The arguments in favor of assisted suicide often focus on the middle ground, the average person who doesn’t have a radical ideology but who fears dying a bad death. This is why campaigns to legalize assisted suicide focus on stories of people with difficult health conditions.
We are compassionate, so even people who do not generally support assisted suicide may think that it is acceptable in some circumstances.
Thou Shalt Not Kill
The first question is — what are euthanasia and assisted suicide?
Euthanasia is a direct and intentional murder (homicide), whereas the act of euthanasia requires a medical practitioner to kill the person by the injection of lethal poison. Is it ever OK to kill someone who is not a threat?
Assisted suicide is literally to assist a suicide. The act of assisted suicide requires a medical practitioner to approve and prescribe lethal poison to a person for the purpose of suicide.
Euthanasia and assisted suicide are similar but different. The similarities include the intention of the act (causing death), the use of a lethal poison cocktail, and the outcome (death). The difference is how the acts are carried out. Euthanasia requires a medical practitioner to directly do the act (homicide) whereas assisted suicide requires the medical practitioner to intentionally approve and prescribe the lethal poison, but the person is technically required to self-administer the lethal poison.
The assisted suicide lobby doesn’t like words like euthanasia, homicide, assisted suicide, or suicide so they created deceptive language to confuse the issue. Terms like Medical Aid in Dying (MAiD), Assisted Dying, Assisted Death are designed to confuse the meaning of the act and make people feel better about killing.
Who Does the Killing?
The primary concern is how killing changes the ethics and attitudes of medical practitioners and others who become involved with killing people.
The first major concern is how the lives of people with disabilities and others who regularly require medical treatment are devalued by medical practitioners and the medical system when killing becomes a legal option. Once killing becomes an acceptable option for people experiencing terminal or complex care needs then killing is interpreted as an option for many more conditions.
Since assisted suicide is sold as a compassionate act for people who are suffering, then why wouldn’t a medical practitioner who is involved with assisting suicide not want to offer this “compassionate” act to others who are “suffering.” The natural outcome of legalized killing is more killing.
Further to that, assisted suicide is sold under the guise of “freedom”, “choice”, and “autonomy.” The messaging surrounding assisted suicide suggests that it is a positive act for people experiencing a negative reality. But assisted suicide is not about freedom, choice or autonomy especially when it is considered within the context of why people ask for assisted suicide. I consider assisted suicide to be medical abandonment.
Most people request assisted suicide because they are living with a difficult medical condition, whether or not that condition is strictly physical or includes psychological or emotional elements. The data indicates that very few people are asking to be killed based on physical suffering. Most people, when asked, will say that their life has lost meaning, purpose, or value and that they are seeking death as a way out of a difficult situation.
The 2023 Oregon Death with Dignity report states that, since the inception of the law, those who died by assisted suicide listed the following reasons, for requesting it: 90.4% loss of autonomy, 89.6% less able to engage in activities that make life enjoyable, 70.3% Loss of Dignity with only 28.8% listing inadequate pain control, or concern about it as a reason. Some of the 28.8% listed inadequate pain control, or concern about it, not because they were experiencing inadequate pain control but because they feared experiencing inadequate pain control in the future.
The Slippery Slope Gets More Popular
Nearly every state that legalized assisted suicide expanded the legislation soon afterwards. Once legal, the expansion of assisted suicide is inevitable based on compassion and equality. For instance, nearly every assisted suicide law originally included a 15-day reflection period. The reflection period is part of the sales pitch that assisted suicide is only for people who want to die. Removing the reflection period is based on compassion, arguing that the 15-day reflection period forces people to suffer.
Every state that legalized assisted suicide originally had a residency requirement, meaning only state residents can die by assisted suicide. Oregon and Vermont have removed their residency requirements based on equality. It was argued that you cannot deny out-of-state residents equality of treatment.
Euthanasia and assisted suicide are about killing people.
There is much more that can be written about assisted suicide but essentially the question is — Is it ever OK to kill someone?
If the answer is NO, then a compassionate society must focus on caring for people who are living with difficult medical experiences. If the answer is YES, watch out because your life may also be determined as not worth living one day.
As a human person, I know that there are times when I need protection.
I am committed to caring for and protecting your life in your time of need.
I am opposed to killing people.