To live or let die..
To Live or Let Die
Debi S Bowman
Grand Canyon University: PSY-510
April 26, 2017
To live or to die is a debate that has been raging on forever. People believe that death is natural and others, that one should fight to stay alive. This paper is between those who believe in assisted dying and those who do not believe. There are two articles that make points towards each side. The first article leans against the choice; “What is Wrong with Rational Suicide” and the second article shows the support and leans towards having the right to choose; “Joining a right-to-die society: Motivation, beliefs, and experiences.” For this paper, I will refer to the article that is against assisted death as; article 1. The second, in which is pro-assisted dying will be referred to as; article 2.
Article 1 claims that a person’s life belongs to God and one cannot take his or her life without going against God. Pilpel, A. and Amsel, L. (2011) state:
Most Judeo-Christian philosophers, concur, though for different reasons: e.g., because it
is contrary to nature, because our lives belong to God and only He can take them, and
because it hurts the community, to say nothing of the biblical prohibition against murder
(p. 111).
It continues with an example of a woman who doesn’t have a spouse or children, she is aging and unable to be active. The article explains that she has taken a hard look at her future and believes death at her age will save her any more pain. She chooses to go against God and take her own life. The article argues that she did in fact have a high quality of life and fails to take into consideration the negative impacts her choice has on extended family and friends. This is a negative impact that allowing assisted suicide has on people, the glorification of death and/or suicide. The article claims her choice was not rational and as with most people, the choice cannot be rational because it is an emotional choice where most people have a mental state that is incapable of making a rational choice to end their life. The article argues, if it is rational for her to commit suicide because she felt more pain in life than good, then is it not rational for more people to do so? Pilpel, A. and Amsel, L. (2011) state, “Would we really wish to accept the consequences: that it is rational for billions who live in poverty and hopelessness all over the world to kill themselves (p. 118)?” This claim is interesting in that it shows the controversy between right-to-die and living through the pain.
Article 2 takes a different view on assisted dying by studying the groups that have been formed by people who believe it is one’s personal choice. The financial burden, vulnerability, and the fear of what they will put their families through are also key factors as to why people join these groups and support the right-to-die movement. The article claims that many members have also witnessed family members or close friends go through a slow death and believe it is not something they wish to go through. According to Judd, M. and Seale, C. (2011), “Experience of a terminal illness in self or other was the most commonly give reason for joining (p. 232).” The article continues to present research and information as to why assisted death is more widely accepted, especially in places such as; Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Oregon, and now California. The article also sheds light on the fact that a high number of healthcare professionals support assisted death and the right-to-die movement. Ultimately the argument is made that as an individual, it should be one’s personal choice to continue care or to die with dignity.
After careful examination, it is evident that both articles make strong arguments for each side of the life and death dilemma. There are pros and cons to each side of this argument. Elderly patients, especially those with terminal illness and/or dementia, have lived a long life and it is logical to think that extended care is considered painful for all and a financial burden on family members. Loneliness and/or lack of feeling necessary is also a key reason, especially in elderly people, for assisted death. In a recent study on elderly people and their reasons for choosing death, van Wijngaarden, E., Leget, C., and Goossensen, A. (2015) stated, “They viewed themselves as dispensable, redundant and not important to people or society (p. 3.2).” This argument is made well within article 2. However, article 1 makes the compelling argument about suffering and how choosing to die is not a rational choice, which is what most who believe in the choice claim. Most claim it is a rational decision to choose death based on circumstances, however, article 1 makes the point that it is an emotional choice which therefore cannot be rational. Nightline News continues to prove this side of the argument when they released the story of Terri Schiavo. She is a patient who some, including her husband, believe to have a low quality of life. However, investigators, her family, and the state of Florida believe that Terri Schiavo still has a lot to offer and has a quality of life that is still worth living. She was forced to starve for a week before the state of Florida demanded she be put back on a feeding tube. Nightline presents the question if a timeline should be put on someone’s life. According to the Republican state senator, Daniel Webster, he believes the state of Florida dealt with today and how Terri Schiavo is today and she responded to stimuli at the right time (Webster, 2003). This argument coincides with article 1, in that there cannot be a timeline on someone’s life, if one is alive, they are alive. Article 1 has the winning argument when it compares one person’s suffering to how billions suffer and how it is not logical to think of billions committing suicide because they are in pain.
When looking at both articles, there are logical fallacies that occur in both. The example in article 1 is not a scientific based example, thus it can be considered a slippery slope and a hasty generalization. If the woman is of a certain age, feels she cannot live the same life, then she will most likely feel as though death is a logical decision. This is not a logical or accurate statement and generalizes all women will walk this path and commit suicide. However, it is a good example of suffering that does lead into the author’s determination of all people suffer and it does not make suicide a viable option. Article 2 did not have any logical fallacies that were evident in the reading. The study was not generalized but specific to a group of individuals who believe in one’s right-to-die (assisted death). However, failed to prove its argument since it was more informative of what these specific groups believe rather than whether it was right or wrong.
The topic of assisted death is a popular and complicated topic that is heavily debated. There are many ethical concerns and moral concerns amongst healthcare professionals and religion individuals. When California passed the law that assisted death was now a choice amongst patients, many people rejoiced. However, the dilemma remains regarding a physician’s oath to heal the sick. According to NBC News, “The American Medical Association, the largest physician group in the U.S., has a formal ethics policy against doctors facilitating a patient’s death, including information on drugs ‘to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act’ (NBC News, 2016).” Another argument that is currently debated is whether age should be considered. If a person is above a certain age, should he or she have the right to assisted death? Thornton, J. E., and Winkler, E. R. (Eds.). (1988) pose these questions regarding assisted death and restrictions:
For example, what restrictions, if any, can be justifiably imposed on the individual in
order to advance common good? In particular, can compulsory retirement at a specified
age be justified? What obligations do the younger generations have to the elderly? What
obligations do the elderly have to the younger generations? Is planning for old age a
matter of individual, family, and/or state responsibility – and how is the responsibility of
each determined (p. 127).
These are valid and ongoing discussions that are current and relevantly debated in this era and will continue to be a topic of debate because there is not right or wrong answer. If one is of faith and believes in God then, yes, taking one’s life no matter the circumstances is wrong. However, if one is not a person of faith and does not wish to be a burden or live in pain, it is not wrong for he or she to choose assisted death.
References
Judd, M., & Seale, C. (2011). Joining a right-to-die society: Motivation, beliefs and experiences.
Mortality, 16(3), 223-241. doi:10.1080/13576275.2011.586123
Melber, A. (2016, June 9). NBC News. Patients Ponder Life and Death as California’s New
‘Right to Die’ Law Begins. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us
news/patients-ponder-life-death-california-s-new-right-die-law-n588611
Pilpel, A. & Amsel, L. (2011). What is Wrong with Rational Suicide. Philosophia, 39(1),
111-123.
The right to die: Terri Schiavo [Video file]. (2003). Retrieved May 2, 2017, from
https://fod.infobase.com/PortalPlaylists.aspx?wID=96349&xtid=33019
Thornton, J. E., & Winkler, E. R. (Eds.). (1988). Ethics and Aging: The Right to Live, the Right
to Die. Vancouver, CA: UBC Press. Retrieved from
http://www.ebrary.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org
van Wijngaarden, E., Leget, C., & Goossensen, A. (2015). Ready to give up on life: The lived
experience of elderly people who feel life is completed and no longer worth living. Social
Science & Medicine 138, 257-264. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.05.015