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.
1
Nelson
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
2
Nelson
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
3
Nelson
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
4
Nelson
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:
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=d95d86e13a83-4a2f-849b-1d8655268b33%40sessionmgr198&vid=4&hid=106
5