1

Nelson

Montana Nelson

Professor Dr. Eric Moore

Philosophy 308- Intro to Ethics

3 October 2015

Empathy in Assisted Suicide

In “From Empathy to Assisted Dying: An Argument,” Phillip A. Berry argues that there is justification for supporting assisted dying (AD). His main discussion revolves around doctors, their patients, their responsibility to their patients, and the connection between all three. Berry supports Assisted Dying himself and discusses his point of view through his belief of maximizing a patient’s autonomy by doctors practicing active empathy. Empathy is a main topic in this article and a foundation for Berry’s argument. I will argue that Berry’s argument is valid but unsound, because assisted dying is immoral and there should not be justification or support from doctors.

I will start by explaining Berry’s argument and why it is valid. Valid meaning the conclusion follows from the premises. I will explain, in depth, the argument for support of assisted dying and the reasoning Berry gave to reach his premises and conclusion. Next I will argue why the argument is unsound. Unsound meaning at least one of the premises is false, and in this particular case two of the premises are false. I will give my own reasoning on why I disagree with doctors supporting (AD) and the immorality of the matter.

The argument:

  1. An effective doctor must empathize with a patient’s needs.
  2. If 1, then an effective doctor must empathize when a patient feels he needs assisted death.
  3. If an effective doctor must empathize when a patient feels he needs assisted death, then support for assisted dying is justified.
  4. Therefore, assisted dying is justified.

The argument is valid because it is in multiple modus pones format and the conclusion follows from the premises. I will explain the significant words and concepts so that the argument can be fully understood. Empathy is mentioned several times because it is a foundation for Berry’s argument and he defines it as, “... the ability to imagine what a patient is feeling so as to gain an insight into the nature of their suffering” (Berry, 5). Assisted dying the most important concept because it is topic of discussion but Berry never offers a definition. I believe he never details what (AD) means because he assumes that those who will read the article will have the basic knowledge that it is when patients approaching the end of life requests their doctors to end their lives, usually by means of taking away something that is keeping them alive. The first premise of the argument is based on Berry’s belief that a doctor can only be effective if he employs empathy and that Berry states “Only the patient can show how they feel, and only the empathetic doctor can accurately determine how their suffering may be assuaged” (Berry, 6). The second premise is also argued by the above quote but also from the fact that AD can assuage someone’s suffering. The third premise follows the same line of thinking if a doctor must empathize he must empathize with AD and if he must empathize with AD then there is a basis for support of AD. Berry understands that the majority of society does not believe in AD and argues that that is a main reason that doctors would not empathize with AD. Empathy is meant to maximize a patient’s autonomy and law not allowing AD is “For the patient… wrong, for society… right” (Berry, 6). Society’s disapproval, and the fact that AD is illegal are what Berry calls external restrictions that doctors face. There are also internal restrictions such as religious and philosophical concerns and guiding moral principles. Berry argues away internal restrictions by saying “The elevation of a doctor’s personal concerns or beliefs above those of the patients is usually prohibited. There are few instances in which it is acceptable to refuse treatment because one does not agree with it in principle” (Berry, 7). He does not say that AD is an instance that doctors can refuse on principle.

Berry makes a credible case for his side and details several strong points but his argument is still unsound. I object to premises 2 and 3. I agree that doctors must show empathy towards their patients in order to best help them and try to ease their suffering. I do not agree, as argued in premise 2, that this extends to empathizing with AD. AD is wrong based upon religious and moral grounds. On religious grounds murder and suicide are wrong because life is considered sacred and valuable. Assisted dying is another way of saying assisted suicide which is a more controversial term. AD is in fact a from of suicide and murder in one act because the patient is asking for their life to be ended and if the doctor were to agree he would be causing a life to end. It is moral because society has deemed murder and suicide to be illegal. These acts are illegal because life is valued highly and others should not be able to take a life nor should a person be able to give up on his life. Empathy can not be granted to an act that is so immoral even if both parties involved agree. The objection to premise 3 stems from the fact that empathy should not be granted to AD and if this is the case then there is no justification for support. Doctors are employed to follow guide lines in their practice of medicine and, “These guidelines are designed to protect and maximize patient safety, dignity, and autonomy…” (Berry, 6). If doctors were to support AD they would not be following the guidelines of their profession. Berry poses a question in his article, “So is it possible to be a good doctor and simultaneously disregard the ‘rules’? Possibly.” (Berry, 6). His answer, “Possibly”, is accurate to his question but it is also possible that if a doctor were to disregard the rules and participate in AD he would be charged with malpractice and possibly obtain a sentence in prison. This doctor’s life is then reduced to a life in prison and also possibly the loss of his profession. “Possibly”, is not a strong enough answer to support Berry’s argument.

Overall, Berry’s argument is understandable when the point of empathy to assuage suffering is made but justification of support for assisted dying is not a sound argument. Doctors need to employ empathy toward their patients but it would be immoral to empathize with assisted dying.

Works Cited

Berry, P. A. "From Empathy to Assisted Dying: An Argument." Clinical Ethics 8.1 (2013): 5-8. Web. 4 Dec. 2015.

Here is the link to the article: