PBH 399 Public Health Research Seminar

Debate

The Legalization of Euthanasia

Student Name Student ID

Instructor Name: Reham Kotb

Submission Date: 18-4-2022

Despite the development of modern science, many diseases till now still cause death and lead

the individual to suffer terminally. To end their sufferings, some countries have lately

considered the concept of euthanasia, but others are totally against it. Euthanasia is defined as

a practice of ending a person's life by his/her or family request due to suffering from an

untreatable disease (Holland, 2019). Euthanasia can be categorised into four main types

which are active, passive, indirect, and physician assisted suicide. Active euthanasia is any

act done by a doctor that causes a slow or fast death (Annadurai, 2014). Physician assisted

suicide is a practice where practitioners provide a deadly medication based on the patient's

request to end their life peacefully (Marks, 2021). Moreover, passive euthanasia is defined as

removing life-maintaining equipment or treatment through an appeal from the patient or

when there is no hope of extending the life of the patient. On the other hand, indirect

euthanasia refers to prescribing medications such as painkillers that might trigger death in

order to alleviate patient’s agony (Abohaimed et al., 2019).

Body

Because the concept of euthanasia is controversial, there are different opinions and

viewpoints about whether euthanasia should be legally utilized, and in the upcoming

paragraphs the claims of supporting and opposing euthanasia will be discussed.

Supporting Euthanasia:

1. Patients Autonomy

It is believed that every patient has his/her right to make independent choices regarding their

health. So, patients who are suffering from unbearable discomfort due diseases and illnesses

that are untreatable, should have the total autonomy to make decisions and consider choices

about how they might end their lives. To add, it should not be avoided unless it does threaten
other people (Ulrichová, 2016). No one should obstruct a patient from their right to die

because it is their ethical right. For instance, in Netherlands, 4.5% of fatality was a result of

euthanasia performed by 93% of general practitioners. From the 4.5%, it was the choice of

80% of patients to end their life. Moreover, the Dutch euthanasia's code of practice support

practicing euthanasia based on patient's autonomy, as it stated that palliative care is not a

must if the patient rejects it and prefer euthanasia instead (Kouwenhoven, 2018).

2. Alleviation of agony and torment

Euthanasia will aid patients in diminishing their agonizing pain and afflictions. This is

because only the person who is suffering can sense the pain, and no one should judge others

of why they can’t tolerate it. This demonstrates that sick patients are the ones who will

choose whether they will be able to tolerate the pain, or whether they would choose to die

peacefully in order to lessen their sufferings (Ulrichová, 2016). For instance, in Utrecht, a

study found out that unendurable suffering was one factor of demanding euthanasia with

patients having terminal cancer, in which 88% of the patients have requested either direct or

indirect euthanasia to diminish their pain (Ruijs, 2014).

3. Prioritizing healthcare equipment

Sanctioning euthanasia or what is also known as mercy killing will be vital and beneficial in

distributing medical care and resources for patients who actually need urgent support.

Spending most of medical and healthcare resources on patients whose health is deteriorating

will result in not being able to support other diseases and severe incidents (Ulrichová, 2016).

For example, a study conducted on the Canadian population found out that about $34.7

million and $138.8 million of money will be saved across Canada if euthanasia was utilized,

and therefore, it can be used to cure people who immediately need medical assistance

(Trachtenberg, 2017).
 4. Dying with pride

Permitting euthanasia will support people who are suffering from endless pain to decide on

dying with pride and dignity. It is believed that there is no shame to settle on dying peacefully

without any pain, rather than dying after a long time from unbearable pain either at home or

at the hospital (Ulrichová, 2016). Additionally, it is believed that sanctioning euthanasia will

safeguard the powerless from unjust death which allows them into dying tranquilly with pride

(Strinic, 2015).

Opposing Euthanasia:

On the other hand, many people are against euthanasia even denounce it. Although

euthanasia is described as a compassionate alternative to sufferings and pain, it has four

major consequences.

1. Medically unethical

Euthanasia conflicts with medical ethics which upholds the principle of “If You Don’t Do

good, Don’t Do Harm”. Therefore, physicians should not kill patients, but rather kill

symptoms, and this can be done via using palliative care (CARE, n.d). Furthermore,

euthanasia contradicts with the human right to live. This applies in the non-voluntary

euthanasia when the parents take the death decision on behalf of the patient because the

patient is unconscious (University of Missouri, n.d). For instance, around 1000 patients were

killed by euthanasia in Netherlands without their request (CARE, n.d).

Additionally, some of the patients who requested euthanasia were suffering from

physiological illness, which is not consider fatal or terminal. Evenblij et al. (2019) conducted

a cross-sectional study where the total number of psychiatric patients requesting euthanasia

was estimated at 1,150. Psychiatrists responded to 70 cases and mercifully killed them.

Physicians who administered euthanasia to patients described the cases as suffering from
mood disturbances and physical comorbidities. Therefore, doctors must put more effort to

treat them psychologically rather than killing them.

2. Exploiting illness for personal gain

Opponents of euthanasia consider it immoral because some families and peers utilize

euthanasia to meet their personal interests such as inheritance, revenge, or getting rid of the

patient's burden. Besides, some hospital administration took advantage of euthanasia to kill

long-term patients in intensive care and replace them with new patients.

3. Psychological and Emotional consequences

Euthanasia expose physicians and parents to many emotional and psychological problems.

