Ms.

eu thanatos:

Who's playing god?

Have you ever known someone who has been diagnosed with a serious illness or declared as terminally ill? Have you ever had to watch someone you care about deteriorate slowly or suffer immensely until they die? If so, did you ever wish that there was something you could do to help out, or carry out their wishes of a sooner death? Many people go through these types of situations every day, not knowing that there could be other options for the patient. So it was with the Terri Schaivo case. Those involved were unaware of the many opportunities euthanasia can provide. Euthanasia is defined today as the intentional termination of life by another, at the request of the person, who dies. However, the term actually originated form the Greek language, eu meaning good, and thanatos meaning death, therefore euthanasia truthfully means 'good death' (Robinson 1).

The case of Terri Schaivo involved a woman, Schaivo, who had been brain dead for an extended period of time, and the decision her husband made to have her feeding tube removed. He felt it was futile to keep her alive when she could not enjoy life, but would simply remain in a vegetative state (Denver Post1A). Schaivo's parent's, on the other hand, felt that if the feeding tube was removed, it would be killing their daughter. Instead of being in a vegetative state, she would starve to death. The family dispute soon elevated into a court issue and involved both state and federal courts (14A).

If you knew the time you had left on Earth was going to be spent watching your body slowly shut itself down, would you want to continue living? Without euthanasia this is exactly what many people have to go through. Diseases such as Lou Gehrig's, Parkinson's, and even some cancers work to gradually tear the body apart, or turn it against itself. These diseases are often referred to as degenerative diseases because a person who is diagnosed will slowly lose function, or degenerate, until their life actually ends (Robinson 2). In living a life that is slipping away, one is living a life of low quality. It is because of this I believe euthanasia should be allowed. It would enable those diagnosed as terminally ill to avoid living a life of poor quality. Many of the people that have been diagnosed as such, do not want to go through the experience of not being able to do the things they want, or fearing what could happen if they did. Instead, they would rather end life before they start wishing for the things they can't have, or before they can live the life they want (Robinson 3).

Everybody wants to live life to its fullest and live to their full potential, and they want to be remembered for doing so. They want people to remember them as being full of life and capable of doing anything. They don't want to be remembered as someone who slowly became a vegetable or a helpless adult. The use of euthanasia allows people to do just this. They can end their own life peacefully, before becoming a vegetable, and can be remembered as the person they really are, before the disease has a chance to change that (Robinson 3). However, many other people argue that the person might not realize the consequences of the action they are asking to be performed. Instead, they should 'tough it out' and allow their family and loved ones to have as much time as possible to spend with him or her (2). Although these seem somewhat reasonable, what kind of quality time would the family actually be getting? And isn't it ultimately the patient's decision to make?

In his article, Dixon presents many other issues regarding euthanasia that have risen since its use has come into question. For example, the trust shared between doctors and their dying patients will be destroyed if allowed. Already, too many people are afraid of hospice care and their doctors because the treatment given may shorten their life. If doctors are allowed to participate in mercy killing, this fear will only be heightened. He also mentions that the use of euthanasia will put a high amount of pressure upon the elderly to ask for an early way out of life (2). Not only this, but the commotion brought about by this issue is becoming quite pricey. Dixon states that instead of so many people spending money on the action for or against the requests to make euthanasia legal, the money should be spent on discovering medical advances in order to cure the diseases which many suffer from (2). Another question brought up is, how can one be certain all medical possibilities have been explained, or that the diagnosis is correct (3)?

An additional issue people have with euthanasia is the question of, how do we know this is what they would really want to happen? A living will is a means by which a person can let their family know what decisions they have made and what they wish to be done, in case they become incapable of specifying for themselves. It states the exact wishes of the patient, therefore, leaving no questions or doubts for the family to worry about. A living will sets forth such desires as how long to leave the patient on life support or when to resuscitate them (Dixon 2). It is not only helpful to the family, but can give a patient comfort in knowing what will happen to them if they become unable to make the verbal decision themselves. When making their decision, many people have the attitude of, "I'd much prefer to be put to sleep rather than wear diapers, and not remember my relative's names. Why suffer and make others suffer, simply because I want to watch Jeopardy" (3)? Therefore, if euthanasia was an option, the person can die with a sense of dignity, knowing they took care of themselves until the end.

All of these questions are logical, but evidence of these things happening has not been found. One of the three countries in the world to allow assisted suicide is the Netherlands. The misconception of doctors acting carelessly is cleared up here. In order for an assisted suicide, or voluntary euthanasia, to occur, it is true that only a doctor can assist in or carry out the euthanasia. However, in order to do so, two doctors must have examined the patient, confirm their suffering is "lasting and unbearable", and decide that death is truly the best outcome. Unless both doctors are entirely in agreement, the euthanasia cannot happen. The false impression that, once legalized, the number of cases of euthanasia will increase drastically is proven to be false. The article gives the statistic of 10,000 requests made per year for euthanasia.