8mm
Posted on 11/23/2006 1:06:06 PM PST by Coleus
Euthanasia Robs Dying of Opportunities for Reconciliation, Family Connections, Says Leading Ethics Professor
Fr. Robert Spitzer speaks at pro-life conference in Vancouver
The last stages of life serve as a vital “wrap-up” period that provides opportunities for important developments in relationships with family and friends, said Fr. Robert J. Spitzer, S.J., ethics expert and co-founder of the Center for Life Principles, at a B.C. pro-life conference on Saturday. He said the end of life period should never deliberately be cut short. Speaking at the International Pro-Life Conference held in Vancouver Nov. 16-18, Fr. Spitzer identified dominant myths put forward by the pro-euthanasia movement--arguments, he said, that prey on the vulnerable elderly who fear suffering and don't want to be a burden.
“The final six months of life frequently see a significant improvement in reconciliation, in relationships with family and friends, in the passing on of wisdom and a personal legacy to family, and in a great investment in the relationship with God,” Fr. Spitzer said. The assumption that terminally ill patients have a low quality of life is simply not accurate, he said, when a narrow definition of life quality based on physical health and freedom of movement is expanded to include a much greater emphasis on relationships.
He pointed out that while euthanasia advocates frequently rely on the argument of inadequate pain treatment to promote legal assisted suicide and euthanasia, in fact research has shown that 96 percent of terminal pain can be adequately controlled through advances in morphine use, without significant loss of consciousness. According to a report by the World Health Organization, 97 percent of requests for assisted suicide were withdrawn after the patients received adequate pain management and treatment for temporary depression.
Legal euthanasia and assisted suicide will create a culture of suicide, Fr. Spitzer warned, as life value is measured more and more in terms of physical health and independence. “Young people will hear this as a legitimate solution to pain and suffering,” he said. “Schools will carry this. What becomes legal becomes normative, what becomes normative becomes moral.” Fr. Spitzer said it is imperative that governments resist the push to legalize euthanasia, despite pressure from activist organizations who claim euthanasia should be a personal choice. “There is a basic principle at work here. One person's option can—and will—become another person's duty to die.”
President of Gonzaga University and founder of the Institute of Professional Ethics in Seattle and the Institute on Character Development at Seattle University, Fr. Spitzer is a world-renowned speaker, author and lecturer.Visit Healing the Culture website: http://www.healingtheculture.com/calendar.shtml
I have stage IV cancer that will eventually kill me.But I will trust in my savior and his promises.The great comfort is that your pal satan is incabable of granting your wish.
I will pray that the scales are dropped from your eyes.
I'm an evangelical Christian and our views on end of life are very similar. I'm sorry that there are a few on FR, who seem unable to have an open dialog on difficult end-of-life issues. Instead, they are all to quick to judge you and attribute evil to you and your motives. Real life is just never that simple.
Since you mentioned this, you surely know that donations of organs from the living are superior to those from cadavers. It seems to me that a strong moral argument could be made for the person who wishes to die to be allowed to do so so that his/her vital organs can be quickly transferred to those to whom they would give meaningful life.
Same to ya.
You're a real death culture doozie, aren't you!
If you want it, go for it.
Do you really want to be an advocate for evil?
Guess I'm just surprised by your statement.
I will pray you dicover the truth sooner than this man.
Luk 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
Luk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Luk 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Luk 16:25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Aside from your eternal soul I am sorry life on this earth is so miserable for you.I have learned to value everyday and would never wish pain and suffering on any human being.I hope you find rest for what's troubling you.
Just going to have to ping this out tomorrow.
Thanks for posting it.
I've seen the realities. With 6 people. And no, they weren't all "easy" deaths (whatever that is).
Anyone advocating suicide/euthanasia is not seeing very wisely.
I've also been in the extremities of pain. Consciousness is still there despite deblititating pain, even when you can barely communicate or not communicate.
I've had a friend come out of a 6 week coma. He could hear and understand when the doctor said he was brain dead.
Advocating death for others is nothing but evil. It denigrates the unconditional value of life, that is a gift from God. He gives it and He takes it, and anyone who wants to interfere is trying to take His role over, but without His perfect knowledge and mercy.
BTW, reconciliation can happen even without words, even without seeing, just by being there. And reconciliation with God can take place within the heart, with no one else seeing or knowing what is taking place. Hastening death is primarily about being in control. Read some books about it. Read what the suicide/euthanasia advocates themselves say. It isn't about pain, it's about control.
GSlob, I hope you read LadyDoc's post in number 19.
My own mother died in August after 2 years of up and down pain caused by antibodies from her body against a thymic carcinoma. At times, any sensation was interpreted as pain, either by the nerves themselves or - more likely - the brain. All we could do when her pain flared was give her the medicine she wanted to sleep and try to keep her blood pressure up when we did it. Finally, she had strokes that took her life. But, on the day she died she told me and a nurse assistant that she was saved when she was a kid.
There should never be a question about a doctor acting with the intention to cause death. Your grandmother's docs should have acted to relieve her pain, by making her sleep if necessary, and even if a side effect was that she stopped breathing.
However, if the docs are authorized to act with the intention to kill, who's to say that what Father Spitzer predicts will not happen? It has in the Netherlands. Then the docs pushed for legalization of involuntary euthanasia. Patients and families aren't even told. And now, they're killing infants - not just letting them die, but active purposeful killing on the doc's decision. There's an official "protocol" - the Groningen protocol named after the Academic (teaching) hospital where it's in effect) and the docs are pushing for legalization of their actions.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621588/
Some call it cognitave dissonance, the ability to hold two very opposing values side by side and not grasp the irony. We see it a lot with liberals but not so much with those calling themselves conservatives.
Yet some suppose they hold conservative values, and right next to those values, carry opposing thoughts expressed by the far left, even the middle east terrorists. Yet they do not seem to notice that which the rest of us see.
We see it here on these threads with some posters as well. May those who have eyes see.
8mm
I've wondered if something like this couldn't be done when a patient with a terminal disease has severe pain in a particular part of his or her body. Is it done very often? How do they block the pain? Is more research being done in this area?
Speaking of reality: Not many medical advances are made by doctors who think killing is the answer.
I do not believe you.
Hmmm, so if your granny said something you didn't like or agree with, you would be okay with the pain she suffered at the end? You named yourself accurately. BTW, there are nerve blocks that your 'competent' physician should have used when the morphine ceased to block the pain. Don't blame people of faith when your 'demigods' (doctors) fail to use the most up-to-date methodology.
In my experience, a lot of MDs advocate end of life decisions for their patients... Do you have any data showing that most advances are not made by them?
A person suffering from cancer has the right to pain relief, including morphine at effective dosages even if they are known to have a negative impact on life expectancy, and including the cutting of specific nerve branches or endoscopic ultrasound-guided celiac plexus nerve block. And the medical profession has the duty to provide this.
There is much more information herre, at the Johns Hopkins Univerity website on pancreas cancer.
Your enemy, and your grandmother's enemy, is not the priest who is advocating for her life. Your enemy is the incompetent doctor who proved unwilling or unable to provide the available pain relief.
And note that if killing-as-a-treatment becomes acceptable, there will be NO further progress on surgical pain-blocking or opioid analgesia. Why should they bother with terminating the pain when they can more cheaply terminate the patient?
"I have never seen intractable pain. I have seen intractable doctors and nurses." -- Dr. Jose Espinosa.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.