancements in medicine and healthcare, many patients, even in the most affluent states, still, die in discomfort. Therefore, such countries as the United States and the United Kingdom are trying to enact a policy that would grant a doctor a lawful right to end a suffering patient’s life on request (Keown, 2018). The purpose of this paper is to prove why euthanasia should be allowed in the United States and why people sufficing from chronic and incurable diseases should be allowed to end their life.
The discussions of euthanasia implementation in the United States began in the early 19th century after the development of ether, which was applied to pain-relieving. In the early 1900s, advocates commenced arguing for legalizing euthanasia, casting aside religious or moral beliefs (Dugdale et al., 2019). However, the process waned for some decades and revived only in the 1960s under the right-to-die heading, which implied physician-assisted death. In the 1990s, patients suffering from chronic or incurable diseases had a right to decline to receive medical treatment if they chose to (Dugdale et al., 2019). Oregon was the first state to validate such power in 1997. Later, Washington, Maine, California, Vermont, Colorado, Oregon, and Montana accepted the assisted suicide/death procedure. Therefore, as euthanasia is still banned in most of the United States, I believe it is necessary to enact a policy allowing severely ill patients to choose what to do with their life.
I firmly believe that euthanasia should be legalized in all states. First and foremost, people are endowed with a right to choose, so they should decide what to do with their lives. Secondly, I am sure that for terminally ill people, it would be the best option to be assisted in dying rather than commit suicide. Finally, I assert that aid in dying is a necessary measure for relieving someone’s pain. As for the main policy drivers, access, quality, and cost will be the main focus. The health care policy concerning euthanasia will have to be accessible first. Moreover, it should be of high quality to prove the safety of a method. Eventually, the cost containment must be kept so as not to cause financial burdens on one.
The first rationale concerns the study of bioethics and its principles: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. The question of euthanasia primarily relates to the law of autonomy which nowadays significantly influences U.S. healthcare politics. Keown (2018) stated that the modern approach to autonomy as a value had given rise to supporting voluntary euthanasia. According to Dugdale et al. (2019), “autonomy refers to governance over one’s own actions” (p. 748). The statement implies that while in medical settings, the patient decides what medications or treatments to forego. Researchers state that “patient autonomy serves as the justification for informed consent” (Dugdale et al., 2019, p. 748). It means that only after a thorough evaluation of risks and benefits coming from medical intervention, a patient can become a stakeholder in a decision-making process concerning their health. Therefore, assisting a patient’s death does not exclude palliative care that makes a death with dignity a possible option respecting a person’s autonomy.
The second rationale supporting the euthanasia implementation across the U.S. is propped by the fact that this method relieves suffering and pain. The primary purpose of every medical worker is to alleviate pain and cure a person of a disease (Mason et al., 2016). Hippocratic Oath proclaims helping ill people as a chief principle and not administering any risks that could destroy a patient’s health (Mason et al., 2016). In this case, in order to relieve someone’s pain, it is necessary to resort to aid in dying, especially to alleviate people with chronic or terminal illnesses. Therefore, the Hippocratic Oath also implies assisting someone in death due to their request for help.
Another point I consider essential in issuing a healthcare policy concerning voluntary euthanasia deals with the safety of the procedure. According to some researchers, “aid in dying is lauded by advocates for being a safe medical” (Dugdale et al., 2019, p. 748). This aid provides safety of the method because the doctors can ensure secure death, whereas suicide cannot. One may use the wrong medications and merely cause more harm to oneself. In addition to this, the lethal drugs must be high-quality to ensure safety. Therefore, the key stakeholders in the procedure are the patients themselves and the doctor.
Assisted death is tautly connected with ethical virtue theory which underlies the concepts of being good and compassionate instead of acting well. Thus, if a physician has such virtues, they will be able to perceive a patient’s pain. Jordan (2017) asserts that “these virtues help guide the physicians in their decision-making and actions in regards to helping their patients” (p. 6). Another ethical theory was suggested by Kant, who claimed that people should respect not only themselves but others too. According to Jordan (2017), “the notion of respecting others and not treating a person strictly as a means to an end is a key point in morality” (p. 5). Therefore, this theory seems beneficial to both sides.
Taking all the things into consideration, it seems reasonable to state that physicians’ aid in dying is still controversial to patient care. Although, I believe euthanasia must be legalized in the United States to ensure each person’s rights are respected. The procedure should be accessible and qualitative to ensure safety while assisting death. Moreover, the principles of ethics are aimed towards helping people, even if such assistance includes euthanasia.
References
Dugdale, L., Lerner, B., & Callahan, D. (2019). Pros and cons of physician aid in dying. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 92(4), 747–750.
Jordan, M. (2017). The ethical considerations of physician-assisted suicide. Dialogue & Nexus, 4, 1-7.
Mason, D., Gardner, D., Outlaw, F., & O’Grady, E. (2016). Policy & politics in nursing and health care. Elsevier.