The Perception of Sas Shs Students in the Impact of Euthanasia in the Residents of Tanza, Cavite

...

Euthanasia in the Philippines

Euthanasia is a word coined from Greek in the 17th century meaning “well death”. Euthanasia, then, is inducing the painless death of a person who is severely debilitated for reasons assumed to be merciful, either through voluntary, nonvoluntary, involuntary means (Hendin, 2004). Voluntary euthanasia involves the consent of the patient to perform the treatment. Nonvoluntary euthanasia is conducted when the permission of the patient is unavailable maybe because of state of coma, or instances when babies are born with significant birth defects. Involuntary euthanasia is seldom practiced for it is performed against the will of the patient. All these types of euthanasia applies methods such as removing the life-supporting devices, injection of drugs, inhalation of carbon monoxide or helium, dehydration, and intake of suicide pills. However, moral and ethical methods, such as voluntary euthanasia, and methods not involving painful outcomes are the ones commonly practiced. These methods are done to patients who are terminally-ill; that is patients who have impossible chance of recovering from the disease, or if ever cured, does not function in good health and will be under vegetative state.

In the Philippines, euthanasia is not legal for the reason of the predominance of the religious communities which hinders the ratification of the Euthanasia Bill. Also, the majority of the Filipinos value the Christian doctrine as the foundation of their conviction. However, it is still practiced by some, mostly are from the poor segment of the country. They have no other choice but to use euthanasia to stop the patient from suffering, and to avoid expenses on medical treatments. Additionally, medical technologies and professionals here in the Philippines are not entirely advanced. Common Filipino physicians may have inadequate skills to efficiently cure complicated diseases. If medications reach to the point of life-or-death matter, operations, at times, result to failure, making all treatments paid by the relatives of the patient result in vain.. Likewise, medical technologies are not completely available to cure various diseases; if ever it is, it will cost a tremendous price.

The stand of the Church that euthanasia is still immoral and unethical is the prime reason of the unacceptability of this. According to the most recent version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2003), “All forms of suicide and euthanasia remain strictly prohibited… Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law… Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.” And according to Pope John Paul II, “Euthanasia must not be called false mercy, and indeed a disturbing perversion of mercy. True compassion leads to sharing another’s pain. It does not kill the person whose suffering we cannot bear.” Also, some people believe that compassion is no guarantee against doing harm. A physician who does not know how to relieve a patient’s suffering may compassionately, but inappropriately, agree to end the patient’s life. Patient autonomy is just an illusion when physicians are not trained to assess and treat patient suffering. The less they know how to treat these suffering, the more they favor assisted suicide or euthanasia; and the more frequent they do it, the more they prescribe it. Until, then, the only choices left for patients become continued agony or a hastened death. A part of the Hippocratic Oath states that physicians must value the life of their patient and never suggest anyone a way towards suicide. Under the Philippine Constitution of 1987 (Article II, Section 11), the State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights. Therefore, euthanasia contradicts both the Hippocratic Oath and the Philippine Constitution.

In contrast, Euthanasia gives terminally-ill patients a medical treatment of choosing between a prolonged life of agonizing pain or a peaceful death. It is not a compulsory treatment, in which every patient who has little or no chance of recovering will have to choose euthanasia. Euthanasia is granted with the will of the patient or the surrogate of the patient and it is only upon their request that physicians perform it. The legalization of euthanasia does not aspire to violate the ethical and moral code, but rather just provide an option to those who need it. For example, to consider that financial cost of keeping a person alive being dependent on a life-support machine is very enormous, and that 80% of the Filipinos live in poverty, how can the family afford keeping the patient on life support, knowing that the patient will be in vegetative state, no matter how he was kept alive? With the statistics that only 2 out of 10 terminally-ill patients survives because of proper medication, it is then illogical to hope for the patient with no enough money for medication to recover from severe diseases; this then results to euthanasia. And since euthanasia takes place anyway, even without the ratification of the bill, it is better to legalize it so that it will be practiced under careful guidance, doctors will have to report these activities, and so that physicians will not have any responsibility over the death of the patient.

Euthanasia, even though contradicted by religious communities, still has to be legalized for the benefit of the incurable and hopeless patients, including their relatives. This legalization will improve further the system of planning, performing, and recording of euthanasia, since it takes place inevitably. Likely, the issue regarding the ratification of the Euthanasia Bill of the Philippines is still on its formative period, in which there is no consistency whether where the topic will go further in the future. With both sides reflected in the preceding paragraphs, it is evident that, it could become a loud argument, once again, especially between the State and the Church. (https://jirocadungon.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/euthanasia-in-the-philippines/)

Mercy killing: yes, no, and why?

Mercy killing or euthanasia was a favorite topic of debate in Philippine law schools during the last fifty years or so. Now that a bill is with the Senate, among many questions Filipinos wish to be answered to have an in-depth understanding of the subject that will enable them to make an informed yes or no and why in case of renewed debates, survey or referendum, are: What is euthanasia or mercy killing ? What is the difference between voluntary and involuntary mercy killing ? What is a “living will”? May human life be shortened legally? Should one kill another in mercy, or is life, however hard too dear to lose? What is the rule in our jurisdiction on mercy