Is euthanasia assisted suicide? – Malta Independent Online

The right to end one's life when pain and immobility become unbearable has seen many swords clash during the past decades.

To delve deeper into this issue, I asked 18 students from the University of Malta and noted the arguments by the Rev. Prof. Emmanuel Agius, Dean of the Faculty of Theology, and Pierre Mallia, Professor of Family Medicine, who both lecture at the University, during an interview on Campus FM.*

Students defined euthanasia as: the killing of seriously-ill patients to be relieved from pain; a patient's right to end his life painlessly; mercy killing; the withdrawal of treatment; and assisted suicide.

Euthanasia, however, holds a wider definition. Prof. Mallia defined it as 'voluntary homicide', generally referring to a sick person but not necessarily one close to death. He made a net distinction between active euthanasia: when the physician helps end the patient's life with intended means; and passive euthanasia: when treatment is purposely withheld to let the patient die.

Prof. Agius noted the difference between killing and letting die, saying that only the first action is considered as euthanasia and not "when a patient refuses to take treatment". When I asked students about this, four agreed with Prof. Agius, saying that you are just letting nature take its course. Six claimed to be both a form of euthanasia or else an indirect method.

Prof. Mallia said that although when one speaks of such moral rights, one tends to incorporate the importance of autonomy, one cannot oblige society to end one's life, especially in cases of heartbreak or just because you got ill. So, when can euthanasia be justified? Thirteen of the students felt that euthanasia can only be justified when the person's life deteriorates, when not able to live independently and when one loses complete control of one's body. Five said that ending a life can never be justified because each and every human life is precious, invaluable and humans don't have authority over it.

Mallia referred to the pre-legality state, observing that Parliament is trying to turn ethics into statistics, which is impossible, because the passing of a law doesn't depend on whether the law is morally right or wrong; rather on the agreement reached by MPs.

According to Agius, one should look into the social conditions which induce a person to consider such a step that goes against the fundamental right to live. What induces a person to opt for euthanasia? Students listed endless pain, concern for others such as concern of being a burden to one's family, lack of hope, lack of support from relatives and friends and lack of understanding of value of life.

Seven students disagreed with the fact that the right to live and the right to die are contradictory, insisting that they are similar human rights which every person should be entitled to. One rejected euthanasia as a right, claiming that we are not the master of our lives. Eight agreed while two said that life should be protected at all times; otherwise the right to live would be meaningless. The rest were undecided.

In order to analyse what leads people to want to take their own lives, one ought to consider palliative as well as spiritual care, Agius said. Out of 18 students, 16 agreed with Agius, that euthanasia should be a last resort after spiritual/emotional support. Also, that authorities should make sure people who are giving such support are competent, well-trained, pro-life and of good morals. The rest said it's difficult once a person has made up his mind.

I asked the students if the moral implications are any different between an old person and a child/teenager/young adult who opts for this procedure. Seven said that age should not make any difference. One said it's true that a young person is seen as the one who has a longer future but if life was extended to both, they might end up with a positive outcome i.e. changing someone else's life or giving a life-changing contribution to society. Five students said that there is a difference because while the old person lived his/her life, the young one is still at the beginning of life.

When it comes to the effects on the physician, students mentioned guilt, especially if a bond has been created with the patient. Others said it depends on the physician's values - especially spirituality - because if he/she is pro-life, shame might ensue for having assisted in the procedure. Four students disagreed that such attached emotions could follow since, for physicians, they encounter such losses while others might be blinded by its lucrative side.

So, should euthanasia become legal or not? Apart from the four students that responded "undecided", the number was even. Seven agreed to the extent that strict regulations should be applied, for example, when the patient is in a good state of mind, when it's the patient's decision and when the patient is terminally ill. The other seven students disagreed, saying that authorities cannot keep referring to themselves as 'Christians' if they opt to go against the fundamental and core values of Christianity. One said that with the improvement of medicine, euthanasia should not be considered.

Ten students were concerned that if euthanasia is legalized, we would be running the risk of people abusing of such an option and sick people will opt for the easy way out i.e. refuse treatment. Three said this depends on the emotional support the patient receives. The rest were undecided.

"If we want to make our island more merciful and be first in Europe, we have to be the country where we give the most palliative care and whoever will be found in this situation wouldn't need to ask for euthanasia because we have psychological, emotional, spiritual support and a good system where we give these patients their dignity," Agius added.

*The programme, 'Mhux l-aar Kelma', led by the Rev. Dr Joe Borg and Professor Maryanne Lauri is broadcast on Campus FM. 103.7

Excerpt from:

Is euthanasia assisted suicide? - Malta Independent Online