Physician Assisted Suicide ….
The Continuing Debate
The
Vermont Ethics Network does not have a position on Physician Assisted
Suicide.
Rather these materials are presented to help the people of Vermont
engage in a dialogue about this important ethical issue.
|
Definition of Terms
Some Questions
Pros & Cons
DVD and VHS |
Print Worksheet
Print Definitions
Other
Web Resources |
H-44
(VT House Bill)
S-63 (VT Senate Bill)
The Oregon Model
Vt Legislative Council Report
|
| VEN hopes to help people come together
to share their values and beliefs and to re-examine the issues and
positions in a dialogue format that will allow an analysis of the
underlying concerns about dying and choices |
Send
Us Your Comments
|
| VHS and DVD of excerpts of the 1997 VEN Program "Physician Assisted Suicide: A Challenge for Society", are available for purchase ($20) or rent ($10 for 10 days). Call 802 828-2909 or email: ethics@vtethicsnetwork.org |
Pros & Cons -Here are several key points from the perspective
of proponents and opponents of physician assisted suicide (PAS),
based
upon the Oregon model. Add more to each list.
Proponents would say: |
- PAS provides another option for people who want
to have more control of their dying.
- "Safeguards" are built into the proposal provide adequate protection for those who may be depressed or for those who are susceptible to family pressure.
- PAS can be used by terminally ill persons whose pain or other
symptoms are not otherwise controlled.
- PAS in an open and regulated system can provide
the reassurance that the prescribed medication
will have the desired
effect.
- PAS will prevent the isolation and guilt attendant upon
other forms of suicide by some terminal patients who may
now be using other means (e.g. firearms, voluntary refusal
of food
and fluids
(VRFF), etc.)
- Having the PAS option available will be a
means of opening dialogue with family and health
care
professionals about other
options such as Hospice and palliative care alternatives.
- The experience of having PAS available in the
State of Oregon has not diverted people away from Hospice and
other
alternatives and has not lead to a flood of people
opting for
this
means of ending their lives
|
Opponents would say: |
|
|
- PAS is not needed. All patients have the right to decline unwanted life-prolonging therapy. Good hospice and palliative care can address the needs of almost all terminally ill patients. In the rare situations where this is not possible, palliative sedation is professionally, legally, and morally acceptable.
- "Safeguards" built into the proposal do not provide adequate protection for those who may be depressed or for those who are susceptible to family pressure. In addition, the art of prognosis is inaccurate, so that estimating who may die in six months is often wrong.
- PAS is a basic contradiction to the Oath
taken by Physicians to heal and minister to the sick and to “first,
do no harm.”
- Some believe the taking of a human life through PAS is wrong, even when
suffering and quality of life and patient wishes are
taken into consideration.
- The introduction of PAS for the terminally
ill will start a slide down the “slippery
slope” to euthanasia (direct killing) of those who cannot take
their own lives and will probably lead to being applied to seriously
chronically ill and
disabled individuals who are not “dying”.
- Growth and
development can occur even in the most desperate of circumstances,
including healing of relationships and a spiritual understanding
of the meaning of suffering as a part of the natural dying
process.
- Health care professionals, families and other caregivers will
not give proper attention to pain control and hospice if
they see PAS as
a viable alternative.
- The respect and trust of physicians in
general will be harmed if they are seen as ready to assist
in suicide by their patients.
|
| Some Questions
to Help You Evaluate How You Feel : |
|
- What concerns on either side
of this debate have the most weight for you?
- If you were
to characterize your own position as “for” or “against,” what
is the most persuasive single point raised by people who hold
the opposite position?
- What are some areas of common ground
identified in this discussion?
- Are PAS and related matters ones that can or should be dealt with
through legislation and/or regulation?
|
| Other Web Resources |
|
|
Patient Choices at End of Life - Vermont (proponents) http://www.patientchoices.org/
Vermont Alliance for Ethical Health Care (opponents) www.vaeh.org
The Vermont Legislature (for listing of H44 and S63) www.leg.state.vt.us
The Oregon Law www.dhs.state.or.us/publichealth/chs/pas/pas.cfm
Oregon's Death with Dignity Law and Euthanasia in the Netherlands: Factual
Disputes - Produced by the Vermont Legislative Council:
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/reports/04Death/Death_With_Dignity_Report.htm
|
Send Us Your Comments - Questions
|
