Objections to the Institutionalization of Euthanization - Stephen G. Potts (2016)

Extract

[...] Objections to the Institutionalization of Euthanization - Stephen G. Potts (2016) Introduction The essay "Objections to the Institutionalization of Euthanization'' by Stephen G. Potts argues against the legalization of active euthanasia in hospitals. The majority of his paper is broken down into nine distinct arguments to support his objections; I will be examining 4 of his concerns. I will analyze each of these points regarding euthanasia and argue in favor of legalizing the practice. Summary The first worry Potts describes is his fear that the push to expand terminal care will diminish as a result of the legalization of euthanasia. [...]

[...] Critique Potts shares some very realistic concerns about institutionalizing euthanasia that I would like to address, the first of which is his belief that, if implemented, there would be less pressure on the medical community to expand terminal care. Potts does have the advantage on this point since he himself is a doctor, and therefore more informed than me when it comes to what may motivate his fellow doctors. That being said, if every doctor is as averse to euthanasia as his paper suggests, I think it will only motive doctors even more to find an alternative. [...]

[...] Yes, the world's economy has suffered and brought financial considerations to the forefront of every patient's mind. A patient may in fact decide to refuse treatment because of cost alone, and then suffer years of unnecessary pain. Shouldn't we give the patient a way to die painlessly in a "good death" instead of years of pain because they can't afford the expensive treatment? I would also like to bring back something I touched on earlier: the human desire to live. [...]

[...] Ben (as mentioned above) continues to want to live despite daily pain and nausea because of his family. In addition, the desire to live is an innate part of human beings, a drive that is so strong that the average human lifespan has increased drastically over human history. Admittedly, that increase is due mostly in part to advances in the medical field, but a patient had to opt in for those medical options to extend their life. So even if a family is placing some pressure on a patient, that pressure would have to be extreme to override the patient's innate desire to live. [...]

[...] He may be realistic about his prognosis, but I argue that hope is still alive. When asked why he continues to go in for treatment, he gives credit to his family. His family gives him hope. This leads me to another concern of Potts's: pressure on the patient. Potts grudgingly gives some credit to the legislators for trying to limit the very real concern that family could consciously or unconsciously pressure the patient into electing for euthanasia when the patient has no true desire to die. [...]