FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: EUTHANASIA

1. What is Euthanasia?
2. What practices would be involved?
3. What is so-called passive Euthanasia?
4. Is this an important distinction?

What is Euthanasia?
Euthanasia is the intentional killing of a person, for compassionate motives, whether the killing is by a direct action, such as a lethal injection, or by failing to perform an action necessary to maintain life. For euthanasia to occur, there must be an intention to kill.

What practices would be involved?
The most common suggestion is for voluntary (or "active") euthanasia, where the person asks to be killed. Although those who advocate euthanasia do not like the use of the word "kill", it is the only accurate, non-emotional word to describe the reality, and it is the word which the law uses.

Assisted suicide is also now being proposed, where a person would be provided with the means of committing suicide, and would then himself or herself perform the act.

Less commonly discussed is involuntary euthanasia. This concerns the killing of persons who cannot express their wishes, because of immaturity (such as a newborn infant), mental retardation or coma. Here it is decided by others that that person would be better off dead.

What is so-called "passive euthanasia"?
Euthanasia is generally broken into two distinct terms when discussion on means takes place. The intent is that death takes place either by direct means or by indirect means i.e. omitting to carry out something.

The two terms are active euthanasia or passive euthanasia. In the case of active euthanasia some direct means are used to bring about death. With the term passive euthanasia there is much confusion and we need to explore what people understand by the terms "passive" euthanasia.

Should it be used when death is brought about by the withholding of treatment that is required to sustain life? This could be extensive treatment or as simple as the provision of the necessities of life i.e. food and/or drink. No, not at all. This is equivalent to "active" euthanasia, as death is the intended outcome.

The other context that "passive" euthanasia is used is when in the best interests of the patient as judged by either the patient and/or by the treating doctor that treatment is ceased as it is not benefiting the patient or is too demanding on the patient. Here there is no intention of taking life. Generally though this refers to all but life support treatments.

When life support treatment is placed in this context it can be viewed under three headings when the patient is already dying:

A decision is made not to commence treatment that will not benefit the patient.
A decision is made to discontinue treatment that is not benefiting the patient and possibly adding to the patient's problems.
When strong measures are used to control either distress and/or strong pain and in which the strong measures may shorten the patient's life.
In the position described in case (3) the patient's life may be shortened when measures are used to control pain then, from a humane standpoint, they should not be discontinued. Indeed treatment under these conditions is good medical practice and is fully supported under the law.

As can be seen, the term "passive" euthanasia is a misnomer, as any active action that is used to deliberately bring upon death is euthanasia. Any active action that is used to control patients comfort and/or pain and used with the intent not bring about death is not euthanasia, active or passive.

Is This an Important Distinction?
Yes it is an important distinction. For it hides what is really meant, active euthanasia under the guise of so called passive euthanasia. All efforts should be made to resist any push to allow so called passive euthanasia. This is generally called for by people who are outside their area of expertise and under the guise of compassion.