Legalize Physician Assisted Suicide

Do no Harm

Some doctors who oppose physician assisted suicide (PAS), point to the Hippocratic Oath, quoting “Primun non nocere (First do no harm)” as a tenant of the oath. Implying that PAS is an act that causes harm to their patient and not relief. The American Medical Association (AMA), which is the largest association of MDs and medical students in America consisting of around 240 thousand members are against PAS.

 

Looking at AMA's Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 5.7 they state, “Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control, and would pose serious societal risks.”

 

AMA finds that allowing someone to undergo PAS would not only violate the Hippocratic Oath but also people's trust in their doctors. This mistrust would result in grave consequences, such as patients possibly being less likely to seek treatments or to follow directions given to them by their physician.

​

It is certainly understandable why patients might take issue with their physicians if they thought that their physician was even remotely not looking out for their own best interest. However, it is not appropriate to associate a physician’s wiliness to allow their patients to undergo PAS for being at odds with a physician’s role as a healer.

 

Is the Hippocratic Oath, what you think it is?

​

Edmund Pellegrino, a professor of medicine and medical ethics at Georgetown University wrote a scholarly article in the journal of Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics in which he explains that the concept of the Hippocratic is actually different than how it is commonly thought of and how there is no conflict with a physician’s decision to let their patient undergo PAS with a physician’s role to not cause harm to their patients.

​

The Hippocratic Oath is like the Constitution in that it can and has been changed over time.

 

Pellegrino notes that the idea that physicians must never kill their patients was “quietly removed from the Hippocratic Oath” after abortion and PAS was legalized in America.

 

The oath, much like America itself has changed to reflect the new realities of the times. If the Oath was not changed then it would indeed create the conflict that AMA brings up. Additionally, it is important to note that the Hippocratic Oath also holds no legal power in America and is not even given at every medical school. Thus, the oath should be considered for best practice and NOT absolute.

​

Why should you tell me how I should live

or end my life?

​

The idea of “do not harm” is itself perverted. A physician should treat their patients to the best of their abilities. However, it is wrong to confuse the act of PAS as doing or wanting to harm a patient.

 

In the case of PAS, if the patient themselves find that the act is beneficial to them then it is not proper for others to say the act is ultimately more harmful than it is good.

 

This is again a call back to autonomy (that an individual knows what is best for themselves and what they think is right should be what is most important with matters that concern themselves, especially concerning matters that impact their own live or death).

​

Patients may not even know their physician supports or not physician assisted suicide

​

To address AMA's last point that patients may lose trust in their doctors if they knew that they may consider options such as PAS.

 

The fear is largely unfounded and is not supported by evidence.

 

• Firstly, most physicians are against PAS and the wiliness of physicians to prescribe PAS is even lower with physicians who are primary in charge of caring for dying patients.

 

• Secondly, in Oregon physicians cannot advertise they prescribe PAS or recommend their patients to another physician if they themselves do not want to help their patients undergo PAS and they happen to know a physician that does PAS. Additionally, Oregon itself does not release the names or offices of physicians who have performed PAS.

 

Meaning, physicians may or may not help their patients undergo PAS and if they had, patients would not be privy to any of their past actions associated with PAS.