IF
WE PERMIT HELPFUL DEATHS,
HARMFUL
DEATHS WILL FOLLOW
When the idea of voluntary death is first
presented,
suicide is the first
response that happens in the minds of most people.
Several minutes of explanations or several paragraphs of writing
are required to convince the listener or the reader
that it might be possible to permit
voluntary death
while at the same time discouraging
irrational suicide.
Here are the four basic differences:
1. Irrational suicide harms
the victim.
Voluntary death benefits
the patient.
2. Irrational suicide is not
based on reason.
Voluntary death is based on
reason.
3. Irrational suicide is often capricious.
Voluntary death is well-planned.
4. Irrational suicide is regrettable
and lamentable.
Voluntary death is admirable
and laudable.
If you want to
explore these concepts more completely, read:
"Four Differences between Irrational Suicide and Voluntary Death":
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~parkx032/CY-IS-VD.html.
The safeguards
linked below constitute the operational methods
by which several other persons can participate
in examining the proposed death to see whether
it would be an irrational
suicide or a voluntary
death.
Likewise, whenever the words "merciful death" appear,
the first image that comes into the minds
of the listener or the reader is mercy killing.
Much explanation is required to convince the listener or the reader
that it might be possible to permit
merciful deaths
while at the same time continuing
to outlaw
mercy killing.
Here are the same four basic differences:
1. Mercy killing harms
the victim.
Merciful death benefits
the patient.
2. Mercy
killing
is not based on reason.
Merciful
death
is based on reason.
3. Mercy
killing
is often capricious.
Merciful
death
is well-planned.
4. Mercy
killing
is regrettable and lamentable.
Merciful
death
is admirable and laudable.
If you want to
explore these concepts more completely, read:
"Four Differences between Mercy Killing and Merciful Death":
http://www.tc.umn.edu/%7Eparkx032/CY-MK-MD.html.
The safeguards linked below constitute the
operational methods
by which several other persons can participate
in examining the proposed death to see whether
it would be a mercy killing
(harmful criminal behavior)
or a merciful death
(helpful compassionate behavior).
This set of worries about the right-to-die
is traditionally called the "slippery-slope argument".
If we permit some forms
of the right-to-die,
then we will begin slipping down a hill to disaster
without the possibility of stopping ourselves.
A chain of terrible consequences will follow
if we take even the first step down the slippery slope.
If this were true,
that we could not prevent evil
deaths
if we permit good deaths,
then (so the argument goes),
we should never take the first step onto the slippery slope.
The safeguards are the sand that can be put on the
icy sidewalk
so that it will be safe to walk down the hill.
As long as we have the safeguards preventing us from slipping out of
control,
the trip down the icy sidewalk will be safe.
With careful safeguards, we can permit wise deaths and prevent foolish deaths.
SAFEGUARDS TO DISCOURAGE IRRATIONAL SUICIDE AND MERCY KILLING
The following 17 safeguards call upon the considered
opinions
of a wide variety of neutral persons who can help
to separate those deaths that would be harmful irrational suicides
from those deaths that would be helpful voluntary deaths
and to separate those deaths that would be harmful mercy killings
from those deaths that would be helpful merciful deaths.
These safeguards are arranged beginning with the
most powerful and effective:
STATEMENTS
FROM FAMILY MEMBERS
AFFIRMING OR
QUESTIONING THE CHOSEN DEATH
STATEMENTS
FROM
ADVOCATES FOR
DISADVANTAGED GROUPS
IF INVITED BY
THE PATIENT AND/OR THE PROXIES
PHYSICIAN'S
STATEMENT OF CONDITION AND PROGNOSIS
INDEPENDENT
PHYSICIAN REVIEWS THE CONDITION AND PROGNOSIS
HOSPITAL OR
HOSPICE ENROLLMENT
PSYCHOLOGICAL
CONSULTANT EVALUATES
THE PATIENT'S
ABILITY TO MAKE MEDICAL DECISIONS
ADVANCE
DIRECTIVE FOR MEDICAL CARE
REQUESTS FOR
DEATH FROM THE PATIENT
INFORMED
CONSENT FROM THE PATIENT
UNBEARABLE
SUFFERING
ETHICS
COMMITTEE REVIEWS THE LIFE-ENDING DECISION
A
MEMBER OF THE CLERGY APPROVES OR QUESTIONS THE CHOICE FOR DEATH
RELIGIOUS OR
OTHER MORAL PRINCIPLES
APPLIED TO THIS
LIFE-ENDING DECISION
REPORT TO THE
PROSECUTOR BEFORE THE DEATH TAKES PLACE
CIVIL AND
CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR CAUSING PREMATURE DEATH
COMPLETE
RECORDING AND SHARING OF ALL MATERIAL FACTS AND OPINIONS
THE
DEATH-PLANNING COORDINATOR ORGANIZES THE SAFEGUARDS
If these 17
safeguards do not seem sufficient
to discourage irrational suicides and mercy killings,
there are a dozen more listed in the complete catalog of safeguards:
http://www.tc.umn.edu/~parkx032/SG-CAT.html.
Each of these descriptions contains a few paragraphs
explaining how that safeguard will discourage
irrational suicide and other forms of premature death.
revised 2-21-2008