Life and Death

Dr. Jack Kevorkian's death on Friday, June 3rd was reported by NPR as: "Dr. Jack Kevorkian, the assisted suicide advocate, died Friday at 83. Supporters say he was a compassionate caregiver who paid a steep price for helping chronically and terminally ill patients end their suffering. Critics, however, say Kevorkian's zealotry clouded his ability to behave like a responsible physician." more.

I must admit that I didn't pay as much attention to Dr. Kevorkian's activism as I should have back then. During the 90's when he was in the news for actively seeking publicity, and more importantly forcing the society to have a frank conversation about end of life situations (he failed in that respect, IMHO), I was young and foolish so I thought why would you want this Dr. Death's assistance to kill yourself. I also took it for granted that if you wanted to take your own life, there aren't any barriers the society can put in front of you. I guess, I didn't realize that when you do want to take your own life for medical reasons, it is too late to make any provisions to do so due to the same medical reasons.

In this report on NBC Nightly News Dr. Nancy Snyderman quite eloquently places the Kevorkian conundrum in front of the viewers. Kevorkian's antics made it a bit too much to take the message seriously. At the same time, had he not done all he could to bring it in front of the TV cameras, we wouldn't have had any conversations about it. (And, if I remember correctly, a couple of states now have laws on books allowing for assisted suicides, due in part to his early efforts to get people talking about it.) Then again, I think, we haven not had this conversation as a society and that's why some political hack can slap the "death panels" label on anything and scare the hell out of half the population. As Dr. Snyderman said, we care for our suffering pets better than we do for our fellow humans. That's a sad state of affairs.

That's brings up several questions. First, let's say you are suffering from a terminal illness and you have decided to call it a day. Unfortunately, you live in a state where it is difficult to find a physician who is willing to assist you. There really isn't a whole lot you can do. Other than going via methods with spectacularly messy outcomes, you can't purchase the required, ahem, ingredients for the drug cocktail that will bring about the end. For a country that prides itself in having best individual rights and focuses a bit too much on "me, myself and I," this important right seems to have fallen by the way side.

That brings to my second question. Who decides what is meant by "suffering"? And, does it have to be a medically diagnosed, terminal condition before we can seek "assistance"? Says who? Don't we generally take the individual rights over and above that of the society (when they don't clash)? If I'm not infringing the right of the others to pursue their right to life, liberty, etc the shouldn't I be free to seek assisted suicide regardless of the medical condition? Is mental agony a sufficient condition? What if your current life situations don't give you any other options; is that sufficient? What if you are just tired of it all?

Like Dr. Kevorkian has said, this is about the necessity of physician's ability to assist.