The misguided ‘mercy’ of euthanasia

The Catholic Register ^ | 8/10/14 | Father Thomas Rosica

[wagglebee]

The mainstream media has caused great confusion about the topic of euthanasia and has been extremely deceptive in its portrayal of human suffering and compassion.

Most people who believe euthanasia and assisted suicide should be legal are not thinking the issue through. They are weighing personal autonomy and choice, or imagining what it would be like to be incapacitated and forced into a life they consider undignified or worthless, or perhaps seeing severely disabled people as having no quality of life.

Dignity and quality of life don’t come from what we can or cannot do. They are not matters of efficiency, proficiency and productivity. They come from a deeper place — from who we are and how we relate to each other.

The mere notion that euthanasia and assisted suicide could become a Canadian reality should be a wake-up call to Canadians, not just because all life is sacred from conception to natural death, but because of the people such a law would most affect: the chronically ill who are a strain on the healthcare system; the elderly who have been abandoned, have no one to speak for them and who feel they are a burden; and the disabled who fight every day to maintain their integrity and dignity.

Society has lost sight of the sacred nature of human life. When people today speak about a “good death,” they usually refer to an attempt to control the end of one’s life, even through physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. The Christian notion of a good death, however, is death not as a good end, but a good transition that requires faith, readiness and acceptance.

St. John Paul II taught us how to respect the frail and the vulnerable. Nine years ago, he showed us true dignity in the face of death. Rather than hide his infirmities, as most public figures do, he let the world see what he endured in the final phase of his life. He offered a paradoxical image of happiness.

We must never lose sight of atrocities against the unborn and the too-seldom-spoken pain and anguish experienced by those involved in abortions. Nor can we ignore society’s next great challenge — resolving the serious question of euthanasia, or mercy killing as it is sometimes called. It is no longer an abstract or theory. It has arrived on our shores and it has invaded our lives.

This issue goes to the very core of who we are and what we believe. Euthanasia is a false and misguided mercy. True compassion leads to sharing another’s pain, not killing the person whose suffering we cannot bear. The true test of a Christian society is to see how it treats its most vulnerable citizens, those with little or no claim on public attention, those without beauty, strength or intelligence.

Human life and human dignity encounter many obstacles, especially in North America. When life is not respected, should we be surprised when other rights are threatened? As St. John Paul II wrote: “a right to die will inevitably give way to the duty to die.”

In a powerful message in February to the Pontifical Academy for Life, Pope Francis wrote: “In our society there is a tyrannical dominance of an economic logic that excludes and at times kills, and of which nowadays we find many victims, starting with the elderly.” He lamented a “throwaway” culture in which the excluded are exploited, rejected and cast aside.

“Health is without doubt an important value, but it does not determine the value of a person,” the Pope said. “Furthermore, health is not by itself a guarantee of happiness, which may indeed be experienced even by those in a precarious state of health.” Therefore, he said, “poor health and disability are never a good reason to exclude or, worse, eliminate a person; and the most serious deprivation that the elderly suffer is not the weakening of the body or the consequent disability, but rather abandonment, exclusion, and a lack of love.”

As Catholics and Christians we have a responsibility to confront the intrusion of euthanasia into our society. We have a moral obligation to be caregivers for incapacitated persons and a civic duty to protect those who lack the capacity to express their will but are still human, still living and still deserving of equal protection under the law.

There can be no true peace unless life is defended and promoted.

(Fr. Rosica is the CEO of Salt + Light Catholic Television Network and English language assistant to the Holy See Press Office .)

[wagglebee]

Dignity and quality of life don’t come from what we can or cannot do. They are not matters of efficiency, proficiency and productivity. They come from a deeper place — from who we are and how we relate to each other.

Perfectly stated!

[wagglebee]

Pro-Life Ping

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[wagglebee]

[BuffaloJack]

Euthanasia is not mercy; it’s murder.

[Yo-Yo]

You didn’t watch your mother die a slow, painful death from pancreatic cancer.

[AnAmericanMother]

I watched my mother die a slow death from cancer. Her oncologists here and at M.D. Anderson moved mountains and bought her a year, but could not defeat it.

The hospice - a splendid group of physicians and nurses - provided the best possible care, with carefully measured medications that provided relief from pain without impacting her cognitive functions. She was able to visit with her friends, make her farewells, participate in a communion service that was held in her room, and die with true dignity a natural death in which neither family nor physicians played god.

The plural of anecdote is not data, but my experience is just as valid as yours.

[lepton]

One should also consider that what most who are intent on euthanasia are actually suffering from is depression. If treated for that, most lose interest in offing themselves regardless of the physical pain.

[gdani]

You didn’t watch your mother die a slow, painful death from pancreatic cancer.

In my mother's case, it was Alzheimer's & heart trouble.

She could not stand up, walk or take herself to the bathroom. She had to be fed. She could barely speak and, when she did, much of it made no sense. All of it was 100% irreversible.

Modern medicine kept her "alive" because the law refused to give her autonomy over herself.

