Jesse Harmon
RELIG 430
Dr. Bryant
April 11, 2014
Euthanasia: An Analysis
Dax
Cowart. Terry Schaivo. Tony Nicklinson. Dianne Pretty. These are all cases involving something
called Euthanasia. Euthanasia today
means “mercy killing.”
Dax
Cowart, a 25 year old man in 1973, was involved in a serious car incident when
his car exploded after coming in contact with a leaking underground gas
line. Cowart was burned on nearly
two-thirds of his body. A farmer
happened upon him. Cowart was in so much
pain, he pleaded with the farmer to take a gun and kill him. The farmer refused. Cowart was transported to a hospital in
Dallas, where he was questioned for nearly six hours without pain medication
being administered to him. After the
six-hour ordeal, he asked the hospital physicians to not treat him, as he
wanted to die. Although he was
considered fully capable of consent to his treatment, or lack thereof, his
mother and lawyer decided to go ahead with treatment. For several weeks, he was dunked in a bath of
bleach to peel off his dead skin, leaving bare muscle and even bare bone. Cowart passed away a few years, ago, but
after his ordeal at the Dallas hospital, he became a lawyer and fought for
victims’ rights. Although he lived a
happy life, he still wished that he were left to die in the hospital. Our questions are these: Why did the farmer
not shoot Cowart dead? Why did the
physicians at the hospital refuse to comply with a perfectly mentally capable
man with his wishes to not be treated?
Our questions, which are specific, can be broadened. Is euthanasia ethical? Is euthanasia moral? What does God think about euthanasia? What does society think about euthanasia? Is euthanasia the murder of someone, or the
killing of someone?
What
does death mean in the Bible? We must
first determine what the difference is between murder and killing. For simplicity’s sake, in this paper, murder will
be considered an illegal act of intentional death upon someone else. Killing will be considered a legal act of
intentional death upon someone else.
Suicide is the act of causing the death of oneself.
Ecclesiastes
7:17 says, “Do not be [excessively wicked], and do not be a fool—why die before
your time?” In this poem or song in
Ecclesiastes, we see that the author is telling the audience what he has seen
in his “meaningless life” (7:15). The
author has seen the “righteous perishing in their righteousness,” and the over
righteous destroying themselves. He also
sees the excessively wicked taking of ones own life. This may seem like it applies to suicide, and
it does. Still, asking for a physician
to take one’s own life is still suicide.
This is called Physician Assisted Death, or PAD. When a patient or a proxy asks a doctor or
non-physician to assist in his or her death, the doctor or non-physician, if he
or she complies, will administer a way of death (Couthan 8).
In
Ecclesiastes 8:8, it says, “As no one has power over the wind to contain it, so
no one has power over the time of their death.”
This verse seems to state that no one will able to predict their time of
death, nor should they have any power over it.
This can reflect when Jesus said that even he doesn’t know the time or
day the world will end. The death of all
of us is in accord with God’s plan. When
someone wants to kill him or herself, they are breaking God’s plan.
The
New International Version of Genesis 9:6 says, “Whoever sheds human blood, by
humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made
mankind.” Maybe the New Living
Translation is an easier translation, “If anyone takes a human life, that
person’s life will also be taken by human hands. For God made human beings in his own image.”
Again, this is referring to the
murder of someone else, and not necessarily the killing of someone else. Jesus says in Matthew 26:52 says, “Put your
sword back in its place…for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” Again, Jesus may be talking about the murder
of someone since he was being arrested at this point in the Garden of
Gethsemane.
God
will destroy the man who destroys the temple, or the body (1 Corinthians
3:16-17). If anyone does damage to his
or her own body willfully, God will destroy that person.
All
these Bible verses may be fine and dandy, but none of them specifically address
the issue of euthanasia. Nowhere in the
Bible does it say, “Thou shall not kill by euthanasia.” But also, nowhere in the Bible does God command
a physician to put to death a person who is suffering. We commonly put animals to death because of
their old age, sickness, severe injury, or severe pain. Why don’t we do this to humans as well? Let’s perform a thought experiment. Say Fido has bladder cancer. Fido is in suffering tremendously. Fido’s owners don’t have enough money to get
surgery for Fido. Fido’s owners decide
to put Fido down because it would be cheaper and Fido wouldn’t experience pain
anymore. Now, let’s say Grandma has
bladder cancer as well. Grandma is
suffering tremendously. Grandma’s
caretakers don’t have enough money for cancer surgery. Grandma’s caretakers don’t know what to do. Grandma goes through surgery, radiation
treatment, and chemotherapy. Grandma is
now suffering, but in a different way.
