Assisted suicide or relief from suffering?
Brittany Maynard, who became the public face of the controversial right-to-die movement over the last few weeks, ended her own life on November 1 at her home in Portland, Oregon. She had announced her decision to die by taking a fatal dose of barbiturates, prescribed to her by a doctor.
29-year old Maynard said goodbye in a message to her friends and family on Facebook before taking her own life.
Doctors gave Maynard six months to live earlier this year after diagnosing her with a form of brain cancer. She publicly announced her intention to move to Oregon so she could undergo physician-assisted suicide under the state’s Death With Dignity Act.
“My glioblastoma is going to kill me and that’s out of my control,” she said about her decision. “I’ve discussed with many experts how I would die from it and it’s a terrible, terrible way to die. So being able to choose to go with dignity is less terrifying.”
Quite understandably, people feel for her and ask us, whether we do not agree that she has taken the right decision. Our response is, it is the right decision for her. In the state to which she and her family moved, the society had agreed that she had a right to take this decision and the law had decided to permit it. The natural question is, if it is right for Oregon, should it not be right for us?
And we say, No.
We say No because, Brittany’s choice came after she had the choice of getting palliative care. This is the essential difference between USA and India – whatever be the shortcomings, the US system does provide for palliative care, while in our country, only a tiny minority of people have access to it. Under these circumstances, we should not go by the sensational decision of one person; but should rather take into consideration the mute suffering of millions in our country who are deprived of pain relief.
We repeat, we strongly believe that it is unethical for India to discuss assisted suicide, without first providing palliative care.
Comments are closed.
