A further point in this argument is a new drug that supposedly, can be given to patients in a vegetative state and ‘wake them up’. In one case, ‘after taking the drug, the patient could communicate using a keyboard, stand up, stretch her arms to full height and clap her hands, before the drug wears off’ (Daily Mail). This shows that there is hope for severely disabled people and that there are ways of changing their state instead of resorting to euthanasia. As the British Council of Disabled People says, ‘what kind of message is this sending out to society, where it is perceived to be easier to kill a disabled person rather than support them to live with dignity’?
Doctors often find themselves in the middle of the argument, facing prosecution and the end of their career if they get too involved where what they are doing is still illegal. For example, ‘A struck off doctor is being investigated by police after helping terminally- ill patients visit Switzerland to commit suicide,’ read a headline in one newspaper, (Daily Mail) last year. This is a swift reminder that euthanasia is still illegal in this country and the law must be regarded and abided by. Another difficult assessment to make is deciding whether a patient is in a fit state of mind to be able to decide such a final matter. In ‘Whose life is it Anyway’ Dr Emerson says, ‘It’s his life but my responsibility’. Here, Dr Emerson feels he has a professional obligation to fulfil- he cannot just let Ken decide with first proving whether or not he is sane, and doing everything he can to help him recover first.
On the other side of the argument, people see euthanasia as an option that should be available to them if they decide that it is what they really want. As a human being on this planet they believe everyone should have the right to decide their own lives. Another reason for this belief is that if euthanasia was made legal, it would cut down the number of ‘mercy killings’ committed by ‘selfless and loving’ families trying to carry out their loved one’s wish.
Where as some people describe it as cowardly, for the terminally ill patient it can be reassuring, in some cases, to know that if things get too much they can just let go and break away from their ever lasting illness. One patient- Mrs March, wrote in her diary, ‘You my feelings of wanting to opt out. It is the only way I can cope, having an escape route if things get too hard’. In this case Mrs March was not being cowardly she made a rational decision and wanted to die ‘as an act of love’ so her husband would not have to spend the rest of his life caring for her and could move on.
In the play, Ken respects and congratulates people who have made remarkable achievements using the technology that is now available to them. However for him, ‘it is medical technology gone mad’. Like some other people, he would not like to carry on, compromising life. He cannot live his passion- sculpting, and is sure that there are not any ‘cybernetic lumps of clay’ for him to use. So rationally, he decides he wants to die.
If patients were allowed to choose euthanasia it would also help doctors in their decisions. As Dr Barnard says, ‘The goal is not to prolong life, but to improve the quality of it. At times a doctor may have to decide, however reluctantly, that death is the best option’. This is important to remember, you can do all you can for a patient, but in the end it is their life, their feelings. Another doctor- Michael Irwin ‘boasted’ that he was ready to risk his medical career to help people ‘commit suicide’. He added, ‘I have no regrets and would be prepared to go to jail over my actions’ (Daily Mail). Nevertheless Michael Irwin is a minority. It seems everyone is ‘waiting for some great miracle cure’ and various doctors keep telling stories of ‘incredible spontaneous recoveries’ (Mail on Sunday). Although as Dr Barnard says, ‘if there have. I do not know of them’.
The final point for euthanasia being a matter of choice is that dying saves the person from a life without dignity. Ken says, ‘it is not undignified if the man wants to stay alive, but I must state that the dignity starts with his choice.’ It is not dignified having someone spoon feed you and wash you if that is not what you want. One mother said, ‘I am just so tired of being dependant on people’ and her family who care for her told a newspaper, ‘she’s got to die some time and she has got to die when it is right for her and not for us’. This reiterates that it always has to be the patient’s choice over their life and what they do with it.
Looking at the newspapers, they seek to dramatise these stories. They use emotive words, ‘selfless…boasted…shameful’. However, whilst drawing you in to the terrible stories and struggles of the patients, they do provide views and quotes from ‘pro- life campaigners’ and other organisations of differing view- ‘Her death is a tragedy’. The play, (Whose life is it Anyway?) presents balanced views and opinions of individuals. Although the play leaves you to decide which side to take, throughout it tries to push you towards Ken and his well set out arguments.
After reading the newspaper articles, the play and arguing these points I come to believe that, euthanasia should defiantly be a matter of choice. I believe this because as a human being I should have the right to choose with dignity. As Ken says, ‘If I choose to live, it would be appalling if society killed me. If I choose to die, it is equally appalling if society keeps me alive’. Moreover, I think doctors should come around to the idea that sometimes we have to let people die. However, if you are making such a big life or death decision you have to first give people the chance to live and recover before you give them a chance to die. I also think that it is extremely important to listen to doctors as they are the professionals and do have what they believe to be our best interests at heart.
One more reason I am of this view is that, I think it is terrible that people who want to die and are refused this option, have to resort to messy suicide plans often involving family and afterwards, prosecution. Also, I think having to travel abroad to die is ridiculous- the Patients have the hassle of getting there and then die in a strange place far away from home. It would be a great deal easier if they were allowed to die legally and peacefully at home.
