There is growing concern about the moral fabric of our society. A record-high 50% of Americans currently rate the overall state of moral values in the U.S. as "poor," with an additional 37% considering it "only fair." These statistics highlight the urgent need for dialogue and reflection on complex ethical issues. Among them, dying with dignity and personal autonomy has emerged as one of the most significant moral conversations of our time – Physician-Assisted Death (PAD), Women’s reproduction health, and Trans rights, being just a few, raising fundamental questions about who holds the right to govern one's own body.
Currently, physician-assisted suicide is legal in eleven jurisdictions. Supporters argue that individuals have the moral right to choose what they do with their lives, including the option to end their lives without causing harm to others. On the other hand, opponents argue that society has a moral duty to protect and preserve all life, and facilitating assisted suicide contradicts this obligation. These conflicting viewpoints compel us to weigh the importance of individual choice and self-determination against the reverence for life and the sensibility and complexity of human emotions. In the short film Oasis, the protagonist Alex is entrusted with overseeing and facilitating the peaceful passing of five residents at the unconventional Oasis euthanasia facility. When a defiant patient wishes to go back on her contractual demise, Alex must navigate her own convictions and challenge the very foundations of the system she once trusted.
The inspiration for the Oasis film stems from a deeply personal experience. When I was fourteen, my grandmother passed away after a long and painful battle with ALS. Witnessing her extended suffering made me question, what I would have done if she had asked me to end her pain? And an even more harrowing question arises, what if her demands didn’t align with what I thought was “right”? Who’s morally “at fault” in that case? This dilemma still lingers in my mind today. The film delves into these profound questions set against an end-of-life moral dilemma. It explores the moral implications of having control over someone's life and delves into themes of personal growth, accepting responsibility, and the complex nature of morality itself.
The Oasis film employs a symbolic and artistic approach to convey its message. Power dynamics serve as a recurring motif, underscoring the themes of choice, self-autonomy, and morality. The protagonist, Alex, views herself as morally righteous, which is portrayed in character blocking and camera angles that always position her above others. In contrast, Jasmine, a resident who is uncertain about her decision but influenced by Alex, is consistently framed as inferior. This dynamic also reflects broader societal power imbalances and the complexities of female empowerment and relationships. Alex's own struggle with her mother's unfulfilled desire for death adds another layer of complexity to the narrative. When faced with a similar decision involving Jasmine, who desires freedom rather than remaining in the confines of the Oasis, Alex confronts the challenges of responsibility and the blurred boundaries between selflessness and selfishness.
The Oasis film is an exploration of the intricate facets of morality and our obligations to one another. It is a hyper-stylized piece set in a mesmerizing world that blurs the line between reality and fiction, paralleling the nuanced nature of morality itself. Personally, I firmly believe that everyone should have the right to govern their own bodies, including end-of-life choices. The film serves as a means to engage audiences in a profound conversation about our responsibilities towards each other as humans, and the relativity of personal freedom. The film is not intended to provide easy answers but rather to ignite thoughtful discussions and inspire individuals to reflect on the intricacies of personal autonomy, morality, and our interconnectedness as human beings.