And some people amazingly think making her suffer this way, against her wishes, is a positive thing.

[AnAmericanMother]

Any competent wills-and-trusts lawyer will recommend when an older relative's health begins to fail that he or she (1) update the will; (2) execute a medical POA; (3) execute a general durable POA.

Mom very sensibly had done all these things when Dad passed away. She expressed her desire for no extraordinary measures to keep her alive, that her pain be managed, and that Nature be allowed to take its course. We honored her requests and we had the medical POA to support them.

Everybody who reaches that age should make their wishes crystal clear and entrust decisions to a reliable relative.

[AnAmericanMother]

One of the things that hospice did was to manage Mom's mental and emotional state as well as her pain. They monitored her closely for any anxiety or depression. As it turned out she did not need any anti-anxiety medication until almost the very end - but they were watching and ready.

I cannot say enough good things about these folks. Theirs is a calling and a mission, not just a job. They did everything possible to make Mom comfortable and at peace during the difficult process of leaving this world. I hope I have as good care when my time comes.

[gdani]

Any competent wills-and-trusts lawyer will recommend when an older relative's health begins to fail that he or she (1) update the will; (2) execute a medical POA; (3) execute a general durable POA.

Everything was done well in advance, before her health started to decline. I was POA for everything. She was a registered nurse & did not want to end up like so many other situations she witnessed.

Mom very sensibly had done all these things when Dad passed away. She expressed her desire for no extraordinary measures to keep her alive, that her pain be managed, and that Nature be allowed to take its course. We honored her requests and we had the medical POA to support them.

I did the same for my mother. But, "nature taking its course" with Alzheimer's means you essentially wait until it has ravaged the body so bad that the digestive system & brain stop communicating with each other. The only decision left to make at that point was whether she should have been force fed. She clearly did not want that & I honored her wishes.

Everybody who reaches that age should make their wishes crystal clear and entrust decisions to a reliable relative.

Of course. But everything you said/recommend does zero for a person who wishes to end their life at a certain point, well before intense & non-stop suffering takes over.

[aimhigh]

You didn’t watch your mother die a slow, painful death from pancreatic cancer.

So, you wanted to kill your mom?

My adult daughter has a genetic condition that has caused lifelong pain. She doesn't know what it's like to be without pain. Are you saying I should have her killed?

[AnAmericanMother]

Alzheimer's or dementia is a dreadful disease as it robs the family of their loved one in fact while the body is still living. Been through it first with my maternal grandfather and then with my dad.

But I think that those who are truly suffering in such a case are we - the family - and not the patient. Given the complete lack of cognitive function you describe, there is no contraindication to pain meds of a level that will absolutely relieve discomfort. Then the only ones uncomfortable are you and I - and I guess that's our job to endure that for the sake of our parents and for the moral imperative that we NOT take innocent life. They endured a lot for our sake.

[AnAmericanMother]

Thus Dorothy Sayers:

“In those last weeks or hours of pain and unconsciousness, the soul may be undergoing some necessary part of its pilgrimage on earth. It isn’t our business to cut it short. Who are we to take life and death into our hands? ... the wrongness of the thing lies much more in the harm it does the killer than in anything it can do to the person who is killed. Especially, of course, if the killing is to the killer’s own advantage.” - Vicar Tredgold, in "Unnatural Death".

[jonno]

Yep - your comments jibe with the "money quote" from the article:

Euthanasia is a false and misguided mercy. True compassion leads to sharing another’s pain, not killing the person whose suffering we cannot bear. The true test of a Christian society is to see how it treats its most vulnerable citizens, those with little or no claim on public attention, those without beauty, strength or intelligence.

[gdani]

Then the only ones uncomfortable are you and I - and I guess that's our job to endure that for the sake of our parents and for the moral imperative that we NOT take innocent life. They endured a lot for our sake.

But what about when the person in dire condition wants to end their life at a certain point and makes that clearly known?

My mother made her wishes known while still healthy, decades ago. But current law (in 46 of the 50 states) did not allow for her wishes to be granted.

The problem is other people deciding what they think is best for people they do not know, never met & never will. It is nobody's business but the person in question & the person who accepted the responsibility of carrying out the wishes of the person suffering.

[AnAmericanMother]

They just can't do that.

In a single case it might appear to be justified, but the overall harm to society in allowing such a decision to be made at all is far more significant.

In the Netherlands, this practice has been carried (as it always will be) to its logical end. You can see not only individuals who honestly believe they wish to die, but also individuals who state such a belief and later change their minds (too late), as well as elderly relatives who are stating a desire for suicide because they do not wish to dissipate their assets (or, far worse, those who are pressured or threatened into doing so by their heirs who don't want the assets dissipated.) And then there are the doctors, influenced by the overall disregard for the value of life, who push euthanasia to free up hospital beds . . . .

Once we open up the possibility, there is absolutely no guarantee that it will always be used for merciful or altruistic purposes.

[Dante3]

True.