Library Index :: Death and Dying Reference :: Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide - Background, Suicide, The Right To Die, The Right To Life, Physician-assisted Suicide

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide - Physician-assisted Suicide

Dr. Quill: A Model Case …

A well-publicized case of physician-assisted suicide in 1991 continues to be a major topic of discussion among those in the medical, bioethical, and legal professions. Dr. Timothy Quill, in "Death and Dignity—A Case of Individualized Decision-Making" (New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 324, no. 10, March 7, 1991), wrote about helping a patient identified as Diane commit suicide. Dr. Quill, who had known Diane for eight years, had seen her battle and overcome alcoholism and depression. Eventually Diane was diagnosed with an acute form of leukemia. She was very sure not only that she would die during treatment, but also that she would suffer unbearably while undergoing chemotherapy (drug treatment to fight cancer). Diane decided that she would rather end her life than lose control over her body. Dr. Quill prescribed barbiturates that Diane subsequently used to kill herself.

Through an anonymous tip, authorities identified the real "Diane" whom Dr. Quill had helped to commit suicide.

TABLE 6.5
Patients' attitudes toward and experiences with euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS), 20021

Study Publication date Type of survey Response rate Types of patients surveyed Personally considered euthanasia or PAS Factors associated with considering euthanasia or PAS Factors not associated with considering euthanasia or PAS
Emanuel et al5 1996 Telephone 61 155 New England patients with cancer 27.3 Depressive symptoms
Poor physical functioning
Less religious
Higher incomes
Pain
Breitbart et al6 1996 Mail NA 378 New York City patients with human immunodeficiency virus 552 Depression
Hopelessness
Fewer social supports
Pain
Pain intensity
Pain-related functional impairment
Ganzini et al7 1998 In-person interview 71 140 Oregon patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis 563 Male
More education
Hopelessness
Less religious
Depression
Pain
Perceived effect on family
Use of hospice
Emanuel et al8 2000 In-person interview 87.4 988 US terminally ill patients 10.54 Lack of appreciation
Depressive symptoms
Care needs
Pain
1Data are given as percentages unless otherwise indicated. NA indicates not available.
2The question asked: "Would you consider physician-assisted suicide if it were legal?"
3The yes or no question stated: "Under some circumstances I would consider taking a prescription for a medicine whose sole purpose was to end my life."
4The question asked: "Have you seriously thought about taking your life or asking your doctor to end your life?"
5Emanuel EJ, Fairclough DL, Daniels ER, Clarridge BR. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: attitudes and experiences of oncology patients, oncologists, and the public. Lancet. 1996;347:1805-1810.
6Breitbart W, Rosenfeld BD, Passik SD. Interest in physician-assisted suicide among ambulatory HIV-infected patients. Am J Psychiatry. 1996;153:238-242.
7Ganzini L, Johnston WS, McFarland BH, Tolle SW, Lee MA. Attitudes of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and their caregivers toward assisted suicide. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:967-973.
8Emanuel EJ, Fairclough DL, Emanuel LL. Attitudes and desires related to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide among terminally ill patients. JAMA. 2000;284:2460-2468.
SOURCE: Ezekiel J. Emanuel, "Table 5. Patients' Attitudes toward and Experiences with Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS)," in "Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Review of the Empirical Data from the United States," Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 162, no. 2, January 28, 2002

As a result, the case was brought to a grand jury. Asked to decide whether Dr. Quill's action constituted a crime, the grand jury declined to recommend an indictment. Meanwhile, the New York State Department of Health's Board for Professional Misconduct considered his actions "legal and ethically appropriate."

Many observers were not surprised at the outcome of the grand jury proceedings. They cited growing public concern about how easily patients could lose control over end-of-life decisions. Some bioethicists thought that Dr. Quill's handling of Diane's case would make a suitable model for how physician-assisted suicides should be practiced. Many of Dr. Quill's colleagues lauded his act, some claiming that it was generally known that some doctors do assist in suicides. They were glad that, because of Dr. Quill's confession, the practice was now in the open.

… Or a Case of Misguided Judgment?

Dr. Herbert Hendin, a psychiatrist and psychologist as well as a world-renowned authority on suicide, claimed that "the doctor assisting a suicide is not simply a dispassionate observer responding to the patient's needs and wishes." In Seduced by Death: Doctors, Patients, and the Dutch Cure (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1997), Dr. Hendin noted that Dr. Quill's account of Diane's suicide belied his supposedly disinterested, albeit compassionate, response to his patient's request. Dr. Hendin believed "emotional involvement" on Dr. Quill's part "[had] clouded his judgment."

When Diane decided to refuse the treatment recommended by her oncologist (cancer specialist), Dr. Quill, instead of exploring with the patient the reason for her seemingly hasty decision, told his readers, "Together we lamented her tragedy and the unfairness of life." Dr. Hendin believed Diane must have been suffering from depression. Once she had told Dr. Quill of her decision to end her life, she calmed down. Dr. Hendin explained that suicidal people become less depressed after their decision: "Coping with the uncertainties of life and death is what agitates and depresses them."

Dr. Hendin believed that Dr. Quill's failure to challenge Diane's presumption that the cancer treatment would fail opened the door to her next decision—to commit suicide with Dr. Quill's help. Although Dr. Quill told Diane that he could not assist in her suicide, Dr. Hendin claimed in his article that Dr. Quill "appears to have conveyed

TABLE 6.6
Provisions of Oregon's Death with Dignity Act

What the law does do
The Death with Dignity law allows Oregon residents to obtain medication from their physicians after two explicit oral requests and a written request have been made.
Key facts
• At least two doctors must concur on diagnosis, prognosis and the patient's capability;
• The patient must provide a written request to their physician witnessed by two individuals who are not family members or primary caregivers;
• The patient must ultimately administer the prescription him/herself.
What the law doesn't do
• Allow non-Oregonians to use the law;
• Allow anyone other than the patient to make the request;
• Allow euthanasia. The law explicitly prohibits euthanasia, which is typically defined as having someone other than the patient administer a life-ending medication.
SOURCE: Adapted from "Death with Dignity Primer," Death with Dignity National Center [Online] http://www.deathwithdignity.org/law/dwdprimer.asp [accessed April 18, 2004]

to her … that her request 'made perfect sense'," and he subsequently referred her to the Hemlock Society. Founded in 1980, the Hemlock Society advocates for choice and dignity at the end of life and the legal availability of the means to hasten death. Dr. Hendin felt it probably confused the patient to hear Dr. Quill saying that he was "leav[ing] the door open for her to change her mind," while he simultaneously directed her to a place that could help her fulfill her wish of death. "Quill once again powerfully shaped the clinical interaction between himself and his patient," wrote Dr. Hendin.

Dr. Hendin pointed out that, at her last meeting with Dr. Quill, Diane promised she would reunite with the doctor "in the future at her favorite spot on the edge of Lake Geneva, with dragons swimming in the sunset." According to Dr. Hendin, "death as a metaphor for reunion in a magical netherworld is a common fantasy among suicidal people. That both doctor and patient shared it suggests that neither really came to grips with the fact of death."

Dr. Quill, an active advocate of the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, joined two other physicians and three patients in 1994 to sue the New York State Attorney General for violating the Fourteenth Amendment by banning physician-assisted suicide. The Supreme Court ruled on this case in June 1997, reversing an earlier ruling made by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Supreme Court distinguished between withdrawing life-sustaining treatment and physician-assisted suicide, and differentiated between physician actions taken to relieve pain and suffering and those intended to hasten death.

User Comments Add a comment…