Countries that legalize euthanasia for seriously ill patients give the patient the right to die but

do not give doctors the right to refuse to kill. A study conducted in 2006 discovered that most

doctors who injected patients with a lethal dose to maintain euthanasia suffered from

emotional trauma, and were adversely affected emotionally and psychologically (Stevens,

2006). In addition, parents who took the decision to implement euthanasia to their children

suffered also from psychological problems (Gogolishvili & Globerman, 2017).

Nevertheless, patients sometimes decide emotionally to die using euthanasia because they do

not want to be a burden on their families, they simply lost the hope to live, and they don’t

have the financial ability to complete treatment. However, one report indicated that

euthanasia saves only 1% of total health care expenditures (McKinnon & Orellana-Barrios,

2019).

4. Religious consequences.
According to McKinnon & Orellana-Barrios (2019), Islam forbids euthanasia because it is

considered suicide or premeditated murder. Moreover, all religions (Islam, Christianity, and

Judaism) forbid and criminalize euthanasia as an infringement on the authority of God.

Conclusion:

To recapitulate, euthanasia is a method used to mercifully kill patients in order to relieve their

sufferings. Some countries have legalized different kinds of euthanasia as a medical policy,

while others have not. Likewise, some people were in favour of the idea of euthanasia, and

some rejected it completely. Proponents of euthanasia believe that euthanasia preserves

patents' autonomy, relieves patient's sufferings, gives priority to healthcare equipment, and

allows patients to die with pride. On the contrary, opponents consider that euthanasia is

medically unethical, promotes the exploitation of illness for personal benefits, causes

psychological and emotional consequences, and opposes the principles of monotheistic

religions. Finally, the concept of euthanasia is still controversial and debatable, therefore

more research is required to settle on the direction that euthanasia must follow.
References:

Abohaimed, S., Matar, B., Al-Shimali, H., Al-Thalji, K., Al-Othman, O., Zurba, Y., & Shah,

N. (2019). Attitudes of physicians towards different types of euthanasia in kuwait.

Medical Principles and Practice, 28(3), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1159/000497377

Annadurai, K., Danasekaran, R., & Mani, G. (2014). ′Euthanasia: Right to die with dignity′.

Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 3(4), 477.

https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.148161

CARE. (n.d.). Arguments for and against assisted suicide and euthanasia. Retrieved April 8,

2022, from https://care.org.uk/cause/assisted-suicide/arguments-for-and-against-

assisted-suicide-and-euthanasia?

gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8tCA44WD9wIV0ZBoCR2nbgTdEAAYASAAEgLAOvD_B

wE

Evenblij, K., Pasman, H. R. W., Pronk, R., & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D. (2019). Euthanasia

and physician-assisted suicide in patients suffering from psychiatric disorders: A

cross-sectional study exploring the experiences of dutch psychiatrists. BMC

Psychiatry, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-019-2053-3

Gogolishvili, D., & Globerman, J. (2017, June 8). Impact of medical assistance in dying on

family and friends | the ontario HIV treatment network. ONTARIO HIV

TREAMENT NETWORK. Retrieved April 8, 2022, from

https://www.ohtn.on.ca/rapid-response-impact-of-medical-assistance-in-dying-on-

family-and-friends/
Holland, K. (2019, May 31). Euthanasia: Understanding the facts. Healthline. Retrieved

April 10, 2022, from https://www.healthline.com/health/what-is-euthanasia

Kouwenhoven, P. S. C., van Thiel, G. J. M. W., van der Heide, A., Rietjens, J. A. C., & van

Delden, J. J. M. (2018). Developments in euthanasia practice in the netherlands:

Balancing professional responsibility and the patient’s autonomy. European Journal

of General Practice, 25(1), 44–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2018.1517154

Marks, J. W. (2021, March 6). Medical Definition of Physician-assisted suicid. MedicineNet.

Retrieved April 10, 2022, from https://www.medicinenet.com/physician-

assisted_suicide/definition.htm

McKinnon, B., & Orellana-Barrios, M. (2019). Ethics in physician-assisted dying and

euthanasia. The Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles, 7(30), 36–42.

https://doi.org/10.12746/swrccc.v7i30.561

Ruijs, C. D., van der Wal, G., Kerkhof, A. J., & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D. (2014).

Unbearable suffering and requests for euthanasia prospectively studied in end-of-life

cancer patients in primary care. BMC Palliative Care, 13(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-684x-13-62

Stevens, K. R. (2006). Emotional and psychological effects of Physician-Assisted suicide and

euthanasia on participating physicians. The Linacre Quarterly, 73(3), 203–216.

https://doi.org/10.1080/20508549.2006.11877782

Strinic, V. (2015). Arguments in support and against euthanasia. British Journal of Medicine

and Medical Research, 9(7), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.9734/bjmmr/2015/19151

Trachtenberg, A. J., & Manns, B. (2017). Cost analysis of medical assistance in dying in

canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 189(3), E101–E105.

https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.160650
Ulrichová, M. (2016). Euthanasia and the needs of the terminally ill merits and risks of

voluntary workers in hospices. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 657–

668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.093

University of Missouri. (n.d.). Euthanasia - MU school of medicine. University of Missouri

School of Medicine. Retrieved April 8, 2022, from

https://medicine.missouri.edu/centers-institutes-labs/health-ethics/faq/euthanasia#:

%7E:text=Euthanasia%20is%20the%20practice%20of,%E2%80%9Cthanatos

%E2%80%9D%20(death).