|
28th April 2008
Opponents of Physician Assisted Dying (PAD) often refer to the Hippocratic Oath and “do no harm” as defences against PAD. Doing so is highly misleading and here’s why.
The Hippocratic Oath, attributed to Hippocrates (C460-370BC), swears allegiance to Ancient Greek Gods, encourages paternalism and misogyny by referring only to male doctors, requires practitioners to teach the next generation of doctors without payment, and forbids surgery.
For obvious reasons, medical schools don’t use the Hippocratic Oath. Among medical schools where oaths are used—and there are many modern forms of oath—only 14% of oaths contain a statement prohibiting euthanasia.1
---
Nor is “doing no harm” always achievable.
Firstly, many medical procedures and treatments have side effects, some of them quite serious. A doctor must weigh up benefits versus harms before advising on courses of action. Often, it is simply not possible to “do no harm”.
Secondly, who is it who decides which is a greater benefit or harm? In Victoria, doctors are expert advisors and caregivers, but don’t make binding decisions on behalf of their patients. The patient ultimately makes the final decision as to which treatment, or no treatment, is a greater benefit and a lesser harm. Well-informed patient autonomy is a respected tenet of modern medicine.
A terminally ill patient with intolerable suffering may decide for themselves, on the basis of consultation and advice, that a peaceful death is a far lesser harm than being forced to endure unrelievable suffering—as they are currently required to do, which gives rise to violent suicides (see Bulletin 7).
------
1Orr, RD, Pang, N, Pellegrino, ED and Siegler, M (1997), Use of the Hippocratic Oath, Journal of Clinical Ethics, Vol 8 (4): 377-388.
|
bulletin > 8 misinformation about the hippocratic oath