On the topical issue of assisted dying: the insurmountable challenges of human existence, and the right to exit.

Although the issue of medical-assisted dying or medical aid in dying (MAID, euthanasia, and medical-assisted suicide) has a long history, it has become an increasingly important topic in recent years. Around the world, many governments remain opposed to MAID. In places where MAID is legally permitted, it is highly regulated, and typically, unbearable suffering limited to a few serious and incurable medical conditions determines eligibility. MAID eligibility based on unbearable suffering but limited to a few medical conditions is unfair because suffering is inescapable in life, is not limited to medical conditions, and is highly subjective. Indeed, the subjectivity and individual differences in the experience of pain and suffering make it inaccurate to suggest that suffering is lesser for a person dealing with trigeminal neuralgia, extreme poverty, treatment-resistant depression, or the grief of losing a loved one compared to someone with a MAID-eligible condition. The subjectivity and individual differences in the experience of suffering mean that its intolerability can only be fairly defined by the individual experiencing it. So, the use of a third party (e.g., a physician) to evaluate severity, burdensomeness, or prognosis in determining MAID eligibility unfairly restricts people suffering who may not meet the clinical or physician's threshold of intolerability. Also, suffering is often imposed on humans by forces outside their control, making denying the right to exit suffering with dignity through MAID unfair. In this position paper, an argument is made for MAID to be made broadly legal without age limits and available to anyone who requests it based on patient-defined unbearable suffering or fear of future suffering.