title: Euthanasia is not medical treatment.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The public assumes that if euthanasia and assisted suicide were to be legalized they would be carried out by physicians.
  
  
  METHODS
  In furthering critical analysis, we supplement the discourse in the ethics and palliative care literature with that from medical education and evolving jurisprudence.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both proponents and opponents agree that the values of respect for human life and for individuals' autonomy are relevant to the debate.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Advocates of euthanasia and assisted suicide give priority to the right to personal autonomy and avoid discussions of harmful impacts of these practices on medicine, law and society. Opponents give priority to respect for life and identify such harmful effects. These both require euthanasia to remain legally prohibited.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Proposals are emerging that if society legalizes euthanasia it should not be mandated to physicians.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The impact of characterizing euthanasia as 'medical treatment' on physicians' professional identity and on the institutions of medicine and law should be examined in jurisdictions where assisted suicide and euthanasia have been de-criminalized.
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, 1110 Pine Ave. West, Montreal, QC, Canada. donald.boudreau@mcgill.ca
authors.forename: J Donald
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Boudreau
authors.forename: Margaret A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Somerville
mesh_terms: D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005065:Euthanasia / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D010819:Physician's Role; D017236:Suicide, Assisted / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D035761:Wedge Argument
keywords: assisted suicide; euthanasia; healing; medical legislation; palliative care; suffering