Euthanasia: the Human Interruption of Nature's Course

Step into the shoes of 60 year old Mrs. Harris for just a moment. She was diagnosed with a severe case of diabetes, high blood pressure, and arthritis in both of her knees. Due to her high blood pressure, Mrs. Harris was at an intense risk of having a stroke. In addition to her health problems, she weighed in at approximately two hundred pounds, which limited her mobility. As her health began to deteriorate, so did her quality of life. Mrs. Harris did not want to hold onto life by a small thread of hope. She once pleaded to her son, " If I should start to go, don't try and save me. And don't put me in a convalescent home. That's a place of the living dead," (qtd. in Humphry, "Let" 64). As time passed, Mrs. Harris "suffered a massive stroke… and was left completely paralyzed on her right side and could neither speak nor eat." One week later, the doctor announced that Mrs. Harris would never be able to speak or walk again. As though this wasn't bad enough, she suffered from her second stroke that same night. Somehow, doctors were able to stabilize her but she was pretty much a vegetable at this point (65). Now the true question was raised of whether or not to hang on to the little bit of life she had left. Between all of the loops from her dramatic health roller coaster, her son's health began to downfall as well. After many attempts to comfort her during her downward spiral, it was time to give up. He gave into the anger, frustration and sadness by shooting her in the head and ending her life (75). Thus, the controversy lies here. Was this act of euthanasia wrong or justified? How do most people wish for their death to occur? With pain, agony, suffering, and the thought of their loved ones witnessing such misery? Of course not! Most people want to die quickly and peacefully such as in the case of Mrs. Harris. It is believed that euthanasia should be legalized to some degree. This argument inquires that if you should ever have a loved one that is suffering and death is certain, you should have the choice to ease their pain if that is their desire. It is quite understandable the no one wishes to die painfully or continue in a state of constant discomfort. Not to mention that to a terminally ill patient, death is usually preferred over the process of dying. This is mainly because of the way the person will die. They may have to go through a long period of pain and suffering. Even if you do not believe that you would end your life or another's life should personal views decide that it is not the right thing for another to do. Does any person have the right to control the choices of others?
Currently, in the State of Oregon is it legal to practice the act of doctor assisted suicide with particular guidelines. The Oregon Department of Human Services contains a "Death with Dignity Act" which declares the specific criteria to be met in order to perform such a procedure. The following are examples of a few specifications:
(1) "Adult" means an individual who is 18 years of age or older.
(2) "Attending physician" means the physician who has primary responsibility for the care of the patient and treatment of the patient's terminal disease.
(3) "Capable" means that in the opinion of the court or in the opinion of the patient's attending physician or consulting physician, psychiatrist or psychologist, a patient has the ability to make and communicate health care decisions to health care providers, including communication through persons familiar with the patient's manner of communicating if those person's are available. (Death 1)
This list continues on only to show that there is a state that finds it lawful for a physician to assist someone's suicide should the patient meet these particular circumstances. This movement argues that if someone is of sound mind, they should have the choice to continue on or to peacefully die, even if they need assistance in doing so. This is one of the two types of euthanasia known as "active." It is "active" euthanasia when one supplies lethal drugs to assist their requested suicide (Humphry "Dying" 21). The principle of mercy may also demand letting die in a still stronger sense. This asserts a duty to act to end suffering that is already occurring. Medicine already honors this duty through its various techniques of pain management, including physiological means like narcotics, nerve blocks, acupuncture, and neurosurgery. In some cases pain or suffering is severe but cannot be effectively controlled, at least as long as the patient remains conscious at all. Classical examples include tumors of the throat, tumors of the brain or bone, and so on. Severe nausea, vomiting, and exhaustion may increase the patient's misery. In these cases, continuing life- or at least continuing consciousness- may mean continuing pain. Mercy's demand for euthanasia takes place here: mercy demands that the pain, even if with it the life, be brought to an end. Death is one of the few things that all people have in common. This means that there is a chance for anyone to face the decision of having to let someone go. One of the main reasons people in favor of euthanasia give is, a person has the right to die with dignity. People should be allowed to control their own deaths. The most frequently asked question is why should a patient be forced to live if they think their present standard of life has degenerated to the point of meaningless, when doctors can no longer help, and perhaps the pain has become unbearable? There is also the argument that life support machines interfere with the natural process of death. Because of which, modern medicine is contradicting its contention against euthanasia due to the prolonging of suffering rather than the easing of it (Lewis 1). One particular doctor explains in an article, " The Right to Die: A Doctor Who Supports Euthanasia," how he makes the patient thoroughly aware of each possibility for medications rather than euthanasia being their only option (Kimsma 1). On his way to enter the courtroom for one of his many murder convictions, Dr. Kevorkian had but this point to make to a group of reporters, " First of all, do any of you here think it's a crime to help a suffering human end his agony? Does anybody think it is? Say so right now." No one answers. "Well, then what are we doing here," Kevorkian asks as he proceeds to enter the courtroom.