Moksha Pasricha
Remedial Blog post for quiz 10
Euthanasia and Alzheimer’s: What does ‘saving’ a loved one
really mean?
What to do when a loved
one is diagnosed with Alzheimer’s is a classic philosophical and ethical dilemma.
The prognosis of a person with Alzheimer’s, diagnosed after 65, is about four
to eight years. These four to eight years, are filled with loss in memory, loss
in sense of self, loss in perceptual and motor function, etc. A person with
Alzheimer’s – depending on the speed of advancement and age of onset – ultimately
leads to loss of mind and bodily functions.
Often times, and even with my own grandmother
who had Alzheimer’s, we hear family members and close relatives, talk about who
the person, who has now reduced to be just a patient of Alzheimer’s, once was.
My grandmother – was an ambassador’s wife, with pride as her highest
identifier. She was a woman of her word, of class and grace. 5 years into the
disease, she lived at her son’s house, was bathed and dressed by a nurse every
day and couldn’t even talk enough to ask for a glass of water.
My parents, me and my sister who assisted
the nurse in caring for my grandmother, loved my grandmother immensely.
However, she just wasn’t my grandmother anymore. My parents were often heard
reminiscing about old times, when my grandmother was the head of the household,
they often talked about how she would have hated this life of dependence and
helplessness. The love and attachment we all had for my grandmother, possibly
clouded our judgement in what she would have wanted, and my parents kept up the
extraordinary measures in keeping her alive. It was then arguably, selfish and inconsiderate
to put her through that sort of life.
In such situations, of Alzheimer’s
after the loss of what we posit to be the essence of a person, their memories
and experiences and their agency, when one is stripped of who they are and what
they can do – would anyone really want such a life? In March this year, the
supreme court passed a judgement which stated that “The right to die with
dignity is a fundamental right.” The supreme court has passed a judgement
legalizing passive euthanasia in India. Passive euthanasia takes place when
there is a withdrawal of medical care to hasten death. It is, therefore, a
death brought about by absence or omission of medical care. An important point to note, however, is that
there is a requirement of consent from the individual who wishes to undergo such
passive euthanasia and stop their medical treatment.
This clause in the judgement fails
to account for those who do not have the agency or mental ability to decide for
themselves. Understandably there is a need for checks and rules so as to manage
misuse of this law, but there is a necessity to take in to consideration the
need for this law in regard to persons who have any form of dementia. A person with Alzheimer’s is not considered
medically fit to take any such decision. Who must then take the onus, and be
allowed to take the onus, to decide the trajectory of such a person’s end of
life care?
In conclusion, while the law
allowing passive euthanasia is a step forward to helping the terminally ill,
there needs to be consideration for persons who have lost their agency and a system
needs to be formed to help relieve them. There needs to be discourse on how to
take steps in this direction while ensuring there is no misconduct, and no one
takes undue advantage of terminally ill patients. We also need to consider
whether we are truly saving people by increasing their life expectancy without
taking their quality of life in to consideration. We must decipher whether ‘Saving’
someone is just keeping them from physically not dying , relieving them from
pain, or allowing them to live happily?
References:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/patient-power/201509/my-dad-deserves-die
https://thewire.in/health/passive-euthanasia-now-a-legal-reality-in-india
Comments
Post a Comment