Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: gleeaikin

Thank you for you information on care of the terminally ill. You did a wonderful thing for both your mother and your husband.

I realize people ask their doctor for a prescription, but government would have to permit the use of drugs that are designed to kill people. There would certainly come into play various arguments as to who should be given these drugs. I mean people that are ill but not near death or people with depression will request them, and they may become available to people with depression in Switzerland. I firmly believe it will lead to euthanasia as it has in other countries. Allowing euthanasia has resulted in deaths of infants or the elderly that haven't been able to consent. Infants or those in nursing homes are killed under the guise that it is best for them and inhumane to allow suffering. Some people have no one to speak for them in these hospital or nursing home situations. Others may accept the medication to end their lives so as not be a burden upon their families.

I can explain why Catholics are opposed to suicide and euthanasia through the listings of the Catechisms explanations on suicide and euthanasia. I imagine it's the same for most conservative branches of Christianity like Anglicans.

Suicide

2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Volutnary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.
Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminsh the responsiblity of the one committing suicide.

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

Euthanasia

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.
Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitues a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and the the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbdden and excluded.

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legallly entitled to the act for the patient, whose reasonable will and lgitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.


28 posted on 03/16/2007 12:37:29 AM PDT by Pinkbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: Pinkbell; All

Thank you for your clarifications. I too am concerned at the thought of unregulated outside-the-patient decision making. This is why advanced directives are so important. And I urge everyone to have them. Their lack was what made the Terri Schivo situation so awful.

One of the biggest problems is dealing with serious irreversible illnesses like Amyo Lateral Schlerosis (sp?), also known as Lou Gherigs Disease, or heredity ones like Huntingtons Chorea. I believe that the Oregon law only gives patients the option of requesting potentially lethal medication when the medical judgement is that only 6 months of life remain. Unfortunately, with the above diseases, or with some kinds of lethal cancer, the really bad phase of dying may take much longer than that.

Therefore I would suggest that any jurisdiction that wants to deal with the problem should have a well qualified panel of medical and ethical personal to review the wishes and medical outcome of a presented case. If the panel can determine that the wishes of the patient are clear, and the medical progression and outcome are clearly irreversible and fatal, then a set of conditions could be established and approved for final measures. This would rule out making decisions because of temporary depression, etc.

In the case of ALS, the conditions might be that when the patient has requested that when they are no longer able to eat and swallow, when they no longer have voluntary movement of their body parts, then a designated person could administer a strong painkiller.

In the case of HC, the patient might designate that when they are no longer in mental contact with the world and their loved ones, that the lethal dose be administered.

I realize that given the difference in our religious orientation you may not agree with all of this. But, my bottom line is that in all cases where choice is possible, I want it to be that of the patient, even if their natural dying might reasonably be expected to take more than 6 months.


29 posted on 03/16/2007 1:00:54 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson