Helping patients - to die?

In Austria (population: 8.000.000), about 1.500 people are murdered each year (i.e. killed intentionally), and more than 90% of them are killed - by themselves. Similar statistics exist for most countries in the world (Schmidtke et al 1999). Suicides may be motivated by various reasons: By (1) acute negative emotions; (2) psychiatric diseases (mostly depression); or (3) the threat of inescapable suffering.
As life expectancy in developed countries approaches the 9th decade, a gradually increasing fraction of the population suffers from age-related diseases, either degenerative ones affecting the joints, the heart, and the brain; or neoplastic diseases of various types. Disabling physical or mental conditions of advanced age have become the reason No 1 for suicide. In an increasing number of countries, it is legal for physicians to provide patients suffering from incurable terminal diseases with drugs (mostly barbiturates) to end their lives by their own free decision. Examples are the Netherlands and Switzerland in Europe, and Oregon in the U.S.
This development touches one of the oldest taboos of mankind, best summarized in the 5th commandment: "Thou shalt not kill." Principally, the function of such rules has always been to protect the weak and poor against infringement by the strong and mighty. Nevertheless, the 5th commandment has been taken by its words by various activist groups including those fighting death penalty, abortion, and the alimentary use of animals. The same argument has been brought forward against dying-with-dignity programs. To make it short: I do not recommend the literal observation of rules written in very old books.
The last society implementing euthanasia programs against the disabled was Nazi-Germany from 1933 to 1945, no good company for ideas like these, although in 1942 even the prestigious American Journal of Psychiatry advocated the killing of 'feebleminded' people (Joseph 2005). Fortunately, our priority today is the will of the patient and not the will of the society. If it were up to society to decide,  who knows where it would lead us? Maybe an immoderate society would even try to improve its economy by getting rid of long-term unemployed with an elegant barbiturate overdose?
Many troubles might be solved, just by choosing the right poison. We do it with our old dog, if we get tired of him. Why don't we do it with humans, if we get tired of them? What a wonderful world, if we would meet only charming people, and if we simply could eliminate the boring and the troublesome. The real trouble, however, begins if we ourselves are assessed as being boring and troublesome. Nobody must have the right to decide who is allowed to live, and who has to die. A dying-in-dignity program will not relieve us from supporting our disabled and handicapped; but it may provide for each of us personally an emergency exit when we really need it for ourselves, and might spare us from choosing another, less decent one.
J. Joseph (2005) The 1942 'euthanasia' debate in the American Journal of Psychiatry. History of Psychiatry 16: 171-179.

A. Schmidtke, B. Weinacker, A. Apter et al (1999) Suicide rates in the world (update). Arch. Suicide Res. 5: 81-89.
7/06 <          MB (7/06)          < 11/06
freedom & society