The original publication is available at http://www.samj.org.zaCITATION: Moodley, K. 2000. Physician-assisted suicide: An oxymoron? South African Medical Journal, 90(7):657.No abstract availablePublisher’s versio

Moodley, Keymanthri

Stellenbosch University SUNScholar Repository

~ BRIEWEill-defined limitations makes the decision; in the second anethics committee makes the decision. These models are, as hesl1ggests, paternalistic, and within this framework paternalismseems to be the ultimate evil.Even without their inherent logical contradictions theses,lfeguards are practically unworkable. in practice all they willdo is interpose a bureaucratic delay in the decision-makingprocess, which is in itself not a bad thing, as sober reflection isa good idea when faced with a decision of this enormity. Bothmodels would be totally unworkable if they include input fromthose opposed to killing. As a result the only people involvedin either option will be either neutral to the idea or, more likely,promoters of it. It is highly unlikely that, for instance, Doctorsfor Life will be invited to send a representative to these ethicscommittees.There is absolutely no reason why only physicians should belegally empowered to kill as the skills required are not great.There is every reason why as doctors we should not; for asLandman states, generally we are held in high esteem and weare usually trusted in South Africa. One of the main reasons forthis is eloquently stated by the Editor' - every death is for us aloss and a cause for reflection. Patients should know that theycan rely on us literally to fight for their lives. This proposedlegislation and our participation has the potential to destroythat trust. We should confine ourselves to alleviating sufferingas no illness should be intractable or unbearable with sufficientcare and effort. For a physician to suggest death as a cure isnihilistic and the ultimate admission of incompetence. Weshould be concentrating our efforts in the areas of palliativeand hospice care, and not seeking cheap and nasty alternatives.As Professor Landman suggests, this debate should becivilised, but it should also be passionate because it strikes atthe heart of who we are as a caring profession and what sort ofsociety we want to live in. I can only agree with the Editor thatPAS and VAE are inappropriate responses."WAHarnptonKingsway HospitalAmanzimtotiKwaZlllll-NatalI. Landman WA Legalising assistance with dying in South Africa. 5 Air Med J2000; 90, 11:>-116.2. Ncayiyna DJ- Physician-assisted suicide - an oxymoron? (Editor's Choice). 5 Afr Med / 2000;90: 75.PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE - ANOXYMORON?To the Editor: I read, with agreement, your comments onphysician-assisted suicide (PAS) and voluntary activeeuthanasia (VAE).' However, your concluding statement lackedthE~ lucidity of thought and argument that flowed through youre3I:lier observations and comments.Towhere in his essay does Landman' suggest that PASand/ or VAE ought to be applied as appropriate responses toSouth Africa's 'eminently preventable and curable conditions. .. and diseases of social and economic deprivation andneglect. . .'. Surely, the irrational association with which youconclude is erroneous, an unintended slip of the pen based ona misunderstanding of Landman's article - or is it not?If your comment was indeed carefully considered, then itmust have been calculated to dismiss the relevance of First-World 'post-modem concepts' like PAS and VAE to the'majority of South Africans', who succumb to predominantlyThird-World (unarguably) disease patterns.I am perturbed to find the Editor of the official scientificjournal of the South African medical profession, which consistsof 'some of the finest and best-trained doctors in the world','propounding the sinister propaganda that we revere onlyintellectual discussion that is relevant to the 'majority of SouthAfricans'!Sir, as earthlings now living on an ever smaller rock in thisinformation age, the local medical profession does, should, andwill continue to immerse itself freely in both First- and Third-World intellectual medical debate, conjecture and practice. Thisis unavoidable, given the dual economic and social nature ofthe South Africa in which we coexist, and our irrevocablecommitment to increasing the First-World component of ourcountry, not the other way around!Furthermore, while postmodern concepts have their originsin the eurocentric First World, they are definitely notinapplicable to Third-World communities. Are concepts such assubjectivity, particularity and the importance of context notrelevant to the practice of postmodern medicine everywhere inthe world?Finally, the supreme authority in the hard-fought-fordemocratic South Africa is the Constitution, which confersrights, duties and obligations on all South Africans, not just themajority! Consequently, First-World medicine has a right tocoexist with Third-World medicine in democratic South Africa.Most of us choose to remain here and spend every workingday progressing towards the time when we can talk simply ofmedicine, which is non-racial and all-inclusive.Keymanthri MoodleyCommunity Health Services Organisation andDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary CareUniversity of StellenboschTygerberg, W Cape1. Ncayiyana DJ. Physician-asSisted suicide - an oxymoron? 5 Aft Med J2(X)(); 90: 75.2. Landman WA. Legalising assistance with dying in South Africa. 5 Afr Mf'd J2000; 90: 113-116.3. Ncayiyana DJ. South Africa's finest and best (Editorial). 5 Afr Ml'd J2000; 90: 73.

Physician-assisted suicide : an oxymoron?

http://scholar.sun.ac.za/bitstream/10019.1/7183/1/moodley_physician_2000.pdf

Physician-assisted suicide : an oxymoron?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Stellenbosch University SUNScholar Repository