Legalise euthanasia to save terminally ill patients from agony and indignity

To legalise or not legalise euthanasia, commonly known as mercy killing, is often an emotive issue whenever and wherever it is raised because it evokes strong moral, ethical and religious issues. Euthanasia is the deliberate act of medically ending a terminally ill person’s life to relieve them from unbearable suffering before eventual death.  

In the countries where this practice is allowed, euthanasia is not a reckless process. It is done under strict medical and legal frameworks. The patient must have an irreversible medical condition, with no hope of recovery. Despite medical treatment, the pain should be unbearable and consistent. The patient must voluntarily request euthanasia without any external pressure or in cases they are incapacitated, a previously written legal directive or consent from close family members is required.

Additionally, independent medical professionals have to thoroughly assess the patient’s condition and approve euthanasia based on strict guidelines.

There are several arguments for mercy killing. The most prominent one is to relieve suffering when it is clearly evident that the suffering will result in death. Terminal illnesses such as advanced cancer, late stage organ failure dementia, liver cirrhosis, and advanced stage of HIV/Aids often subject patients to excruciating pain. Euthanasia provides alternative to this prolonged suffering.

Many terminal illnesses reduce patients to a state where they can no longer perform basic functions like visiting lavatories, clothing, eating or even recognising loved ones. Some remain dependent on machines for survival for a long time at high cost. Euthanasia provides one with the opportunity to exit the world in own terms and to die in dignity as well as save your family from further financial loss.

Many patients who suffer from terminal illnesses resist going to hospital since they no longer see hope in life. In fact, many of them pray that they should die to avoid further pain. Legalising euthanasia will give such patients an opportunity to end their lives at will rather than rely on eventual fate when their conditions have worsened.

Even for concerned families, relatives and friends, euthanasia provides some psychological and emotional relief. Watching a loved one suffer from terminal illness can be very devastating, especially when you well know that the suffering will end in death. The psychological toll of witnessing constant pain, helplessness and slow decline in health can cause immense distress. Euthanasia, in such cases, can serve as a humane way to bring closure and peace to both the patient and their loved ones.

Medical treatment for terminal illnesses is costly. Many Kenyan families struggle to afford prolonged hospital stays, medications and specialised care of terminally ill patients. There are many families that have exhausted all their life savings to cater for the medical needs of terminally ill patients.

Some even sell their land and end up destitute trying to save the lives of advanced age patients. After the inevitable death, they are left impoverished and financially ruined. They cannot cater, for instance, for school fees for younger members of the family or even their healthcare

Euthanasia has worked perfectly well in countries where it is allowed. For instance in the Netherlands and Belgium, it is allowed for the terminally ill who experience unbearable suffering provided they give informed consent. This is the same case in Canada, Switzerland Colombia, Spain, Germany, and many other countries.

These are some of the countries with affordable and advanced medical facilities but they have realised that despite the advancement, palliative care cannot always alleviate the agony and indignity that terminally ill patients endure. Compare this with Kenya, where most medical facilities themselves are terminally ill and cannot therefore cater adequately for the needs of terminally ill patients.

In Africa, there is relatively progressive stance on end of life issues. In South Africa, courts have allowed assisted dying in individual cases though the law legalising it is not in place yet. There are efforts to legalise it following recent parliamentary debates.

For euthanasia to be allowed in Kenya, several laws should be amended, specifically Section 226 of The Penal Code (Cap 63). This section criminalises aiding or abetting suicide. The Constitution in article 26 (1-3) guarantees the right to life. It says that life begins at conception but does not explicitly address end-of-life rights. This is subject to legal interpretation or amendment to recognise the right to die with dignity under specific medical conditions. Section 78 of the Health Act, 2017 establishes palliative care to terminally ill patients.

Opposition to euthanasia is usually based on ethical, religious, legal and practical concerns. Religious groups emphasise the sanctity of life, arguing only God gives and takes life. Kenyan medics, like all other doctors elsewhere, have taken Hippocratic Oath. This oath emphasises the need for doctors to save lives but do no harm.

Critics say there are risks of abuse and exploitation if mercy killing is allowed. They argue that some terminally ill individuals might be pressured to end their lives for selfish reasons such as inheritance or the burden of care.

There is also concern of potential misdiagnosis. This is when some patients are diagnosed as terminally ill but there is possibility of recovery since they suffer from other illnesses.

While these are equally valid concerns, they do not overshadow the need for legalisation of euthanasia. Most of these concerns are adequately addressed by law and medical procedures in countries where euthanasia is legal.