Death is a process in life that will be experienced by everyone at some point, and hopefully at a very mature age. The reality is that no one knows when that time will come or how it will happen. For the terminally ill, death is in the near future and is a sobering reality. Therefore, when it does happen, people need to know that they will have options, and know that death does not have to be an agonizing end. They can choose to endure the annihilating pain that comes with the disease and allow it to take its natural course or choose to end it, surrounded by their loved ones.
The “right to die” (Sanburn 50) it the manner they choose should be a basic right for every human being, a personal choice and an outlet for those who seek relief from an excruciating death sentence. Therefore, anyone who faces a terminal illness should be afforded the “right to die” (Sanburn 50) in a manner they choose to if they wish to put an end to their pain and it should not mean that, the person seeking that end should die alone.
Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine a person desperate enough to believe that ending their lives by their own hand, without their loved ones by their side, is better than the alternative but that is exactly what is happening. In many states, committing suicide is illegal regardless of the fact that the person is terminally ill. Consequently, aiding someone in taking their own life is considered a crime, and California is one of such states. Harry a California resident, who was once a physician was diagnosed with terminal “myeloma” (Drum 27).
As a former physician and well aware of the ordeal ahead of him, Harry decided he would take his own life when the pain became too much to bear. As a reult, Harry understood that he would need to put his plan into action sooner than he should because “he was afraid that if he delayed it any longer he’d become physically unable to remain in control of his own destiny” (Drum 27). According to Drum, “he walked into his bedroom, put a plastic bag over his head and opened up a tank of helium” (27-28) referring to Harry.
Sadly, he did so alone, to protect his family from any legal repercussions. It is not humane to deny someone the right to “assisted suicide” (Sanburn 50), when dying really is an act of mercy. No one should have to die alone as Harry did and for that reason, it is so important for people to have a choice. Likewise, a person with a terminal illness should not have to face taking their own life prematurely for fear of not being capable of effectively killing themselves because their body no longer works.
On the other hand, Kevin Drum, also a California resident and son-in-law to Harry, will not have to face such devastating and cruel choice because in 2016 California passed the bill in support of “assisted suicide” (Drum 30). Drum who is also suffering from “myeloma” (27), and is currently facing the fight for his life, finds comfort in knowing that when the time is right he will not have to die alone.
As a result, the passing of the “assisted suicide” (Drum 28) bill will allow people like Drum to be aided by a physician in ending their suffering when the pain is too unbearable. The bill comes too late for Harry but Harry’s case highlights the need for such legislation throughout the nation. According to Drum, the passing of this bill provides people with options and the confidence of knowing that when things are too much to handle there will be help available. I will ask my doctor for a prescription sedative that will kill me on my own terms=—when I want and where I want,” he stated (Drum 60).
The passing of the “physician-assisted suicide” (Drum 28) bill will provide countless others the choice of ending their suffering surrounded by those who love them while enjoying as much as possible all the time they have left. Similarly, for those who have been dealt a death sentence and are facing their demise, the ability to find a peaceful end to their pain should not mean that they must proot their families and move to another state to get help. Most people think that death, mostly happens to old people, but death is an equal opportunity life event and never has a case brought the need for “physician-assisted suicide” (Drum 28) to the forefront as with the case of Brittany Maynard. Maynard, who was diagnosed with “glioblastoma a form of a brain cancer and given 6 months to live” (Maynard “Brittany’s First Video”) at the age of 29.
For Maynard dying a slow, painful death was not an option and set out on a path to find a way in which she could choose how her life would end. Maynard moved to Oregon with her family where “assisted suicide” (Drum 28) is legal and because she met all the requirements, imposed by the law as safeguards, she was provided with the drugs that she will use to stop her suffering. Maynard stated, “I plan to be surrounded by my immediate family… I will die upstairs … and pass peacefully” (Maynard “Brittany’s First Video”). I can’t even tell you the amount of relief that it provides me to know that I will not have to die in the way that has been described to me” (Maynard “Brittany’s First Video”), she states. While her struggle is devastating and real, not every terminally ill patient has the resources to move to another state to be able to choose how they will die. Legislation must be passed nationwide so that “assisted suicide” (Drum 28) is established as the humane option for those who are terminally ill and who wish to end their suffering.
Although “physician-assisted suicide” (Drum 28), is supposed to be an act of mercy for those in intense agonizing pain, some fear that it may pose a potential risk for abuse. While, it may seem as a conflict of interest to have a doctor aid their patients in ending their lives, the “California’s Medical Association became the first statewide medical group to drop its opposition to aid the dying” (Sanburn 50). This is colossal step in the right direction.
It signals that the medical community is beginning to understand that part of caring for a patient is also making sure that they assist the patient in mitigating their suffering, in some instances by providing end of life care. Who can possibly have the best interest of the patient if not their doctor? Some may think that eventually, doctors may find it too easy to pull the plug, but safeguards are in place to keep that from happening. In Oregon, a patient requesting “end-oflife” (Drum 29) assistance must first meet certain criteria.
The prerequisites are as follows: “making sure that the patient must be over eighteen years old; the patient must vocalize the request of end-of-life; two physicians must be present, the attending and a consulting, to ensure that the patient is indeed facing death within six months due to the illness” (White 610). The last provision also is designed to protect those with disabilities and the elderly, and it states, “a patient cannot qualify for prescribed medication based on age and disability alone” (White 610).
Legislation can continue to be updated to ensure that only those who seek to end their lives due to a terminal illness can gain access to “end-of-life” (Drum 29) care. In conclusion, it is important that end of life care is made available to people who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness, who face imminent death and who are in decimating pain. These individuals should have the choice to end their torment and have the right to choose how their lives will end when they choose to.
These patients should not have to die alone or move to an entirely different state in order to attain the help they need. To deny a terminally ill patient, this very fundamental right is a cruel and unusual punishment. While many states are finally acknowledging the need for “physicianassisted suicide” (Drum 28), there is still much work to be done to ensure patients can remain in their home states and still have access to “end-of-life” (Drum 29) care, if so they desire. “Physician-assisted suicide” (Drum 28), should not be seen as a homicide, but rather an act of mercy.
