Humanist perspective Euthanasia What is euthanasia Voluntary euthanasia

Humanist perspective: Euthanasia

What is euthanasia? Voluntary euthanasia, sometimes called ‘assisted suicide’, is used in cases where the sufferer has made it clear that he or she wishes to die and has requested help to bring this about. Non-voluntary euthanasia occurs when a person cannot express a wish to die but it is believed to be what they would have wanted (patients in comas, cases of senile dementia, or other those who cannot communicate for other reasons). Involuntary euthanasia is when a patient is capable of expressing a wish to die but does not (this equates to murder).

What is euthanasia? Active, or direct, euthanasia involves specific actions used to bring about death (e. g. lethal drugs or injections). This is currently illegal in the UK. Passive euthanasia is the practice of withdrawing treatment and/or nourishment and allowing a patient to die. This practice is widely carried out and generally judged to be legal. Indirect euthanasia is the practice of providing treatment, such as pain relief, which has the side-effect of hastening death. This is also widely practiced and generally considered legal if killing was not the intention. This is sometimes referred to as the principle of ‘double effect’.

Is it ever OK to help somebody to die? ‘I believe passionately that any individual should have the right to choose, as far as it is possible, the time and the conditions of their death. Over the last hundred years we have learned to be extremely good at living. But sooner or later, and so often now it is later, everybody dies. I think it’s time we learned to be as good at dying as we are at living. ’ Terry Pratchett, former patron of the British Humanist Association (1948 – 2015)

Medical oaths I will never do harm to anyone… to please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death. Hippocrates (460 – 370 BCE) I will listen to patients and respond to their concerns and preferences… [and] respect patients’ rights to reach decisions with [me] about their treatment and care. General Medical Council (2013)

Humanist beliefs Humanists base their moral decisions on empathy, reason, evidence, and respect for the dignity of each person. Humanists recognise that all life is valuable but believe that quality of life is also important when making decisions about life and death. They value human beings’ personal autonomy and believe they should have the right to make their own decisions about how they live and die. If we value the freedom we have to choose how we live our lives then why not the freedom to choose how we die? What do you think a humanist might think about euthanasia?

Humanist perspectives I use evidence to help me decide what to do and I see no good evidence that legalising voluntary euthanasia will lead to a ‘slippery slope’. People recognise a clear distinction between voluntary and involuntary euthanasia. We should consider the consequences of our actions on other people. However, in the case of a terminally ill and suffering patient, assisted suicide can sometimes be a merciful release for everyone involved. Should we force others to stay alive against their wishes just for our own sake? Euthanasia is not a replacement for palliative care. Both can be part of a patient-centred approach to end of life care. If voluntary euthanasia is ‘playing god’ then so is all medical intervention such as taking drugs or vaccinations to help us live longer. Human life is valuable but we should also consider quality of life and if an individual has decided on rational grounds that he or she wants to end their life, then we should respect that decision. Active euthanasia can often be quicker and involve potentially less pain than passive euthanasia. There is no moral distinction between the two. The intention and outcome are the same (the death of the patient).

What do the public think? 80% of the population support a change in the law on assisted dying for terminally ill patients. You. Gov poll (2012) (76% of religious people and 89% of the non-religious)

Quotes ‘Why [. . ] should the boundary of sacrosanct life match the boundary of our species? ’ Peter Singer, philosopher ‘Dogs do not have many advantages over people, but one of them is extremely important: euthanasia is not forbidden by law in their case; animals have the right to a merciful death. ’ Milan Kundera, The Unbearable Lightness of Being

