Physician Assisted Suicide and Legal Issues

Physician-Assisted Suicide

Every person has basic rights to their own health and well-being. However, during tough times when an individual is suffering dramatically, there are ethical concerns whether or not they should be allowed to commit suicide with no other options. Although this is a patients' right to autonomy, it becomes unethical for a physician to assist in such demands, as physicians have a moral obligation to perform with beneficence and thus go beyond simple non-maleficence.

The case presented here is a tough ethical dilemma. Essentially, Roberta W. has every right to practice her own autonomy and do what she wants with her own life. Because of the discomfort she has been experiencing, along with the burden she feels she is on her brother and sister-in-law, Roberta W. sees death as a viable option to end her suffering. With no option for surgery, Roberta wants something to help end her suffering. From a perspective of allowing her own rights aligned with autonomy, she should be able to make whatever decision she sees fit. Still, refusing hydration is still a form of suicide, as she is knowingly taking an action that will end her life. Thus, if she follows through with her plan to refuse hydration, she would be knowingly committing suicide. Yet, she has the right to do so if that is want she really wants to do.

The strength of her plan does depend on any potential help she could get from her physician who would be taking care of her while she stayed at the hospital. If Roberta refuses hydration, Dr. R. has the options of helping her, looking the other way on her own decision, or refusing to go along with her plan and forcing her to accept hydration while under his care. There are ethical concerns with each option available to him. First, he has the option to help her. In this sense, he would knowingly be assisting Roberta commit suicide. This is the most unethical choice of all the three options. By assisting Roberta commit suicide, Dr. R. would be undoubtedly going against medical ethics by purposely doing harm to a patient. In this, he is breaking the concepts of both beneficence and non-malificence. It would be unethical to do so, as it is considered a physician assisting in her suicide, and thus should not assist her in executing her plan. Still, there is the option of simply looking the other way. Although not actually helping her himself, if Dr. R. allows her to commit suicide without intervening, it is still a controversial decision. Here, he would not be performing his duties with beneficence, because he would not have given Roberta the best possible care. This would not necessarily be viewed as him actually assisting in her plan, however. The final option would be to intervene and force hydration upon Roberta whether she wants it or not. This would be the most ethical option in terms of him practicing with beneficence; however, it may be considered practice with malevolence, as it is doing harm to her by forcing her to continue living with her suffering. He would also be breaking the concept of her own autonomy by forcing her to do something she does not want.