I would choose my death if I were in agony in the last stage
of an illness like cancer. Of course, I want to live longer, but
my heavy pain is not only mine but also my family's. A lot of
patients will not wish their families' suffering to be caused
from having to look after them. There are many issues concerning
mercy killing such as the relationship between doctors and
patients' families, the background of defining mercy killing, and
the law prohibiting mercy killing. Mercy killing should be
permitted under the law as soon as possible because some doctors
have already been punished as murderers even though the act of
killing patients is performed out of kindness.
As the first issue concerning mercy killing, there is the
relationship between a doctor and a patient's family. Francis
Bacon (1561~1626) who was an English philosopher said, "A doctor
has two duties consisting of restoring a patient's health and
reducing a patient's suffering," and used the term "euthanasia."
This term means a beautiful, favorable and peaceful death, so it
sounds soft and gentle. On the other hand, in the sixteenth
century, suicide before a doctor and a priest admit a patient's
death was defined as a crime. In the end, the relationship
between a doctor and a patient's family was very complex and
important. In Japan, though Ougai Mori first referred to mercy
killing in The Ship Takase, he only shows the concept of
mercy killing in Europe without referring to the right or wrong
of mercy killing.
As the second issue, you should know what things bring
doctors, patients and patients' families to decide on mercy
killing. Mercy killing is related to a human's life and to the
concept of death, so it has been regarded as a very difficult
problem for a long time. However, these days, the way of thinking
toward the last stage of illness is changing; people have come to
think, "The dying patient doesn't need to have his or her life
extended." I agree with this idea because it is more important to
reduce a patient's suffering and make the rest of his or her life
happy than to extend his or her life. As a result, when we choose
making patients' remaining lives happy rather than extending
their lives, mercy killing becomes one of the choices before us.
For example, if you chose making your seriously ill mother's
remaining life happy, you should select her peaceful death when
she begs for her quiet death free from any pain. It is an unhappy
example, but you should choose her death if you love her. After
all, that you want to keep your mother alive as long as possible
is no more than your selfish attitude.
Some people say, "There is a hope if one keeps his or her life
going," but you should know there is a case where living itself
is torture. In short, we have the right of deciding whether we
should live or die, and mercy killing is also one of the ways to
carry out our decision. Governments should not prohibit mercy
killing. That we give quiet death to a person who holds
unbearable suffering and begs for his or her peaceful death is
also one form of mercy.
Today, there are laws prohibiting mercy killing in many
countries. I'll tell you how unreasonable these are. In fact,
from a different angle, we can simply say mercy killing is
overlooked, but what doctors declare in their experience about
mercy killing is no good. For example, when an American doctor
spoke about the mercy killing he performed, he was accused of
murder. In a word, the laws prohibiting mercy killing are quite
obscure and unreasonable. Certainly, there are some countries
that try to revise the laws, like the U.S.A., England and
Netherlands, however, in Germany, Adolph Hitler (1889~1945)
expanded the force of the law from permitting mercy killing to
exterminating the socially weak. Mercy killing is related to the
human's life, so it is difficult to make a clear border. Though
Hitler is an extreme example, we should also learn that the law
permitting mercy killing must be enacted carefully.
Also, there are some problems like performing mercy killing on
unconscious patients. Is it reasonable that a patient's family
decides a patient's death? No, it's not. Then it becomes
important that the law makes the family's rights clear because it
is possible for the family to take advantage of mercy killing for
their own profit. One of the most useful ways to solve these
problems is a living will. It dates from 1967 in the U.S.A. In
Japan, it began in 1976, too, but most people don't know about
it. It suggests that we should make our will clear when we still
maintain our spirit and understanding. In this way, we can show
our will in advance, so the trouble of mercy killing will be
reduced. We should try to know more about the living will system,
and the government should put us under obligation to show our
will in advance.
In conclusion, the law must permit mercy killing distinctly.
Also, a living will should be under obligation. Today, we have
much opportunity to think about the concepts of death or life
through the issues of braindeath, human clones, AIDS, abortion
and suicide, so we should think about mercy killing, too. It is
human being's final right to decide our own death.
by Munekatsu Kudo
