Obeying the Hippocratic Oath is not as straightforward

THE EDITOR, Madam:

Your November 1 article by Mr David Salmon titled ‘Death Wish’ addressed some important issues in advance of the ‘World Right to Die’ Day on November 2. While it addressed the matters of dying in severe pain, Jamaica’s lack of an adequate palliative care service throughout the country, individual choice, factors such as depression, a doctor’s aid in dying and the possible ‘betrayal of the Hippocratic Oath’, I would like to add that obeying the Hippocratic Oath is not as straightforward as many would think.

At its simplest, the Hippocratic Oath behoves a doctor to ‘at least do no harm’. The Oath also requires doctors to relieve suffering. So while on one hand, prescribing or administering a chemical that causes death in a terminally ill patient could be conceived as ‘doing harm’ (so-called ‘mercy killing’), on the other hand, seeing a patient suffering in severe intractable pain and doing nothing to relieve that suffering has been determined in many bioethical circles as ‘doing harm’.

Harm may be caused by a specific action as well as by inaction! Hence the imperative that each society has to debate what is permissible within its jurisdiction.

Whatever the outcome of such discussions, they ought to occur in any society that is genuinely concerned about human suffering and seeks to treat people humanely.

DR DERRICK AARONS

Consultant Bioethicis