This WEB log considers issues involving assisted suicide/euthanasia, bioethics, human cloning, biotechnology, and the dangers of animal rights/liberation. My views expressed here, as in my books and other writings, reflect my understanding that the philosophy of human exceptionalism is the bedrock of universal human rights. Or, to put it another way: human life matters. (The opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of any organization with which I am affiliated.)
A few studies have looked into the emotional toll on doctors who participate in euthanasia and assisted suicide. This peer reviewed article makes it clear that mercy killing not only hurts the killed, but often the doctors who participate in the killing.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 9:35 AM
6 Comments
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
6 Comments:
I notice that they've ignored the many cases where patients get a lethal drug, but never use it. It gives them a great peace of mind, however.
Winston, the article was not about such cases. You've taken a wrong turn on the way to interpretation of the article. It was actually about the evidence of psychological effect of PAS and euthanasia on participating physicians. The issue of patient peace of mind is not strictly relevant to the study, although it seems exclusively relevant to you.
Even if such an article were to be written to bring to light those cases in which the patient gains "peace of mind" from the availability of a lethal drug, that alone wouldn't justify PAS or euthanasia. It would represent the reporting of patient opinions and psychological effects just as this article represents the reporting of physician opinions and psychological effects. The value of this article may be that it brings to light systematically something not widely recognized by the general public. Winston, you're welcome to prefer your opinion or the opinions of others to reasoning tempered with emotion, but don't pretend those opinions can serve as the bases of moral and ethical reasoning while you refuse to take part in such reasoning. Wesley, thanks for the article link.
Thanks for posting this Wesley, it's one of the most enlightening articles I've read on euthanasia in a long time. I never really considered the toll on doctors, but the peer pressure seems incredible. It is more support for the idea that the juggernaut of euthanasia can't be contained by guidelines or "bio-ethics".
There are also many physicians who feel awful because they do NOT assist. It's clearly biased.
Reading one of the books in their references list: "Angels of Death" shows the level of unconsented euthanasia that is not even known about, and that the politicans pretend don't exist.
You misunderstand the nature of the work the authors were doing. In scientific literature, a question is asked, and an answer is sought in the places most appropriate to the question. They were asking about the existence of adverse or harmful effects, not about the existence of "beneficial" effects. There was no bias involved. The door is wide open for someone to ask a similar question about those "beneficial" effects, if any, and to publish a study on his findings.
Post a Comment
<< Home