Part I: The Argument for Assisted Suicide
(PART II: THE CASE AGAINST)
Many of us do not understand the stalwart supporter of Assisted Suicide / Voluntary Euthanasia [AS/VE]. The Voluntary Euthanasia Legalization Society (1935) was founded over 80 years ago. Their supporters have been working towards assisted suicide/euthanasia for a very long time — we must not underestimate their determination. (The Voluntary Euthanasia Legalization Society became Dignity in Dying UK in 2006.)
Economist Milton Friedman had a wise approach to disagreement with others:
Using Friedman’s advice, I argue first in favour of assisted suicide, so we can better understand their position. (Then I hope to refute that argument in Part II!)
PART I:
When approaching Assisted Suicide from a humanistic or atheistic view-point, the case for Assisted Suicide is almost a slam-dunk!
Arguing this scenario, I must presume to have some vile illness — metastatic cancer, dementia or other progressive neurological disease. Personally, I am less fearful of pain because I know that proper palliation can give good pain control — or terminal sedation if needed.
For some, pain is a debilitating symptom. Reasons may include inadequate analgesia or not receiving relevant treatments like radiotherapy. Many places have limited access to universal expert palliative care.
Being a ‘control-aholic’ I hate the idea of being unable to manage my own ADL’s — activities of daily living. The idea of being dependent on others for personal care is embarrassing. In particular, I dread the loss of privacy. Privacy becomes compromised once needing home-care, but is profoundly limited when in hospital. The thought of someone having to wipe my back-side is simply horrendous.
Then comes the more important issue — loss of cognitive function. Most of my work & pastimes are linked to my ability to think. I detest the idea of the illness, pain medication or chemotherapy affecting my concentration and memory. While still aware, progressive dementia would be immensely distressing.
This future portends the ever increasing likelihood of an unacceptable outcome, linked with rapidly dwindling chances of a peaceful exit. It becomes a simple decision to choose the humane escape — plan my own demise — rather than face the futile struggle to arrive at exactly the same end-point: death. Take control while still able to direct my own affairs!
It is reassuring to know that I can set an ‘exit’ date and plan a final visit with family and friends. Like Simon’s “All is Beauty” video above, it would be wonderful to have a personalised ‘send-off’: chat about old times; have a hug & cry; enjoy a tot or two of Black Bush and then, after swallowing the fatal concoction, slip away into nothingness. Sounds idyllic.
Supporting Arguments
AS/VE supporters claim the Right to Die (to be killed) based on choice and autonomy, or alternatively one of the following arguments:
Compassion — being able to completely relieve suffering; physical, or existential. AS can also reduce the workload of care-givers.
Personal Autonomy & Choice: It is My Life, so it is My Death and My Choice.
Adequate Legal Safeguards — are there to prevent misuse, coercion and duress.
Legal Protections — for those who provide assistance.
Dignity & Respect — for the individual.
Cruelty — when disallowing death to a suffering person.
Loss of Control — when ‘forcing’ dying people into decisions like regular non-assisted suicide or making others participate in an illegal act.
“It is legal in many places” & “many support the principle of assisted suicide” so it should be legal here.
DIGNITY IN DYING UK specifies that they want only the legalization of assisted dying for the terminally ill. “We believe the right law for the UK is one that allows dying people, with six months or less to live the option to control their death.”
https://www.dignityindying.org.uk/
DiD claims that they do not advocate for euthanasia: “We do not support a law that would allow anyone to end another’s life.”
(DiD defines ‘Assisted Dying’ as the assisted death of a terminally ill person with legally-provided medication. They consider “Assisted Suicide” to be the assisted death of a person who is not terminally ill. That difference seems moot. Euthanasia is when a health-care provider or other person administers the poison, usually IV.)
They make a fair point that it is inequitable when only some who can afford the trip to Switzerland: “Forcing people to travel abroad and pay thousands of pounds for a dignified death is cruel and wrong.” The law is forcing dying people to risk a painful and gruesome death.(By suicide)
They also note that the requirement to reach Switzerland means that some must travel earlier than preferred to ensure they can make the journey: “The law forces dying people to travel earlier than they would choose. This is because they fear that they will not be able to make the journey later.”
Two major goals of MY DEATH, MY DECISION are significantly different to those of DiD.
MDMD wants assisted suicide for anyone who is “intolerably suffering” and not just for the terminally ill. “We want a compassionate law on assisted dying that permits a medically assisted death to adults of sound mind who are terminally ill or intolerably suffering….to give choice to those with incurable conditions who face years of constant pain or suffering that they find unbearable.”
https://www.mydeath-mydecision.org.uk/
The second is their preference for the Canadian model of Medical Assistance in Dying as is specified on the MDMD web-page, “What we Want” (in the ‘In Depth’ sub-section.) “The Canadian model of assisted dying has fast become the international benchmark for assisted dying legislation. Therefore, we believe it should be used as an indicative guide for future legislation in England and Wales.”
Note that 99%+ of cases of MAiD in Canada are administered by euthanasia.
They make some good points: “…it’s unknown how many covert assisted deaths happen in the UK. The law hasn’t stopped assisted dying, it’s only prevented strong safeguards from being in place.” And that “Patients often fail to confide in their doctors when they intend to end their life, because they fear they could be prevented from doing so. This means patients are less likely to learn about alternative treatment options or make informed decisions.”
Next, Part II: The Case Against Assisted Suicide
Kevin Hay