Thayer 1

AJ Thayer

Honors English II

Blevins

April 24th, 2016

Assisted Suicide

Suicide is never an easy thing to contemplate. But for some, it is the best possible course

of action. Millions of patients in the United States (and worldwide) are suffering from terminal

illnesses, and because euthanasia is illegal in most states, they are forced into a life of unbearable

suffering. Euthanasia for those with unbearable suffering has been both accepted and rejected

throughout history, its life has been long and complicated. There are two forms of euthanasia:

active and passive, the former more accepted than the latter. Active euthanasia is where a patient

is given the means to inject themselves with lethal medication, whereas passive euthanasia is the

withholding of treatment from a patient that leads to their death (Euthanasia, World of Health).

Both of these forms of euthanasia should be made legal in the U.S. for the terminally ill, with

strict protocols for applicants; for it is the right of a person to die if they so choose, and if being

cared for by a doctor, it is that doctor's responsibility to prescribe the best treatment for their

patients, which sometimes means death.

The first known records of mercy killings were recorded in early Greek philosophical

papers, the authors of which considered them morally just (Euthanasia, World of Health). From

these, it is known that the Romans and Greeks mostly considered suicide in the face of

unbeatable pain or illness justified, though there were some still opposed to itsuch as the

prominent physician Hippocrates, whose oath we still use in the medical field today. As the

Christian church and Islamic faith gained popularity and support across Europe and the Middle
 Thayer 2

East, popular opinion began to disprove of suicide, and many of these acts were soon outlawed

(Euthanasia; Intro. to Euthanasia). In 1935, the first known organization to actively oppose these

age-old laws was founded, known as the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (Euthanasia, World of

Health). The Society was not successful in repealing any of the euthanasia laws, and it wasn't

until World War II that people began to support its core ideologies. As millions died in this

Second World War, even more were being treated in hospitals and clinics. With better medical

technologies available to them, doctors were able to treat these patients better, and due to the

Hippocratic Oath, were keeping them alive as long as possible. In many cases, the patients, or

their families, did not prefer this course of action, but were not able to do anything about it

(Euthanasia, World of Health; Euthanasia, Gale Resources). In 1975, Karen Ann Quinn was

brought to a hospital for drug and alcohol overdose. She slipped into a permanent coma, and

because of this, her family asked her to be removed from life support. The hospital refused, and

the family took them to court. The family won their lawsuit several hearings later, and Quinn

was removed from life support. This was the first officially recorded method of passive suicide,

and Quinn's family's success in this case is one of the reasons passive suicide has become more

accepted today. In the same year, Derek Humphrey's wife was diagnosed with an incurable

cancer. She was in immense pain, and so Humphrey gave her a lethal dose of medication, at her

behest. Humphrey wrote a book on the matter which sparked a dialogue on assisted suicide that

continues today. Afterwards he formed the Hemlock Society to promote tolerance of the right to

die. A couple of years later, Jack Kevorkian helped Janet Atkins, who suffered from Alzheimers,

kill herself. Before he was incarcerated, Dr. Death (as he became known), helped 130 terminally

ill people like Atkins kill themselves (Euthanasia, Gale Resources). His conviction refueled the

debate on the legality of assisted suicide. In 1994, Oregon voters passed the Oregon Death with
 Thayer 3

Dignity Act, allowing terminally ill patients to request a lethal dose of medication with the

consent of a physician; similar laws were later passed in Washington, Vermont and New

England. The debate for the rest of the U.S. continues (Euthanasia, World of Health; Intro. to

Euthanasia).

There are two main forms of assisted suicide, with one being more accepted than the

other. Passive euthanasia is simply a patient's refusal of treatment which will inevitably lead to

their death, whereas active euthanasia is the administration of a lethal drug either by the patient

themselves or a physician. The right to refuse treatment has long since been a concept generally

accepted by the American public. In 1990, the Supreme Court ruled that, ". . .individuals who

make their wishes known have the right to have life-sustaining treatment discontinued, even such

routine ones as antibiotics, ventilation, nutrition, and hydration." (Euthanasia, World of Health).

