Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide: do the moral arguments differ?
A discussion paper from the BMA’s Medical Ethics Department
April 1998
Summary
Proponents of euthanasia and assisted suicide tend to argue their position on fundamentally similar grounds of self determination (autonomy) and a medical duty to relieve or curtail suffering (beneficence). Additionally they may cite the argument that if able-bodied citizens can legally commit suicide, severely disabled people may be unfairly deprived of that option. In many cases, little practical distinction can be made between euthanasia and assisted suicide - particularly if patients are too disabled to act themselves. Doctors, however, appear to perceive a moral difference and apparently consider that less responsibility or culpability attaches to the act of participating in another person's suicide.
The BMA has argued that the claimed "benefits" of permitting euthanasia may be more theoretical than real and applicable only for a minority whereas the risks are likely to be borne by an unheard majority. Similar arguments about the potential for abuse can be made with regard to assisted suicide but may be thought to carry less weight in practical terms.
BMA members and other people with an interest in this subject may wish to send enquiries to the Medical Ethics Department, British Medical Association, BMA House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JP. Tel: 0171 383 6286. E-mail here: ethics@bma.org.uk