Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
False
Medical ethics
Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
Discuss ethical issues with the Medical Ethics department of the BMA and the Institute of Medical Ethics. Please note, the views posted here do not necessarily represent the views of the BMA or the IME
The editor the BMJ Fiona Godlee is backing a call for leading UK medical bodies to stop opposing assisted dying for terminally ill, mentally competent adults, and has said that the debate on assisted
4
Cat:OpenClinicalForum:MedicalEthics
Cat:OpenClinicalForum:MedicalEthicsDiscussion:5cfb3ac0-e3c5-4492-a0bf-7b484fd00b08
Forums » Open clinical » Medical ethics » Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 18/6/2012 2:01 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 2947
First: 10/3/2009 Last: 29/4/2013 |
In Response to Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?: [QUOTE]I'm for patients being in control of this decision. However, with this comes responsibility. I note there is a synchronous discussion about karma. It made me think about the idea of suffering. There are terrible instances of patients suffering - see the orignal posters example of Ann McPherson. Some religions accept suffering as due course of life I know it is horrible but is there dignity in suffering as a symbol we mortal and are inevitably ravaged by time and nature? Just a thought. Should we ever accept suffering as part of life? Or is this an attempt to sanitise life as we know it? Posted by drdwright Life is about suffering. Does not the turtle hatch from the egg and make a frantic run for the relative safety of the surf with its different predators, primary schooling, then finding a mate, reproduction, being hit by a propeller, eaten by a shark, eating plastic bags which looked like jelly fish. Yes, we are but turtles in this big ocean called life where we struggle into life through the pain of a birth canal, to the bright sun, playgrounds and blackboards, humiliations, bullying, triumphs, failures, rejection, having children and seeing some die and some become geniuses, of losing or gaining wealth then our health and reason, one's prostate or one's mind, or that breast your lover once fondled and then the ignominy of a nursing home and being nursed by someone with spiked blue hair, a pierced lip and a tattoo, and of losing one's teeth and being rejected by family because you remarried at 82 and of seeing a son with Parkinson's or being told by the police your daughter has been killed in a crash of blood and alcohol. Yes, this fruit of our Eden has a bitter skin but a sweet aftertaste. It is this that we cannot control nor emotional pain which is worse than the pain of a pathological fracture or broken back. We are all in this together. I prefer this tempest and the sting of salt on my beard and the burn of the sun on my face and the scene of the sun setting behind pink tinged clouds as I return to my final mooring in this final liturgy called life. I do not wish for nothing but calm seas and light nor'easter but the exhilaration of a winter westerly which can fill my sails to bursting and make me glad to have lived and died. This life is suffering but suffering is the forge which tempers my blade and makes my edge more keen. We dare not take this chalice from our lips as it is the chalice of life's death.
|
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 18/6/2012 3:46 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 682
First: 17/11/2008 Last: 19/5/2013 |
On a related but not quite on the subject is a column by Victoria Coren who I am jealous of because she can play poker. She argues that doctors should not be gatekeepers to drugs and that we should be treated as adults who can get drugs off of pharmacists and sign disclaimers. She gives the example of her doctor who won;'t let her be on the pill at the age of 35 beause she smokes. her line is that she knows there is a risk but not as much as there is from smoking so she'll take it thanks. We can only imagine what hell must be suffered by the terminally ill who are denied access to the potions (not invented by doctors, but guarded by them) which could gently end their trauma. So, here's my solution to everything. Let pharmacists allocate drugs, as well as selling them. Make it impossible to sue over any side effects from taking them wrongly (which is, surely, the doctors' fear). Treat people like adults: tell them the risks, show them the instructions, let them overdose if they want to." |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 18/6/2012 3:50 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 324
First: 23/12/2011 Last: 3/5/2013 |
In Response to Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?: On a related but not quite on the subject is a column by Victoria Coren who I am jealous of because she can play poker. She argues that doctors should not be gatekeepers to drugs and that we should be treated as adults who can get drugs off of pharmacists and sign disclaimers. She gives the example of her doctor who won;'t let her be on the pill at the age of 35 beause she smokes. her line is that she knows there is a risk but not as much as there is from smoking so she'll take it thanks. She also says Ask yourselves, doctors: if you had to consult officials before buying a car, who said you weren't allowed one because it increased your chances of driving into a tree, how happy would you be to pay tax for that service? .... We can only imagine what hell must be suffered by the terminally ill who are denied access to the potions (not invented by doctors, but guarded by them) which could gently end their trauma. So, here's my solution to everything. Let pharmacists allocate drugs, as well as selling them. Make it impossible to sue over any side effects from taking them wrongly (which is, surely, the doctors' fear). Treat people like adults: tell them the risks, show them the instructions, let them overdose if they want to." Posted by luisad I am sorry but reading through that that seems like such a system that could be abused so easily. What so you just sign a disclaimer and you get whatever you want. You dont go out and buy 20 cars every day. People could start taking pills like bloomin sweeties. And I mean who will the patients go 'crying to' so to speak (a poor choice of words I know) when they do overdose?? |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 18/6/2012 5:04 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 1266
