Legalize Physician Assisted Suicide

There is fear among some people that the legalization of physician assisted suicide (PAS) will lead down a 'slippery slope'.

 

Ben Mattin, a terminally ill man in California who could elect to undergo PAS wrote the article “People with disabilities often fear they're a burden. That's why legal assisted suicide scares me” for Vox.com.

 

Mattin feels that to allow PAS could allow for a 'slippery slope' in which patients feel pressured into doing PAS or to not seek additional treatments in favor of PAS.

 

He feels this is what happened to his friend Maynard who had recently underwent PAS.

 

He regrets that he was not able to talk with her more to try and have her consider alternatives instead of PAS. California follows Oregon procedures for PAS in that physicians must inform their patients of alternatives to PAS, so his friend would have been already aware of those alternatives.

 

While it is truly unfortunate he lost his friend, it is not appropriate for him to second guess her decision.

 

By wanting to change her choice it could be viewed as him disrespecting, undoubtedly one of the hardest choices she had to make. Maynard was fortunate enough to live in a state that had recently legalized PAS. If California had not legalized PAS then she would not have been able to exercise her right to self-determination and lived in a physical/mental state she felt was worse than death. PAS allowed her to escape whatever hardships she was unable to bear.

​

Is the Slope actually Slippery?

​

Let us consider some scholarly articles.

 

In the scholarly article “Physician-assisted suicide in psychiatry and loss of hope.” written by Berghman, Widdershoven G, and Widdershoven H, who all work for the Netherlands Health Administration. It is argued that “offering PAS to patients with a mental illness who suffers unbearably, enduringly and without prospect of relief does not necessarily imply taking away hope and can be ethically acceptable.”

 

Think about it, would providing someone with an option to undergo PAS drain all their hope and draw them towards thinking PAS as their only option?

​

Of course not!

 

However, it can be said that unless PAS is properly talked over with a patient they may become intoxicated by the idea of a seemly easy and irrevocable decision offered by PAS. So it is important that physicians not unduly pressure them.

​

The slope is actually sticky, not Slippery!

​

In “Vulnerability and the ‘slippery slope’ at the end-of-life: a qualitative study of euthanasia, general practice and home death in The Netherlands” published in the Oxford Academic. The article claims that in the Netherlands, PAS has not resulted in the feared 'slippery slope' in which patients are pushed into PAS or euthanasia (Both PAS and euthanasia are legal in the Netherlands).

 

The article insists that, “euthanasia process most often occurs as ongoing talk and not simply as a life-ending act...”

 

Ending one's life is a very serious matter and it is not the intent of physicians to have patients end their life carelessly. Physicians want their patients to carefully understand all their options first and foremost and to talk everything out before a final decision is made.

 

Often those who request Euthanasia do not end up committing to the act as “only one in 10 died a euthanasia death and less than two-fifths of those who made ‘serious’ requests (requests made after life-threatening illness was diagnosed) died by euthanasia or assisted suicide.”

 

Due to the process of ensuring all patients are well aware of the alternatives to PAS and euthanasia, it is not common for people to actually complete the process. In practice, at least in the Netherlands, informing patients of alternatives has thus far prevented any 'slipper slope' from happening.

​

This cautiousness toward avoiding going down the 'slippery slope' that is seen in the Netherlands is also seen in Oregon.

 

In Oregon a patient must be informed of the alternatives to PAS before they can get their lethal prescription. Looking at the numbers released for 2016, only 133 people of 204 (65%) who elected to undergo took their lethal prescription. Looking at the trend of those who received a prescription and took it; since Oregon's Death with Dignity Act took effect in 1997 the number of people who did not take their prescription has remained relatively steady at around 60% each year.

 

Mattin's 'slippery slope' has not showed itself in Oregon, even after two decades of PAS being legal in that state.

​

Stay alert

​

However, Mattin is right in that people should be watchful over PAS legislation. Like any law, legislators may change it so that it may in the future be more open to abuse or the law itself may become victim to abuse via unforeseen loopholes.

 

With this said, it is important that citizens and organizations stay on top of public policy so that if abuses spring up, they are taken care of legislatively to prevent them.