Euthanasia: active, passive, or indirect? In all the situations below the patient has asked the doctor to help them die. 1) The doctor decides to stop providing a life-saving drug to the patient. 2) The doctor administers a lethal injection to the patient. 3) The doctor provides additional pain relief to the patient knowing that this will also kill them? What was the intention in each situation? What is the outcome in each situation? Is there anything morally different between the situations?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? Read the cases. a) Would euthanasia in each case be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? b) Decide whether in such circumstances you think euthanasia would be acceptable. c) Can you explain why you decided the way you did?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? 1) Colin was in a car accident and is now in a coma. The doctors have said that it is extremely unlikely that Colin will ever recover from the coma and if he does he is likely to be severely brain damaged. Colin’s family believes that the best thing to do is to switch off his life support machine. They believe it is what he would have wanted. a) Would euthanasia be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? b) Would euthanasia be acceptable? c) Can you explain why you decided the way you did?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? 2) Claire suffers from motor neuron disease that has gradually destroyed her muscles. She is now paralysed from the neck down, fed through a tube, and has a computer attached to her chair to help her communicate. Doctors have tried every possible treatment without success. There is no cure. Claire is in pain and knows that in the few months she has left to live, her condition can only get worse. She has asked repeatedly for somebody to assist her death. a) Would euthanasia be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? b) Would euthanasia be acceptable? c) Can you explain why you decided the way you did?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? 3) Beth is 75 and suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. Her memory is suffering and she is beginning to have difficulty communicating. Beth has said that she does not want to die. Her family, however, feel that death would be better than the life Beth will lead once her memory goes completely and think euthanasia might be the best option. a) Would euthanasia be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? b) Would euthanasia be acceptable? c) Can you explain why you decided the way you did?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? 4) John is 66 and has chronic arthritis that leaves him in extreme amounts of pain even after he has taken pain killers. He is also going blind and suffers from severe depression. None of these conditions are terminal. John wants to end his life to release him from his pain and suffering, but he does not want to go through with the potentially painful and uncertain process of taking his own life. He therefore wants somebody to assist him with a painless death. a) Would euthanasia be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? b) Would euthanasia be acceptable? c) Can you explain why you decided the way you did?

Euthanasia: acceptable or unacceptable? Read the cases below. a) b) c) Would euthanasia in each case be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary? Decide whether in such circumstances you think euthanasia would be acceptable. Can you explain why you decided the way you did? Cases: 1) Colin was in a car accident and is now in a coma. The doctors have said that it is extremely unlikely that Colin will ever recover from the coma and if he does he is likely to be severely brain damaged. Colin’s family believes that the best thing to do is to switch off his life support machine. They believe it is what he would have wanted. 2) Claire suffers from motor neuron disease that has gradually destroyed her muscles. She is now paralysed from the neck down, fed through a tube, and has a computer attached to her chair to help her communicate. Doctors have tried every possible treatment without success. There is no cure. Claire is in pain and knows that in the few months she has left to live, her condition can only get worse. She has asked repeatedly for somebody to assist her death. 3) Beth is 75 and suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. Her memory is suffering and she is beginning to have difficulty communicating. Beth has said that she does not want to die. Her family, however, feel that death would be better than the life Beth will lead once her memory goes completely and think euthanasia might be the best option. 4) John is 66 and has chronic arthritis that leaves him in extreme amounts of pain even after he has taken pain killers. He is also going blind and suffers from severe depression. None of these conditions are terminal. John wants to end his life to release him from his pain and suffering, but he does not want to go through with the potentially painful and uncertain process of taking his own life. He therefore wants somebody to assist him with a painless death.

Questions for discussion 1) 2) 3) 4) Is it ever OK to help somebody to die? What makes a life worth living? Is it OK to switch off a life support machine? Could euthanasia ever be right in cases where the patient is incapable of giving consent? Who should make the decision? 5) Should seriously depressed people be helped to die? 6) Should doctors and nurses be allowed to impose their moral views on patients? 7) Should religious people be allowed to impose their moral views on nonreligious people? 8) Should people be allowed to travel abroad to undergo assisted suicide from countries where euthanasia is illegal? 9) Which is more important: sanctity of life or quality of life? 10) Is life worth any cost, or can we place a financial value on life? 11) How is the humanist view on this issue similar or different to that of other worldviews you have come across? 12) How are you deciding the answers to these questions?

understandinghumanism. org. uk Understanding Humanism 39 Moreland Street London EC 1 V 8 BB British Humanist Association (registered charity 285987) © 2015