First: 13/4/2010 Last: 21/5/2013 |
Doesn't matter how many disclaimers your patients signed the GMC wouldn't give a toss. As to the admirable Ms Coren's specific complaint it's not her doctor which is saying no to the COCP because she is a smoker and over 35, it's the BNF. But if we really could live in a world where no-one could sue doctors then, yes, patients could do pretty much what they liked but I suspect they would come a cropper much more often than they would benefit. |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 18/6/2012 9:28 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 85
First: 20/5/2010 Last: 22/5/2013 |
In Response to Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?: David, When you are no longer a medical student and have some experience as a doctor, I'm sure you will come across people who need death, not treatment. Please read Dr. Tess McPherson's article in today's BMJ and think about what you might have been able to do for her mother. Better, what should you have done, if you were her doctor? If you are a BMJ member, you can read it here: http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e4007 If you are not, nick a copy from someone who is! John Posted by John D Hi John, Yes I am bottom of the food chain (thanks for reminding me)! I have given this a lot of thought however and even blogged on the issue here. I will read the article you have recommended. Ta |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 20/6/2012 8:45 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 175
First: 13/10/2009 Last: 21/5/2013 |
There is something very odd about the argument used by Odysseus. Quite apart from there being no real evidence to support his slippery slope type of scenario , a similar argument could have been made about the introduction of artificial ventilation - everyone would liable to be ventilated until rigor mortis sets in. There have been folk who argue that death does not occur until all cells are dead and they certainly feel brain death criteria are unacceptable. These people are usually seen as very eccentric. I have known of folk whose lives have been deliberately shortened and of at least one person ventilated well past death to the point of post mortem changes. Yet medical care has evolved so that we have learnt to prevent both these abuses. Lawyers are quite capable of bringing doctors into line and making sure there is no slippery slope with only a stepwise progression where warranted . |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 20/6/2012 8:50 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 175
First: 13/10/2009 Last: 21/5/2013 |
PS I always worry about anyone who goes into medicine "to save life". Quite apart from any other consideration there is precious little real life saving work that we do in the UK and if we really wanted to do that then there plenty of places in the world where it could be done. Or we could go off and work in research or public health...... |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 21/6/2012 11:47 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 2047
First: 12/3/2010 Last: 21/5/2013 |
According to legend, the Dean of my medical school's stock answer to any candidate who wanted to be doctor to save life was that they would do better to join the Fire Brigade. So I think, even fifty years ago, doctors knew that they should allow if not bring death to some. John |
|
|
Re: Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
posted at 21/6/2012 12:41 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
Posts: 2947
First: 10/3/2009 Last: 29/4/2013 |
The problem is not medicine, but law. I have no trust in politicians and no feeling that the legal system is wise or here to protect me. The history of the 20th and 21st century is full of examples of abuse of power. Changes in power over us occur like the tide coming in. As for lawyers bring doctors into line, I am gobsmacked. Lawyers don't make laws. They draft them. The legislature makes laws and they may be capricious and arbitrary. I wish I had such a trusting view of the legislature which is only the manifestation of use of power be it lawful or unlawful. Why is it that doctors in the USA are used in administering lethal injections to the convicted. In my country this would be unlawful. Your "legal" is my "illegal". It is not an absolute but an arbitrary just like religion. Not so long ago, the UK government convicted the greatest brain of Bletchley Park, Alan Turing for sodomy and gave him the choice of incarceration or castration. He eventually committed suicide. This happened in 1952 after WW2 in my life time in the For those with short memories or no knowledge of history, the world looks rosy. He was one of the greatest losses to modern science. This sort of thing in another form can happen again. |
Forums » Open clinical » Medical ethics » Should doctors have a neutral position on assisted dying?
