The drawbacks of the current practice in most areas of the world are obvious. Patients who are suffering are at the mercy of individual physicians who may not be willing to take risks, and these physicians either refuse to help or respond in professionally “safe” ways by providing commonly prescribed – but less-than-adequate – means to die. In either case, the often unintended result is unwanted involvement by significant others who, without access to proper drugs are forced to go to great extremes to ensure a loved one’s last request to die.
The drawbacks of the current practice in most areas of the world are obvious. Patients who are suffering are at the mercy of individual physicians who may not be willing to take risks, and these physicians either refuse to help or respond in professionally “safe” ways by providing commonly prescribed – but less-than-adequate – means to die. In either case, the often unintended result is unwanted involvement by significant others who, without access to proper drugs are forced to go to great extremes to ensure a loved one’s last request to die. This is usually done without counseling, and without full assessment and discussion of alternatives, and can seriously magnify the loss while increasing the legal risks.
Assisted dying in its current form doesn’t provide the safeguards that legislation could require. To legally protect themselves, physicians often avoid talking in-depth with patients and their significant others about the decision to die, and may fail to seek consulting medical opinions or request evaluations by mental health professionals. The current system, therefore, does nothing to ensure that all other options are explored, that those requesting this action have the opportunity to receive counseling, that those who are assisted qualify for it, and those most in need have the option of receiving it.