SUICIDE-MODEL RIGHT-TO-DIE
  versus
 MEDICAL MODEL END-OF-LIFE CARE

by James Leonard Park

1. The Suicide-Model for Ending Life


    Almost all of the early right-to-die laws were based on the suicide-model.
This means that these laws were implicitly or explicitly grounded
on the inherent right to give up one's own life:
Each person's life belongs only to that one individual.
Therefore that person has a right to end that life.

    This feature of most right-to-die laws
can be found in the requirement that the dying patient
must be capable and competent up until the last moment of life.
The final act that brings death
must be performed by the person who is choosing death,
not by anyone else
no matter how authorized or qualified.   

    Using the concept of suicide as the basis for the right-to-die,
no proxy can act on behalf of the person whose life is ending. 
If the chosen method of dying is a lethal injection,
the injection must be authorized at the last moment by the patient.




2. The Medical Model for End-of-Life Care

    The medical model for taking care of dying patients
is based on the authorized practice of medicine.
Wherever scientific medicine is practiced,
being a doctor is a licensed and controlled profession. 

    Only certain trained, tested, & licensed persons
are authorized to practice medicine.

    By law, only licensed physicians may
offer certain named and described medical procedures.
Anyone else who does such procedures without being licensed
is "practicing medicine without a license",
which is a criminal offense.

    Medical doctors are authorized by law
to prescribe controlled substances for their patients.
And with this prescribing-power comes the authority
to increase or decrease any such drugs.

    Giving or withdrawing (or withholding) drugs
can lead to the patient's death.
The patient gives informed consent to any such drugs.
(Or the patient makes an informed refusal for any drug.)
If and when the patient can no longer give consent or refusal,
then proxies for the patient have authority to make these changes.

    Also, sometimes doctors are involved in decisions about life-supports,
including providing food and water to the patient by means of tubes.

    Life-sustaining treatments or supports can also be discontinued
when recommended by the doctors
and agreed to by the family or official proxies for the patient. 

    Whenever the patient is still conscious
and able to make medical decisions,
the patient will be the first person asked
about any change of medical care.
But usually at the end of life,
the patient's thinking has become so diminished
that the official deciding-authority has already shifted to the proxies. 

    All such loss of mental capacity on the part of the patient
does not diminish in any way the right to choose a peaceful death.
The proxies have all of the same authority and powers
once possessed by the patient. 

    This is in sharp contrast to the suicide-model right-to-die.
Under that understanding of the end-of-life powers,
only the patient himself or herself has the authority to choose death. 

    Here are the four most common methods of managing dying
that might be recommended and/or approved by a licensed physician:

1. increasing pain-medication to control the terminal suffering of the patient.
2. inducing terminal coma,
to keep the patient completely unconscious for the rest of his or her life. 
3. ending all curative treatments and life-supports.
4. giving up water and other fluids.

    In a few places on the planet Earth,
licensed physicians are also authorized to prescribe chemicals
that are intended for no other purpose than to cause the patient to die
In some places the doctor can give a lethal injection.
And sometimes the patient is expected to take the deadly substances
using his or her own hands and mouth. 

    When the medical model for end-of-life care is being used,
it does not matter exactly who authorizes the life-ending action.
And it does not matter who take the final actions that cause death.
Safeguards are used to make certain this is a wise end-of-life decision.

    For example, frequently everyone agrees that the life-supports
are doing the patient no good.
The patient and/or the proxies agree to have life-supports discontinued.
And usually the nurse is the actual medical person
who turns off the machine and disconnects the tubes. 

    A doctor must examine the body of the deceased patient
and certify that death has occurred.
The doctor will announce the time of death.
And the doctor will fill out the death-certificate,
indicating the primary cause of death and any secondary factors

    All such procedures are well within the normal practice of medicine. 
And even without the enactment of any new right-to-die laws,
doctors will continue to recommend these first four methods of dying. 

    But new laws are needed to authorize the giving of lethal chemicals
for the purpose of causing the patient to die. 

    Safeguards should apply to all life-ending decisions.
And usually these safeguards are affirmed by the medical profession.
But when new methods of dying are approved by law
such as giving lethal substances to cause death
then some additional safeguards might be wise. 

