We are told that no matter our preconceptions, the 20 th century doctor's job is not to preserve life but above all to relieve suffering by all means available to him. Unmitigated pain is probably the most significant component of suffering, but one that is admittedly subjective and dependent upon the sufferer's assessment. One of the first people assisted in suicide under Oregon's new euthanasia law was, according to the first doctor who examined her, not suffering from pain but depression. With assisted suicide advocates working diligently, the woman was quickly enough led to doctors more open to believing her side of the story. She met her end shortly thereafter.
Mental distress is another form of suffering that euthanasia seeks to relieve.
The feeling that the dignity of one's life has diminished is entirely non-quantifiable, but nevertheless it is a feeling that in all likelihood nearly the entire population of the world has felt at one time or another. Never mind the droves of starving and diseased throughout the Third World, the average skid row resident in our very own cities has the right, it seems, to a doctor inquiring as to their desire to die a merciful death. Presumably the difference lies in one's capacity to contribute to one's physical, intellectual, and spiritual well being. The capacity to contribute to two of three of these is wholly immeasurable. To eliminate opportunities for zealous doctors and weary families to pull the plug, euthanasia rule number one states that induced death must be undertaken at the explicit and express request of the patient.