The American College of Physicians (ACP) position paper on the legalization of physician-assisted suicide reaffirms the ACP's opposition to this practice, even though it is now legal in several countries and U.S. jurisdictions (1). The ACP's position deserves credit for its clarity and courage.

Among other achievements, the ACP paper identifies “euthanasia” and “medical assistance in dying” as euphemisms. These terms do what euphemisms are supposed to do: make a distasteful subject palatable, or at least discussable. The social process of change in ethical and moral standards makes bold use of such euphemisms. At one time, “mercy killing” and physician-assisted suicide were both illegal and unthinkable. However, times are changing, and the changes have followed a recognizable pattern (2). First, the unthinkable becomes discussable although highly controversial. After a while, it is seen as acceptable under certain circumstances. As it becomes more familiar, it seems increasingly sensible and reasonable. Finally, it is established as a legal right. In this way, what was once unthinkable can eventually become policy, or even a duty (3).

美国内科医师学院（ACP）关于医师协助自杀合法化的立场文件重申了ACP反对这种做法的反对意见，即使该做法现在在一些国家和美国辖区是合法的（1）。ACP的立场因其清晰和勇气而值得称赞。

在其他成就中，ACP论文将“安乐死”和“垂死时的医疗援助”确定为委婉语。这些术语可以完成委婉语的处理：使一个令人反感的主题变得可口，或者至少是可以讨论的。道德和道德标准发生变化的社会过程大胆使用了这种委婉语。一次，“仁慈杀人”和医生协助的自杀既非法又不可思议。但是，时代在变化，变化遵循可识别的模式（2）。首先，尽管存在很大争议，但不可思议的话题变得可以讨论。一段时间后，在某些情况下，它被认为是可以接受的。随着它变得越来越熟悉，它似乎越来越合情合理。最后，它被确立为一项合法权利。这样，曾经无法想象的事情最终可以成为政策，甚至是义务（3）。