Abstract
Opponents of legalising assisted dying often make the Argument from Sufficient Palliation. On the premise that advances in palliative treatment have made it possible to free terminal patients from pain and distress, the argument concludes that assisted dying is unnecessary. I assert that this argument fails. Firstly, the premise is false because patients respond differently to analgesics and many continue to experience intractable pain even on medication. Secondly, the premise fails to acknowledge the extreme discomfort (for many patients) of the side effects of palliative treatment. Thirdly, the conclusion would only follow from the premise if the overwhelming majority of patients had access to palliative treatment, and this is patently not the case. Finally, the argument completely overlooks the enormous distress experienced by terminal patients, arising from perceived loss of dignity and concerns about being a burden to others.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
