Assisted dying: Why the Argument from Sufficient Palliation fails

Opponents of legalising assisted dying often make the Argument from Sufficient Palliation. On the premise that advances in palliative treatment have made it possible to free terminal patients from pain and distress, the argument concludes that assisted dying is unnecessary. I assert that this argument fails. Firstly, the premise is false because patients respond differently to analgesics and many continue to experience intractable pain even on medication. Secondly, the premise fails to acknowledge the extreme discomfort (for many patients) of the side effects of palliative treatment. Thirdly, the conclusion would only follow from the premise if the overwhelming majority of patients had access to palliative treatment, and this is patently not the case. Finally, the argument completely overlooks the enormous distress experienced by terminal patients, arising from perceived loss of dignity and concerns about being a burden to others.