Content Warning: This story discusses the topic of suicide.
Transparency Item: The Perspectives section of the Graphic is comprised of articles based on opinion. This is the opinion and perspective of the writer.
The long, almond-shaped pod looks like something straight out of a science fiction show like “Love, Death & Robots,” but its futuristic exterior shouldn’t fool anyone. The use of technology to facilitate suicide erodes basic human morality and relays a concerning message about the value of human life.
The machine is called the “Sarco pod,” though the press has referred to it as the “suicide pod,” “do-it-yourself death pod” and “gas chamber.”
Former Australian medical doctor Philip Nitschke, also nicknamed “Doctor Death” by the press, is the Sarco pod’s creator.
Nitschke wanted to support the wishes of his patients with terminal illnesses, but his discomfort with carrying out the injection led him to creating the 3D-printed Sarco machine, according to an MIT technology review.
The Sarco pod provides a low oxygen and low carbon dioxide death, which can be “intoxicating” with dizziness and a feeling of being high, according to Sarco.
Unsurprisingly, this device has sparked outrage and has been unsettling for many. The ethics of euthanasia have long been debated, but with the Sarco pod taking away the need for a physician, or as Nitschke terms it — “demedicalization” — the end-of-life process is transferred directly to the hands of the user.
When it comes to the pain and quality of life due to a terminal illness, the option depends on the individual, and their decision should be respected, as no one else can know exactly how it feels to be in their position.
However, the aim of the Sarco pod isn’t exclusively for terminally ill patients. Nitschke believes in the right to “die with dignity,” such as with older adults who are not sick now but want to make plans in anticipation for their death, according to a HuffPost article written by Nitschke himself.
Though the intention is to give people a sense of agency over their time and method of death, according to the MIT technology review, the underlying message attached to this concept is troubling.
Rather than the Sarco pod being up for sale, the 3D blueprints of the device are planned to be distributed for adults over 50 while working with assisted suicide clinics in Switzerland, according to Euronews.
Aside from the numerous safety concerns that come to mind upon hearing about this method of “distribution,” there is an ethical problem with these plans that people must also consider.
Regardless of age, there are some things that remain true. One is that hardships will always be a part of life. Another is that people’s lives are always valuable.
Providing access to the device for older adults essentially comes with the message that their lives are nearing the end, and at that age, it is then OK to terminate their lives at any time. Why should suicide prevention be any less enforced for adults than the youth?
Loneliness is the highest reason for suicidal behavior in seniors, according to the National Council on Aging (NCOA). Other reasons include grief from the death of loved ones and financial troubles.
While modern medicine can only go so far in mitigating certain physical illnesses, there are various things that can be done for the reasons listed above. There are and must be better options to explore rather than offering an early death bed.
Certainly, it is easier said than done to enact this type of change, but that is why the concept of the Sarco pod is also troubling. It seems too simple of a solution where it is easier to end life than sustain it. Isn’t human life as a whole and for loved ones something worth working for?
Nitschke himself said he felt uncomfortable directly administering the lethal injection to patients. In creating the Sarco pod, he distances physicians from the process, potentially saving them from the emotional consequences.
However, that is exactly my point. The discomfort felt during an end-of-life process is completely natural. People should feel uncomfortable. There should be emotional consequences when it comes to ending another’s life. It is part of human beings’ basic morality.
But, at the very least, the discomfort speaks powerfully as a reminder of the value of human life. It should not be dealt with lightly or ended so distantly.
When considering this kind of death, people must consider the consequences of the Sarco pod and the involvement of technology in the end-of-life process as well as how it may shape humanity’s perspective — for the better or worse — on death and dying.
_________________
Follow the Graphic on Twitter: @PeppGraphic
Email Faith Oh: faith.oh@pepperdine.edu