She’s cancer free, but still dealing with the effects of the
chemotherapy. Should the caretakers have
put grandma down like the owners of Fido did?
Or should they let grandma suffer even more? Should Fido’s owners put Fido through more
suffering, or should they have put Fido down?
Should euthanasia even be a possibility?
What
are the arguments for and against euthanasia?
First, there is the argument of rights.
Away from the Christian belief that we mentioned earlier that only God
knows when each and every one of us is to die, the civil idea that human beings
have the right to die when they want to is another question that needs to be
discussed. Should we as a society grant
people the right to die whenever they want?
Should our society be given the freedom to kill other people whenever
they want to die? I will leave that up
for debate.
Yes, there is the
religious objection that states God will determine when someone is to die, but
what about those who don’t believe in God?
There are secular objections to euthanasia. The decision to die will affect other people
such as the family and friends of the patient who asks to be put to death. It will cause severe consequences such as
guilt, hurt, and pain. However, there is
a balance issue: Should the pain that others experience overrule the rights and
the pain of the patient, or should the patient’s pain be put first and
foremost?
The Belgium
Parliament recently passed a law that allows children to be euthanized. It has become the first country in the world
that would allow the euthanisation of children of all age groups with a passing
of 86 to 44, with 12 abstaining. The
executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, Alex Schadenberg,
said that, “Belgium has [previously] abandoned the elderly, and now they are
saying they will abandon their children.”
Here are some of the comments from the article used in this paper
(Baklinksi). One commenter said, “I live
in Belgium and I apologize in the name of the civilised (sic) people in my
country for this absolutely horrifying law, which only shows how so-called
progressive thinking is really just a gradual abandoning of all human dignity.” Another commenter said, “What happened to
your people? How did they fall so far
into the abyss?” and, “I remember a time when doctors took an oat to preserve
human life.”
Not all countries
are like Belgium. In Hartford, Connecticut, a bill that would allow physicians
to help terminally ill patients end their own lives did get voted on in a
recent Public Health Committee meeting.
There was simply not enough time to go over the material before the
legislative session ends on May 7th.
It was said that “Those kind of things need ironed out.” Although supporters of the bill will
reintroduce it next year when there will be time to go over the bill. Discussion has “exploded across the state,”
according to Tim Appleton, the director of the Compassion and Choices advocacy
group, a supporter of the bill. (“Assisted
Suicide Bill Won’t Get Vote This Session”).
Various medical
associations around the world have differing views on euthanasia as well. The American Medical Association (the AMA)
has taken a stand for life when it comes to euthanasia. It states that physicians need to instead of
focusing on euthanizing a patient, doing as much as he or she can to help the
patient’s needs (“Opinion 2.21-Euthanasia”).
The British Medical Association has reaffirmed its opposition to PAD in
2009 (“BMA Reaffirms Opposition To Assisted Suicide, UK”).
Even physicians
themselves have gotten in on the debate.
Dr. Kerry Pound recently wrote,
We know that the
top reasons for terminally ill patients to request suicide are that they feel
life is no longer enjoyable, have lost autonomy, or believe their lives to be
burdensome or without dignity (and NOT as a result of pain). And although these
reported symptoms may be similar to those expressed by depressed patients
without an underlying terminal illness, no counseling nor psychiatric
assessment is mandated under the bill. Psychotherapy and psychopharmacology may
provide great relief for any patient suffering from depression. As physicians,
we routinely hospitalize depressed patients who are contemplating suicide — for
the purpose of treating the depression and getting the patient to a healthier
mental state to deal with life. Shouldn’t we require that a thorough
psychiatric assessment be done for those struggling to come to terms with their
own mortality? (Pound).