Active euthanasia however, has always been a hotly contested idea for Americans. Those

opposed to it argue that legalizing active euthanasia will erode our value for human life, allow

families to bully the infirm and elderly into suicide so that they may free themselves from caring

for them, that it goes against the Sixth Commandment of the Judaic, Christian and Islamic faiths,

that it violates the Hippocratic Oath, and in Rosie DiManno's words, a columnist for the Toronto

Star and a strong dissenter of the right to die, "That dying, with all its miseries, is a part of living;

that we do not and should not get to choose the moment of our death any more than we chose the

moment of our birth. . ." (Ball; DiManno; Euthanasia, World of Health).

The right to die is and has always been a fundamental human right. The U.S. was

founded on principles of liberty. As long as the actions you choose to engage in don't violate the

rights of others, the theory is that you should feel free to pursue them. The due process clause of

the Constitution guarantees the right to self-determination through the Liberty provision. This is
 Thayer 4

a strongly supported ideology, again in theory, but in practice, there is significantly less

advocacy for it. Those against active euthanasia argue that it violates the morals of many

religionsyet it is not the job of those of faith to regulate the activities of others. Not everyone

has the same moral principles, and for those that believe in the morality of euthanasia, they

should be free to pursue it (Siebold). As Howard Ball, an author and former professor of political

science at the University of Vermont, says, "A terminally ill patient has the liberty to choose

death by receiving a fatal prescription from her doctor. It is an absolute right possessed by an

individual; the government cannot abrogate it." A much stronger argument against euthanasia is

that families will be able to bully and pressure their ill members into suicide to rid themselves of

the baggage they bring; this coupled with the fear that mentally ill patients will make rash

decisions and doctors will cut corners to lessen their workload in determining whether a patient

should apply for active euthanasia is a serious possibilitybut not a probable one (Euthanasia,

Gale Resources). States that currently have active euthanasia require the applicants to go through

an arduous screening process, including psychological evaluations (Siebold). More often than

not, applicants are rejected from the program. Another reason that active euthanasia should be

legalized is that it is the responsibility of doctors to provide their patients with the best care

possible in order to alleviate suffering. In some cases, euthanasia is simply the best treatment for

a patient facing a life of misery and suffering. For a person facing such a life, the refusal of

euthanasia without consideration would violate doctoral ethics (Siebold).

In sum then, euthanasia has had a long and complicated history in the U.S., both active

and passive. These two forms are very different, and have had varying degrees of acceptance.

Active euthanasia should be fully embraced along with its passive counterpart by the American

public and Congress because it is the right of a patient to determine their lifestyle, and it is the
 Thayer 5

responsibility of doctors to provide their patients with the best treatment, which can sometimes

mean death. This is an important matter to consider, because nationwide, those who are suffering

from unimaginable maladies are being forced to live through their pain, instead of being freed

from the bonds of this world. (1,358 words)

 Thayer 6

Works Cited

Ball, Howard. "Euthanasia Should Be Legal." Euthanasia. Ed. Margaret Haerens. Farmington

Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Physician Assisted

Death in America: Ethics, Law, and Policy Conflicts." www.cato-unbound.org. 2012.

Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

DiManno, Rosie. "Euthanasia Is Barbarous and Immoral." Euthanasia. Ed. Margaret Haerens.

Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Death

to Death with Dignity." www.thestar.com. 2013. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web.

21 Apr. 2016.

"Euthanasia." Gale Student Resources in Context. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Student Resources in

Context. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

"Euthanasia." World of Health. Gale, 2000. Student Resources in Context. Web. 21 Apr. 2016.

"Introduction to Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints." Euthanasia. Ed. Margaret Haerens.

Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing

Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.

Siebold, Steve. "Legalizing Euthanasia Leads to a Stronger and More Compassionate Society."

Euthanasia. Ed. Margaret Haerens. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2015.

Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Belgium Twin Brothers Die by EuthanasiaAssisted

Suicide Should Be Legal in America." www.huffingtonpost.com 16 Jan. 2013. Opposing

Viewpoints in Context. Web. 20 Apr. 2016.