![]() Is MAID a human right?Īccording to the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, human rights “are possessed merely by virtue of one’s status as a human being” or “have been incorporated into legal systems by international agreements.” The United Nations states, “Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more.” Though the patient must ask for the medicine and be able to administer it himself or herself, a physician must prescribe it.įinally, Gottfried said of MAID, “It’s a human right.” His response, I believe, is at the heart of the disagreement. With legal MAID, a patient would die because of a fatal dose of medicine. In response, I said that a person with a terminal disease who is removed from life support is being allowed to die from an illness. What’s the difference between that and physician aid-in-dying? Gottfried offered the following defense: if someone with a terminal illness is on life support, one can legally withdraw it even if the person shortly dies. (All favor wider availability of palliative care and hospice services.) While several state societies have adopted positions of neutrality on the issue, and a few national medical organizations have expressed support for medically assisted dying, the major national organizations of physicians–the American College of Physicians and the American Medical Association–are opposed as is the New York State Medical Society. Given the small number of people who choose MAID, why take the risk? McGann: “There’s some sort of modeling, now you’ve seen this is how somebody else has coped with their pain.” Perhaps by renaming “assisted suicide” as “medical aid in dying,” controlling, and medicalizing it, we might avoid that problem. A Wall Street Journal article notes that “recent studies have shown that people who have lost love ones to suicide have an increased risk of dying by suicide themselves.” The article quotes clinical psychologist Vanessa L. This connection is impossible to prove, or disprove. I also take seriously the warning that some have raised that there might be a connection between relaxed attitudes toward hastening death for the terminally ill and our nationwide epidemic of suicide and death from despair. ![]() What, then, is the harm? I am concerned that legalizing this practice would affect all dying patients and their relationship with their physicians, not only the small number who currently opt for it. The majority of those who have are well educated men with cancer. This might create subtle pressure on those already burdened with serious illness.Īdvocates point out that in the states where MAID is legal, relatively few people have availed themselves of it. Even if it were not directly raised, all patients with terminal illness speaking with their physicians about options would know that assisted dying is on the table. A physician who cares for dying patients would then be obligated to discuss it with all such patients. Once legalized, assisted death would become an accepted treatment option. As a medical oncologist with 30 years’ experience treating seriously ill patients, I have concerns about it, and I expressed them to Gottfried. One of the guests was Richard Gottfried, chair of the New York State Assembly Health Committee, who is cosponsoring A2694, a bill legalizing medical aid in dying (MAID). ![]() The Kings County Medical Society in New York recently hosted a brunch with New York State legislators. Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email this Post Published DecemJPosted in Chronic Conditions and End of Life Care, End-of-Life Care, Hastings Bioethics Forum, Health and Health Care, Medical Aid-In-Dying
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |