The editors of the Canadian Medical Association Journal have proposed a new way to tackle the noisy euthanasia debate in their country – expunging the word euthanasia from the dictionary. In their most recent editorial they argue that the word “mixes ideas and values that confuses the debate about dying”.

The term, euthanasia, is from the Greek and was coined in 1646, they say. It was intended to mean a gentle and easy death. A nuance was introduced, by 1742, referring to the means of bringing about such a death and, in 1859, to the action of inducing such a death. Modern dictionaries have a variety of definitions, but they all imply the same meaning, an intentional action to bring about death in someone who is suffering.

"Euthanasia's broad meaning has inadvertently enveloped a set of actions that also involve the relief of symptoms in dying people," write the authors. "For example giving enough narcotic to relieve pain in cancer patients and adding enough sedation to enable comfort and minimize agitation is appropriate and compassionate care, even when the amounts required increase the probability of death. It can be argued that, in such circumstances, death becomes an acceptable side-effect of effective palliation. But, in our view, it is not euthanasia."

They contend that doctors should “stop using the word euthanasia to describe the actions we might take to help dying patients and stop using such value-laden terms as starve and kill to explain those medical actions. Instead, we can clearly and dispassionately name and define each action as well as its possible repercussions.” ~ CMAJ, Mar 29