Nearly all pain
can be relieved. Notice I said
“nearly.” Some pain can’t be relieved,
no matter what www.care.org.uk says.
Emotional pain, although mentally “debilitatingly” painful as it can be,
is not enough to put someone to death over.
That would be assisted suicide. There
is also no “right” way to die, and there are dangers to each way to die (Arguments
For and Against Euthanasia"). A
failed injection could render someone completely incapable of moving. A wrong dose of medicine could cause a heart
attack in someone. A gunshot to the
wrong part of the head could render someone without speech capabilities.
What about the
people who die without permission? In
1990 in Holland, nearly one thousand patients were killed without their
permission. In the Netherlands,
euthanasia and physician assisted suicides are completely legal, although not
all physicians report their actions (Arguments For and Against Euthanasia"). We also can’t truly control death. Even though we may administer a lethal dose
of medication, the time it takes to kill someone varies. I’m reminded of an episode of House.
The character Dr. Ezra Powell was a physician who studied cancer cells
in lab rats. One night while doing
research, Dr. Powell collapsed on his lab floor, and the rats he was
experimenting on started to eat at his face.
When Dr. Powell was found, he was unable to be diagnosed, and thus taken
to the care of Dr. House. Dr. House then
puts Dr. Powell through his regular medical rigor and antics. However, House is unable to find the cause of
Dr. Powell’s collapse. Meanwhile, Dr.
Powell continues to deteriorate. Then, for
some reason, House’s team starts to discuss euthanasia. Drs. Cameron and Foreman are whole-heartedly
against the idea of euthanasia, while Drs. House, Chase, and Wilson are in
support of it.
Dr. Powell tells
House to cure him in twenty-four hours, or Dr. Powell is going to refuse any
further treatment, thus creating a form of physician assisted suicide, where
the physician involuntarily and passively euthanizes Dr. Powell. (Involuntary passive physician assisted
suicide is when the doctor decides to do nothing, and let nature takes its
course in killing the patient [Cauthen]).
House then fails to diagnose Dr. Powell within the twenty-four hour
mark, and Dr. Powell refuses any more treatment. As House readies a fatal dose of morphine,
Dr. Foreman tries to stop House from injecting Dr. Powell. House comically says, “…someone here is going
to get a buttload of morphine. I’m not
exactly sure who at this point,” referring to Dr. Foreman’s refuse to let House
inject Dr. Powell. When Dr. House injects
Dr. Powell, we learn that the “fatal” dose wasn’t enough to kill him, but
simply put him in a coma so House can diagnose Dr. Powell without
interruption. We learn that House may
not be in support of euthanasia, but we also learn that House may simply have
put Dr. Powell in a coma to finish the puzzle, which keeps House happy. The ethics of putting a patient in a coma
without permission is for another time.
When Dr. Powell
wakes up, and finds that his abdomen and legs have lost sensation, he gets
upset that he wasn’t killed. He then
learns that he has terminal amyloidosis.
As Dr. Powell struggles for breath, Dr. Cameron gets irate at him for
his unethical work on children in the 1960s.
“Ethics hinders research,” says Dr. Powell. Then Dr. Cameron slices a piece of skin off
of Dr. Powell’s arm, and Dr. Powell congratulates her for doing the right
thing. Dr. Powell dies later that night
(“Informed Consent [House]”). The
questions here are, Should’ve House just let Dr. Powell die without putting him
in a coma, or should’ve House put a fatal dose of morphine in him?
The Roman Catholic
Church discussed euthanasia via Pope Pius XII when he condemned the Nazi’s use
of euthanasia. He was the first pope to
address the subject (Fr. Saunders). In
1980, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith released a statement
called the Declaration of Euthanasia. This statement says A) making an attempt at anyone’s life
is evil. B) each person is bound to life according to God’s plan. C) To kill oneself is a rejection of God’s
plan. We could go further to say that
this means that asking someone else to take one’s life is also a rejection of
God’s plan. The document also states that
each person is bound to traditional healthcare (whatever that means in the Catholic
Church), and to food, water, and ordinary medicine. Ordinary medicines, according to the
Declaration of Euthanasia, offers hope of benefit of the medication being
taken, and are not a burden on the patient and the family. This means that if the medication taken
doesn’t provide the right benefit, and it is seriously detrimental to the
family and patient, it isn’t to be considered ordinary medicine (I’m reminded
of another episode of House when Dr.
