Microsoft Word - 2 Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine Chronic pain and voluntary euthanasia Mojtaba Rismanchi Medical Student, Department of Medical Ethics, Shiraz School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. *Corresponding author: Mojtaba Rismanchi Address: Zand Ave., Shiraz School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. Tel: (+098) 91 73 07 30 27 E-mail: rismanchi@sums.ac.ir Received: 19 Jul 2008 Accepted: 24 Aug 2008 Published: 19 Oct 2008 J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2008; 1:2. © 2008 Mojtaba Rismanchi; licensee Tehran Univ. Med. Sci. Abstract Keywords: Chronic pain, Emotion, Decision making, Voluntary euthanasia. Introduction Voluntary euthanasia (VE) is the act of requesting deadly medical practices in order to terminate one’s life (1). The process of decision making (like that for VE) is composed of two interwoven brain based components (2). One is the conscious power of analyzing the condition and utilizing algorithmic like strategies, which is known as cognition (2, 3). The other part is the emotional background of the individual (2). This part is important since it affects the person’s ability of seeking in the condition (4), estimating the parameters of a situation (5) and finally deciding (2). Chronic pain patients (CPPs) develop disappointing emotional backgrounds, which affect their mental power of decision-making (6). This article argues about the mental incompetence relating decision-making that accompanies chronic pain in such patients. Theoretical concepts Chronic pain and emotion based decision making (exemplifying approach): A CPP is under the torture of his/her illness. This can be considered as equal to the historically known conditions of torturing a person and wanting him/her to accept or confess something in return for relieving pain (7). In case of VE, the agent is the internal mental burden of a disease and the thing wanted in return for reliving the pain is “dying acceptance”. Therefore, in this condition the stimulator of Emotional status and its brain bases change in a chronic pain patient and this change affects his/her decision making ability. Moreover, it is accepted that a mentally disturbed individual is not competent to make critical decisions. According to these bases, this article demonstrates that such patients are not entitled to request voluntary euthanasia. mailto:rismanchi@sums.ac.ir J Med Ethics Hist Med 2008, 1:2 Mojtaba Rismanchi Page 2 of 3 (page number not for citation purposes) accepting death is the emotion of escaping from pain in return for anything. This is the exaggerated form of the normal emotion of fearing and escaping from painful situations (8). In fact, a CPP fears from experiencing excess pain. According to this outlook and having in the mind that emotions -in the way it is described in the literature (9) - are the most important determinants of the alternative to be chosen (10), here it is proposed that CPPs are emotionally and hence mentally incompetent for making critical decisions. Chronic pain and emotion based decision making (experimental approach): Studies using MRI technology have shown brain deficits in CPPs (11- 14). More specifically in the state of chronic pain it is stated that the orbitofrontal part of the brain cortex is preferentially involved. This part functions as a link between multiple brain regions with distinct roles in the emotional assessment. These regions include lateral prefrontal areas which handle memory, effector components of the brainstem which are responsible for producing emotional responses and those parts that are considered as the brain substrates of feelings like insula and amygdale (6). According to these findings a CPP does not have a biologically healthy brain for providing the accuracy of the act of choice-making especially when he/she wants to do so for emotion - laden alternatives like that of whether to escape or cope with the pain. Discussion The central concept of this article is that a person who is under the mental pressures is not capable of making critical decisions. The same concept is already accepted for the other categories of people who cannot think well such as drunken individuals (15). The fact that mentally under pressure patients cannot think well is also indirectly accepted by all societies that refuse to obey a mentally ill patient’s will in the light of labeling the patient unqualified for making a will according to the judgment of court. With the same bases, this article’s concept can be accepted by the court and become a law in such societies. Conclusion A CPP is mentally incompetent to make critical decisions. Therefore, the patient’s will of terminating his/her life must not be accepted like that of a drunken person. Deciding to undergo euthanasia is the most critical decision of a person (not only a patient) since this decision leads to the end of making other decisions. In this respect, deciding to die is different from deciding to buy a car because the latter is reversible or can be compensated in the future and does not violate the right of making other decisions, something that the former intrudes in. Therefore the ability of making the decision of undergoing euthanasia must be considered as something different from just a right. In this regards the inclusion of this ability among other rights must be investigated more. Mental incompetence is the common quality in both conditions of chronic pain and will rejection in the court. Therefore the accepted rules for both of these two conditions must be the same. This means that any nation that rejects the will of a mentally incompetent individual must do the same about the request of a CPP for VE. J Med Ethics Hist Med 2008, 1:2 Mojtaba Rismanchi Page 3 of 3 (page number not for citation purposes) References 1. Anonymous, (2008). URL: http://www.vesq.org.au/Definitions.html 2. Martin P, Paulus MP. Neurobiology of decision-making: quo vadis? Cognitive Brain Research 2005; 23(1): 2- 10. 3. Anonymous, (2008). URL: http://www.floridainstitute.comResourcesglossary1.html 4. Kahnand BE, Isen AM. The influence of positive affect on variety seeking among safe, enjoyable products. J Consum Res 1993; 20 (2): 257–270. 5. Nygren TE, Isen AM, Taylor PJ, Dulin J. The influence of positive affect on the decision rule in risk situations: focus on outcome (and especially avoidance of loss) rather than probability. Org Behav Human Decis Process 1996; 66 (1): 59– 72. 6. Apkarian AV, Sosa Y, Krauss BR, et al. Chronic pain patients are impaired on an emotional decision-making task. Pain 2004; 108 (1-2): 129–136. 7. Durant W. The Story of Civilization, 1939; vol 4. 8. Keefe FJ, Lumley M, Anderson T, Lynch T, Studts JL, Carson KL. Pain and emotion: new research directions. J Clin Psychol 2001; 57(4): 587–607. 9. Anonymous. Emotions in Decision Making, (2008). URL: ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotions_in_Decision_Making 10. Anonymous. Emotion and decision, (2008).URL: http://changingminds.org/explanations/emotions/emotion_decision.htm 11. Apkarian AV, Grachev ID, Krauss BR. Imaging brain pathophysiology of chronic CRPS pain. In: Harden R, Janig W, Baron JC, eds. Complex regional pain syndrome. Seattle, WA: IASP Press; 2001a. pp. 209–27. J Med Ethics Hist Med 2008, 1:2 Mojtaba Rismanchi Page 4 of 3 (page number not for citation purposes) 1. Apkarian AV, Krauss BR, Fredrickson BE, Szeverenyi NM. Imaging the pain of low back pain: functional magnetic resonance imaging in combination with monitoring subjective pain perception allows the study of clinical pain states. Neurosci Lett 2001; 299 (1-2): 57–60. 2. Apkarian AV, Thomas PS, Krauss BR, Szeverenyi NM. Prefrontal cortical hyperactivity in patients with sympathetically mediated chronic pain. Neurosci Lett 2001; 311 (3): 193–7. 3. Baliki MN, Geha PY, Apkarian AV, Chialvo DR. Beyond feeling: chronic pain hurts the brain, disrupting disrupting the default- mode network dynamics. J Neurosci 2008; 28(6): 1398-403. 4. George S, Rogers RD, Duka T. The acute effect of alcohol on decision making in social drinkers. Psychopharmacology 2005; 182 (1): 160–9.