Is it time to reconstruct the assisted suicide debate?

Some articles published by BMJ Today, we explore the debate over assisted suicide. There, on the condition of safeguards, people at the end of life who are nearing death, suffering, and have a healthy heart can seek medication to take to end their lives.

The views expressed are those of the authors themselves and do not reflect the position of the organizations to which they relate.

Lucy Thomas is a consultant public health We also work closely with patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families. From this experience, she questioned why assisted suicide was structured as a medical solution to medical problems and suggested that the debate be radically demedical.

She finds that the perception that depression, despair, and burden are the most powerful predictors, while physical symptoms are unpredictable or only slightly predictive of the desire to accelerate death. Point out the research shown.

She responds to the patient’s expressed desire to end life in a radically different way, depending on whether the patient has a serious illness or disability, about the relative value of different lives. Claims to institutionalize discriminatory attitudes.

“By medical standards that make up acceptable reasons for ending life, and by doctors as mediators and managers, medically-assisted death is medical rather than increasing patient autonomy. It expands authority and causes serious damage to unintended consequences. “

So what happens when you challenge this deeply medicalized perspective, she asks.

By moving beyond medical care, she “focuses on basic ethical and practical dilemmas and has a consistent desire for society to end life early with mental abilities. It encourages serious discussions about how to deal with people. “

The discussion is a response to philosophical issues, such as those that make up rational decisions to end life, and situations in which an individual’s desire to end life is challenged rather than accepted. You should include more practical questions such as how you can determine if. Can you predict that someone’s desire to end life can never be reversed? If society legalizes help to end life, who is best suited to provide it?

Thomas concludes that there is no easy answer or solution for such a complex problem. “Acknowledging this serious complexity may be the first step towards a more constructive debate.”

In the second article, Paul Cosford, Honorary Director of Public Health Services in the United Kingdom, explains that incurable lung cancer urged him to reconsider his personal view on assisted suicide.

“I didn’t want to be an assisted suicide and a supporter of law reform,” he wrote. “I always thought the law was too dull to deal well with the complexity of such difficult morals. Ethical issues.. “

He points out the danger. Assisted suicide is more than just an option in certain well-defined situations, it can be promising and devalue the lives of people who are seriously ill, disabled, or wholly out of the ordinary.

He says these are real concerns, but he’s confident it’s time to revisit them. “We need to set aside a well-established position on both sides of the debate and openly look at the problems people face at the end of life,” he writes.

“We need to understand why rational and law-abiding people are sometimes forced to travel to Switzerland for such care and do not tell their families why they go. ..

“Sure, this tells us that our current arrangement is inhumane,” he concludes. “I am especially pleased to help with such reviews.”

A more open-minded and constructive conversation about end-of-life choices is also sought in a linked opinion piece by Dr. Zoe Norris, a general practitioner.

She admits that doctors have the expertise to provide on this important topic, but “we need to make sure that a wide range of opinions are expressed, other contributions to the discussion. Don’t let people, especially patients, drown. “

Regardless of our own personal opinion, “We cannot ignore the voices of those who have directly witnessed the horrors that can occur when we reject people’s choices and dominate their deaths.” She is writing “I believe it is our duty to listen to them as doctors.”

“”BMJ “We support the legalization of assisted suicide,” said editor-in-chief Dr. Fiona Godlee. “The majority of the British people are in favor and are now working well in other parts of the world. There is ample evidence that it demands it and takes care of patients with a healthy heart.

“We believe this should be a social and parliamentary decision, and that healthcare organizations should take at least a neutral position to enable open and informed public debate.”