    However, under normal terminal medical care,
it should not be expected or required
that the patient be alert, conscious, or competent at the end.
We should not lose the right-to-die when we lose consciousness.




3.  Examples of the Medical Model End-of-Life Care


    In 2014, the Canadian province of Quebec
passed a new law for medical care at the end-of-life,
which falls fully within the medical model.
An Act Respecting End-of-Life Care
authorizes doctors to help their patients to die in three ways:
1. disconnecting and discontinuing any medical treatment,
2. beginning continuous palliative sedation, &
3. medical aid in dying.

    All three of these life-ending actions
are authorized by licensed physicians.
The law specifically says that when providing (3) 'medical aid in dying',
the physician must remain with the patient until death occurs.

    And nowhere in the law is the patient required
to be conscious and competent to the very end
to authorize the life-ending decisions,
which would have been required under any suicide-model legislation. 
The patient must have given informed consent to the plans for death,
but such consent can be affirmed in an Advance Directive.

    Other provinces of Canada might follow the example set by Quebec.
And they could explicitly include two additional methods of dying:
comfort-care only and medical dehydration.
And each province will decide exactly what safeguards
must be fulfilled before any life-ending decisions can be made. 

    France also created a new end-of-life medical care act in 2016.
This one falls entirely within the normal practice of medicine
as found everywhere in the advanced world.
And it carefully avoids any mention of
'euthanasia' or 'physician-assisted suicide'.

    The Netherlands has the longest history
of allowing patient to choose death.
In 2002, Holland updated its rules and regulations allowing doctors
to administer "euthanasia" and "physician-assisted suicide"
---and the required reporting of all such deaths.
The patient's considered judgment is uppermost
in making such life-ending decisions.
Plans for death can also be made in advance.

    The Netherlands also allows the other
medical methods of managing dying,
which are all considered normal parts of medical care.
Such life-ending decisions do not require any special reporting.
And the deaths are recorded as having natural causes.

    In 2002, Belgium undated its right-to-die law.
This law basically authorizes a physician to perform "euthanasia"
when the specified safeguards have been fulfilled.
When the patient can no longer participate in the life-ending decisions,
proxies are authorized to make the final choices.
  
    Causing Premature Death is another model for the right-to-die.
This proposed law falls within the laws against murder.
And it lays out 26 specific safeguards by which doctors and proxies
can prove that their patient had a timely death, not a premature death.




AUTHOR:

James Park is an advocate of the right-to-die with careful safeguards.
His largest book deals with the right-to-die:
How to Die: Safeguards for Life-Ending Decisions.



Created November 13, 2015; Revised 11-26-2015; 11-30-2015; 12-1-2015;
8-30-2016; 12-13-2017; 8-9-2018; 12-18-2018; 5-22-2019; 6-19-2020;



more about these two models for ending life

Do I Lose the Right-to-Die when I Lose Consciousness?


links for lawmakers


A Facebook Group has been established for 
Right-to-Die Legislators.
When any member of a law-making body anywhere on Earth
has created a proposal for a new right-to-die law
or regulations that permit more choices at the end of life,
a link can be offered to this Facebook Group.

Safeguards for life-ending decisions
as found in various laws and proposals for laws.


Replacing Laws Against 'Assisting Suicide'

How to Die: Safeguards for Life-Ending Decisions
See especially PART SIX:
CHANGING LAWS CONCERNING THE RIGHT-TO-DIE

Portal for the Right-to-Die

Quebec's "An Act Respecting End-of-Life Care"

with safeguards highlighted and summarized.
This end-of-life medical care act (EOLMCA) could be a starting place
for other provinces creating their own health-care laws.

26 recommended safeguards for life-ending decisions.
Lawmakers could include at least the best of these safeguards
in any new right-to-die or end-of-life legislation.
Each safeguards is explained in a page or two on the Internet.

Whenever lawmakers authorize new (or existing) methods of managing dying,
they might also consider adding a new line to certificates of death:
Beyond giving a full explanation of the causes of death
an additional line might explain any medical methods of managing dying
or life-ending decisions that were the final medical orders
that led to this patient's death.
Expanding Death-Certificates to include end-of-life medical decisions.



Go to the beginning of this website
James Leonard Park—Free Library