[Interview] "The Right to Die with Dignity for Patients with No Possibility of Recovery" [What Kind of Death]

⑤Support for Introducing Assisted Dignified Death
Need to Respect Final Right to Self-Determination
‘Excessive Concern’ Over Life Disregard and Social Homicide

Experts who support the introduction of assisted dignified death cite the right of patients with no chance of recovery to die with dignity and their right to self-determination as the main grounds. They believe that concerns raised by some about social homicide and the spread of a life-disregarding culture can be addressed through the establishment of institutional safeguards.

Attorney Kim Jaeryeon. [Photo by Law Firm On·Sesang]

◆Determining Eligibility Based on ‘Treatability’

Attorney Kim Jaeryeon (Standing Director of Good Law Makers and Constitutional Petition Representative) said in an interview with Asia Economy on the 27th, "The essence of dignified death that our society needs to discuss is respecting the right of patients suffering from physical and mental illnesses that are untreatable by modern medicine to end their dignified lives by themselves."

Attorney Kim argued that the eligibility for assisted dignified death should be judged based on whether treatment is possible. He explained, "There are cases where patients survive for more than six months even after life support devices are removed following a prognosis of limited life expectancy. Therefore, it seems more important to consider whether treatment is possible rather than whether death is imminent."

He drew a line against concerns that the introduction of assisted dignified death would lead to a widespread life-disregarding culture. Attorney Kim stated, "Meaningful statistics showing the spread of a life-disregarding culture in countries where assisted dignified death has been legalized have not been found. When individuals feel it is difficult to maintain a dignified life any longer, it is appropriate for the state or community to respect their right to make decisions about their own lives."

However, he emphasized that measures must be put in place to prevent social homicide caused by economic reasons or other factors. Attorney Kim said, "Decisions on assisted dignified death made considering the hardships of families due to long-term illness or economic costs must be prevented. Expanding hospice care and palliative care and providing budget support must be carried out simultaneously. The state must also have a duty of care to verify that the decision is truly made because the individual does not want their dignity to be further violated. As modern medicine advances, medical judgments about whether the situation is untreatable must also continue to evolve."

Professor Yoon Young-ho, Department of Family Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital. [Photo by Yoon Young-ho]

◆Hospice Care Expansion Must Accompany

Professor Yoon Young-ho of the Department of Family Medicine at Seoul National University Hospital also holds the view that assisted dignified death should not be restricted for patients with no chance of cure. Professor Yoon pointed out, "A liberal democracy must respect the voluntary, rational, and sincere choices made by patients for whom medical treatment is unlikely to be effective. Forcing terminal patients to endure an unsolvable painful situation is akin to torture."

Professor Yoon stressed that the expansion of hospice care is not an alternative to assisted dignified death but a system that must naturally accompany it. He said, "Many, including myself, have worked on legislation to institutionalize hospice care, but it has remained stagnant for decades. Currently, only 25% of terminal cancer patients and 5-6% of the entire population can access hospice care. In countries where assisted dignified death is permitted, over 70% of those who receive it have experience with hospice care. This is why hospice care expansion must accompany assisted dignified death, not serve as an alternative."

Professor Yoon added, "We need to see how much effort religious and medical communities, which realistically oppose assisted dignified death, are making to expand hospice care. It is irresponsible to merely say it is necessary as if it concerns others. With about 80% of the public in favor, ignoring practical issues and failing to make efforts to resolve them is problematic."

Professor Yoon also suggested that legislation on assisted dignified death should explicitly protect and allow doctors to choose whether to participate. He said, "Legal immunity from civil and criminal liability for doctors is necessary. This is the case in other countries that permit assisted dignified death. Doctors who refuse to assist in dignified death due to personal beliefs should not be forced. There should also be legal measures to prevent medical institutions from compelling doctors to participate."