In article one, “Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: A White Paper from the European Association for Palliative Care” by Lukas Radbruch, the topic of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia were explained, showing the difference between the two. The article focused on various European countries and the different laws of each corresponding country, comparing them to each other. The individual effect on physicians for providing these procedures was also discussed, uncovering why physicians are reluctant to provide this procedure and how ethics plays a role in their decision to provide these procedures. In the second article, “Legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon — the First Year’s Experience” the focus looks at physician assisted suicide in the state of Oregon. This includes reviewing laws such as the Death and Dignity Act, and reviewing a case study.
In a more narrow focus on article one, physicians overall have been seen to be more reluctant to provide the procedure of physician assisted suicide (PAS) to patients. The disinclined feeling towards providing PAS to patients is a common theme throughout the different countries with laws on PAS and euthanasia. PAS and euthusania have similar principles, but the main difference between the two is that in euthanasia, the doctor directly administers the drug to the patient, while in PAS, the doctor only prescribes the drug while the patient administers it themselves. A common concern that physicians are having is how the decision will affect their reputation to not only their patients, but also to the medical world as a whole. “Physicians usually have relief or cure as their only goal… this might jeopardize the relationship between the patient and physician” (L. Radbruch). The whole idea of PAS and euthanasa is contradictory to everything physicians practice. A typical practice of a physician is to find solutions for a better quality of life, and overall aid their patients to help them get better no matter the malady. So, when they are approached by someone with the desire to do either of these procedures, they are put in a difficult situation. Even though any physician who chooses to carry out these procedures has the assurance that they will not be prosecuted, it goes beyond legal concerns and more into ethical concerns. There is so much pressure on these medical professionals to pick the right choice for their patient because this is something that is irreversible. Before any treatment can be administered, the physician must complete documents stating their own intentions in order to avoid misuse or malpractice of the medication and sedatives that come with these procedures. Some physicians, in an imperfect world, might be associated with larger medical companies that make the medications for these life ending procedures and could benefit from a higher demand in PAS and euthanasia. This scenario is highly unlikely in the medical world due to the reputations of these doctors being on the line. A large majority of doctors have turned against both procedures, but some patients are so persistent that they will go to several doctors until they get the answer they want. There isn’t anything illegal with administering PAS, but a majority of times these physicians have been seeing their patients for a long time and know their medical history and future probability for their illnesses, but most importantly they know them as human beings, unlike a lot of nonprofit clinics that provide these services. The question remains if it is ethical to go around a physician who knows their patient and provide them with PAS or euthanasia.
There is a strong likeness between patient assisted suicide and the ethics surrounding it and Victor Frankenstein’s unethical scientific practices. Both are medical anomalies and the question of ethics still exists. Victor, in his attempts to bring life from death, is focused on the power he will gain from this creation and the clout he will receive from the scientific community for this discovery. He considers, “life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator…” Victor delves so deeply into the fact that he could be powerful and successful if he does this that he develops a god complex. Since Victor creates this scientific anomaly, he has the mentality that he is superior to all and that he is “blessed.” He experiences a power trip and completely neglects ethics even further than he already had, disregarding how his creation might affect others. In contrast, physicians may have all of this power to provide treatments such as PAS, but they are much more calculated in their practices and think about the patient over themselves. These two situations are the opposite of each other, but are similar in ethical concerns. One is bringing life from the dead, and the other is inducing death to the living; however, one has more rules and regulations while the other is completely spontaneous. Ultimately, the large differences between Victor’s desire for power and spontaneity and the regulated and calculated practices of physicians underscores how ethical boundaries define the difference between dangerous opportunism and thoughtful medical practice.
Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash
