Physician-Assisted Suicide: Look at pros AND cons

Dr. Jack Kevorkian with suicide machine (AP Photo, 1991)
APOLOGIA
By Hendrik van der Breggen
(The Carillon, September 29, 2011)

Physician-assisted suicide: Look at pros AND cons

Often in the discussion about whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be made legal in Canada, proponents of legalization tend to look at arguments in favour but not arguments against. I think that we should look at pros and cons, not just pros.

I understand that a major pro for physician-assisted suicide has to do with the individual's choice in response to suffering. Freedom is important, truly.

But, of course, the freedom to exercise one's choice is not absolute. I do not have the freedom to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre if there is no fire and if the shout will cause a stampede to the exits resulting in injury to others.

So, yes, individual freedom is important, but the individual does not live in a social vacuum. In public policy debates we should think about the individual's freedom AND the consequences for the larger society.

Here, then, are three cons or concerns—i.e., three possible negative consequences for the larger society if physician-assisted suicide is accepted—which should also be considered.

Concern 1. Our society will see suicide more and more as a legitimate way of solving an individual's problems. Got a problem that makes you suffer? Don't forget you can get help to kill yourself!

(This scenario is not far-fetched. At one of the universities I attended not too long ago, I worked as a teaching assistant in an ethics course for a fellow doctoral student who told the class [a] that he had advised his roommate that suicide was an option as a solution to the roommate's problems and [b] that subsequently the roommate committed suicide. My fellow doctoral student displayed no qualms or remorse about the advice.)

Concern 2. Life will no longer be seen as society's default position and so our most vulnerable—the elderly, terminally ill, disabled—must begin to justify their lives. Surely, this is a nasty burden to place on people when they're already down.

Concern 3. If the choice of the sufferer constitutes sufficient legal grounds for the sufferer to end his/her life, then suicide intervention or counseling against suicide may become grounds for a lawsuit against the intervener or counselor. There will be a chilling effect against suicide intervention and counseling.

It seems to me that if we can give top-notch medical and psychological care to those individuals who suffer—such that the suffering is alleviated—then (a) there would be no need for physician-assisted suicide AND (b) we would end up with a healthier, happier, and less morally-calloused Canada.

In view of the pros and cons, I think it would be wise for Canadians not to legalize physician-assisted suicide and instead do a better job of providing palliative and hospice care.

(Hendrik van der Breggen, PhD, teaches ethics at Providence University College.)

P.S. For additional arguments against physician-assisted suicide, be sure to look here and here.