House gives a woman suffering from severe headaches by prescribing her Viagra,
because it dilates the blood vessels, letting more blood flow through the
vessels).
The document also
states that euthanasia is an “easy death,” meaning an “easy way out.” The wrongness is attributed to the intention
of the will to end one’s life quickly.
The document states that God cannot permit in any way the taking of
someone’s life, or the life of his or her own, whether it being the killing of
an innocent human being, being that of an embryo, fetus, infant, adult, or old
person suffering from an terminal disease, or a person who is dying. Otherwise, the person would have to deal with
years of intolerable suffering.
The Catholic
Church’s Catechism states in number 2276, “…Thus an act or omission which, of
itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering
constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to
the respect due to the living God, his Creator...” It also says in 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....” They even say that even if death is imminent,
the “ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted,”
(“Catechism of the Catholic Church”).
The Lutheran
church (on both sides of the political spectrum), offer different values when
it comes to euthanasia. The Missouri
Synod says that euthanasia is “mercy killing.”
Only God knows whether a disease is truly terminal (taking power away
from the doctors who God uses to diagnose and treat disease). This church also believes that when it comes
to a patient’s terminal disease, let nature takes its course (“Lutheran Church
– Missouri Synod – Euthanasia Statement”).
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America believes similarly. It believes that life is a gift from God, and
that both birth and death are part of the life process. But it says that both living and dying should
take place in a loving and caring community.
It also mandates respect for each person. The ELCA believes that euthanasia is wrong,
but says, “While this affirmation is clear, we also recognize that responsible
heath care professionals struggle to choose the lesser evil in ambiguous
borderline situations—for example, when pain becomes so unmanageable that life
is indistinguishable from torture…we approve the legalization of physician
assisted death,” (“A Message On End-Of-Life Decisions”).
Other
denominations and Christian traditions believe several things about
euthanasia. The Mennonite church
believes that “taking the life of a human being is wrong at any stage of life
for any reason,” (“Association of
Christian Churches of South Dakota”). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day
Saints believes in the sanctity of human life, and is opposed to euthanasia. They do not believe in allowing a person to
die from natural causes by “removing a patient from artificial means of life
support, as in the case of a long-term illness,” which, “falls within the
definition of euthanasia (“Euthanasia and Prolonged Life”). Finally, the Orthodox church believes that,
in the words of the 1976 Christmas encyclical of former Archbishop Iakovos,
euthanasia, along with abortion and homosexuality, are a “moral
alienation.” The church, currently,
sees, “The Church distinguishes between euthanasia and the withholding of
extraordinary means to prolong life. It affirms the sanctity of human life and
man's God-given responsibility to preserve life. But it rejects an attitude
which disregards the inevitability of physical death,” (“The Stand of the
Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues—Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in
America”).
Kenneth Couthen,
in his book titled The Ethics of Assisted
Death, gives a wonderful list of reasons as to why euthanasia should or
should not be legal. What are our
arguments against euthanasia? A.
Euthanasia breaks the Hippocratic Oath, or the oath that doctors take that
forbids them giving drugs to patients that will kill the patient. However, that also means that they are bound
to Apollo (not God) and the ancient gods and goddesses. B. Euthanasia breaks the trust between
patient and doctor. We expect doctors to
heal; not to kill. C. Personal autonomy is not an absolute
principle. There are no unlimited
choices in life. D. Suicide and killing
are wrong. As we have seen here, there
is a difference between legal and illegal killing. But both are considered wrong. E. The
patient may simply be temporarily depressed, with regrets. The patient may only be thinking in the
now-moment, and not thinking rationally.
The patient is thinking emotionally.
What are the
arguments for euthanasia? A. Individual
autonomy takes precedence over the interests of the state in protecting life in
some circumstances. Does the patient
have a terminal illness or constant suffering?
Does the patient have an illness that could seriously affect the general
population? These circumstances can
range from simple “I want to die,” to “I’ve currently on fire and I can’t stand
the pain. It’s torture.” If euthanasia was to be legalized, and this
“circumstances” clause put in legislation, to who would determine whether a
circumstance is justified? B. The doctor
may grant patient’s request to end life early because of constant
suffering. What can doctors do to help
alleviate pain? These arguments for and
against euthanasia will continue to be thorns of the debate on whether
euthanasia should be legalized or not.
Works Cited
Aghababaei, Naser,
Hojjatollah Farahani, and Javad Hatami. "Euthanasia Attitude; A Comparison
of Two Scales." Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine 4.1
(2011): 1-6. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
"AMA Policy on
End-of-Life Care." AMA Policy on End-of-Life Care. American
Medical Association, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
"Arguments For and
Against Euthanasia." CARE Arguments For and Against Euthanasia
Comments. CARE, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
"Assisted Suicide Bill
Won't Get Vote This Session." Boston.com. The New York Times,
25 Mar. 2014. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.
"Association of
Christian Churchesof South Dakota." Mennonite Church USA.
World Bible Publishers, Inc., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
Baklinski, Peter.
"LifeSiteNews Mobile | Belgium Parliament Passes Law Allowing Children to
Be Euthanized."LifeSiteNews. LifeSiteNews.com, 13 Feb. 2014. Web.
11 Apr. 2014.
"BMA Reaffirms
Opposition To Assisted Suicide, UK." Medical News Today.
MediLexicon International, 2 July 2009. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.
"Catechism of the
Catholic Church." Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Euthanasia.com, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
Cauthen, Kenneth. The
Ethics of Assisted Death: When Life Becomes a Burden Too Hard to Bear.
Lima, OH: CSS Pub., 1999. Print.
"Declaration on
Euthanasia - May 5, 1980." Declaration on Euthanasia - May 5, 1980.
Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, May 1980. Web. 08 Apr. 2014.
Dowbiggin, Ian. "From
Sander to Schiavo: Morality, Partisan Politics, and America’s Culture War over
Euthanasia, 1950–2010." Journal of Policy History 25.01
(2013): 12-41. Print.
"Euthanasia and
Prolonging Life." Www.mormonnewsroom.org. The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-Day Saints, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
"Informed Consent
(House)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 04 May 2014. Web.
10 Apr. 2014.
Jackson, Adam. "‘Thou
Shalt Not Kill; But Needst Not Strive Officiously to Keep Alive’: Further
Clarification of the Law regarding Mercy Killing, Euthanasia and Assisted
Suicide." The Journal of Criminal Law 77.6 (2013):
468-75. Print.
"Lutheran Church -
Missouri Synod - Euthanasia Statement." Lutheran Church - Missouri
Synod - Euthanasia Statement. Euthanasia.com, n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
"A Message On
End-Of-Life Decisions." Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 9 Nov. 1992. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
"Opinion 2.21 -
Euthanasia." Opinion 2.21 - Euthanasia. American Medical
Association, June 1996. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.
Pound, Kerry, MD.
"Column: A Physician's Perspective on Question 2 » Opinion »
SalemNews.com, Salem, MA." Opinion ATOM. Salem News, 30 Oct.
2012. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.
"Pro-euthanasia
Arguments." BBC News. BBC, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2014.
Rachels, James. The
Morality of Euthanasia. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007. Print.
Saunders, Fr. William.
"Library : What Is the Church's Teaching on Euthanasia? - Catholic
Culture." Library : What Is the Church's Teaching on Euthanasia? -
Catholic Culture. Trinity Communications, n.d. Web. 09 Apr. 2014.
Sharp, Robert. "The
Dangers Of Euthanasia And Dementia: How Kantian Thinking Might Be Used To
Support Non-Voluntary Euthanasia In Cases Of Extreme Dementia." Bioethics 26.5
(2012): 231-35. Print.
Slick, Matt. "What
Does the Bible Say about Euthanasia?" CARM. N.p., n.d. Web. 09
Apr. 2014.
"The Stand of the
Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues.” The Stand of the Orthodox Church
on Controversial Issues — Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. Greek
Orthodox Archdiocese of America, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2014.
Van Ittersum, Frans J., and
Lambert Hendriks. "Organ Donation after Euthanasia." National
Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 12.3 (2012): 431-37. Web.
