|
CHRISTIANS AND POLITICAL ACTION: EUTHANASIA
Babette Francis
My starting point on preserving and defending the dignity
of the human person is Chapter l, verse 27, of Genesis: “So God created
man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female
He created them” (Imago Dei — the principle which inspires us).
Before his February visit to Scotland, Pope Benedict told Scottish bishops
that “euthanasia strikes at the heart of Christianity”, and
urged the Scottish Parliament to oppose a Bill legalising euthanasia.
He said assisted suicide was a sign of “the increasing tide of secularism”
in Scotland and encouraged Catholics to take an active stand in speaking
against it.
So I make no apology if my approach is political. Think of those who battle
in the political arena against euthanasia as the ground troops who make
it possible for the options of palliative care and hospices for the terminally
ill. We oppose a utilitarian approach to end of life decisions and the
corruption of the medical profession in crossing the moral boundary between
compassion and killing.
Meanwhile the push is on around the world to legalise an array of private
killings, whether these be called assisted suicide, dying with dignity
or voluntary euthanasia. It is tragic that in three states of the US physician-assisted
suicide is legal. But elsewhere there is good overseas news to encourage
those who are working against euthanasia and assisted suicide.
Britain
Last year in Scotland, health minister Nicola Sturgeon said she opposed
the assisted suicide Bill being concerned that it could be abused to target
the elderly and disabled. In addition, the British Medical Association
has joined pro-life groups and disability rights advocates in opposing
the Bill. “The BMA would be very disappointed if we ended up legalising
physician assisted suicide in Scotland,” Dr George Fernie of the
BMA said. “People when they have a debilitating illness that may
end their life are extremely vulnerable, they’re at a fragile stage.
And our worry is they’re going to contemplate ending their life when
that really isn’t their wish.”
The Scottish Council on Human Bioethics panned the Bill, calling it “dangerous
and unnecessary.” The panel saw the Bill as likely to turn disabled
and terminally ill people into second class citizens. The Council said
assisted dying was unnecessary because physical suffering can
be adequately alleviated in all but the most rare cases. “When dying
patients realise they do not need to suffer, they often change their minds
about euthanasia.”
Pope Benedict told the Scottish bishops that only complete support for
all Catholic teaching can lend credibility to their voices: “If the
Church’s teaching is compromised, even slightly, in one such area,
then it becomes hard to defend the fullness of Catholic doctrine in an
integral manner.”
The Scottish Bill, moved by an Independent MSP, Ms Macdonald, who is suffering
from Parkinsons, has now been referred to a special committee.
France
In November the French National Assembly rejected an attempt to legalise
euthanasia in a 326 to 202 vote. The Bill, tabled by Manuel Valls, deputy
for the Parti Socialiste, described euthanasia as “medical assistance
to die with dignity,” and said euthanasia should be allowed for “all
adults with advanced or terminal illnesses of a serious and incurable
nature; those who suffer from physical or mental pain that cannot be appeased
by medicine and that the patient considers intolerable.” Bill supporter,
Laurent Fabius, argued that since euthanasia was currently being practised
“outside a legal framework,” it was necessary to have a law
regulating it.
Activists opposing euthanasia strongly criticised such language which
they said could lead to patients suffering from mental illnesses like
depression being at risk of medically approved suicide. “Euthanasia
is not a medical act. The right to die is not a medical act,” said
Union for a Popular Movement party deputy Jean Leonetti, author of a 2005
law on dying that promotes the use of palliative care.
South Australia
In November last year, South Australian pro-lifers defeated a Bill moved
by Mark Parnell, a Greens member of the Legislative Council. It is usually
Greens who move euthanasia or abortion bills — Greens love trees
but hate people. The Bill was tied l0/l0, and we knew the Speaker who
had a casting vote was pro-euthanasia. There was much prayer and lobbying
by prolifers, and on the final vote an Opposition MP, David Ridgway, changed
his mind and voted against the Bill, so it was lost ll/9. Since his previous
vote in favour of the Bill, Mr Ridgway’s mother had died. Perhaps
his grief and actual confrontation with the death of a loved one made
him realise that he could not have sentenced her to death, given that
every remaining day of her life was precious.
We have seen something similar with Australian philosopher Peter Singer,
now teaching at Princeton. For years he has been promoting euthanasia
for those with terminal illnesses as well as Alzheimer’s patients.
However, when his own mother was diagnosed with Alzheimer's,
Singer did not have her euthanased but rather had her cared for in an
expensive nursing home.
We do not know what goes on in the human heart and soul, but possibly
David Ridgway realised when his mother was dying that the Greens’
allegations that the terminally ill can be a burden, or selfish for not
requesting to be euthanased, are untrue.
My husband died seven months ago, and I know how much I longed to have
him live one more week, one more day. And David Ridgway may
have also longed for more time with his mother and realised he could not
support the Bill, which would have cheated not only the dying but their
loved ones of precious time together.
The defeat of the Bill in South Australia was a victory, but it did not
come without a lot of ground work, especially by the Australian Family
Association, and a lot of lobbying and personal contact with Members of
Parliament. I would urge all of those who are not involved in politics
to
become involved. We are fortunate to live in a democracy, and should not
waste this God-given blessing.
Slippery slope
The American Medical Association states that physician-assisted suicide
is fundamentally inconsistent with a physician’s professional role
and that it is critical that the medical profession redoubles its efforts
to ensure dying patients are provided with optimal treatment to relieve
pain and
discomfort.
The policy of the American Nurses Association states: “The ANA believes
that the nurse should not participate in assisted suicide. Such an act
is in violation of the Code for Nurses and the ethical traditions of the
profession”.
The slippery slope towards killing is actually a downhill escalator. In
Holland where euthanasia was promoted as mercy killing with the consent
of terminal patients enduring intractable pain, now patients, especially
the elderly and confused, are euthanased without their consent. Disabled
newborns are also euthanased.
In Oregon, patients Wagner and Stroup, both living with cancer and dependent
on the state medical plan for medical treatments, received letters
from Oregon Medicare denying them access to medical treatment for cancer,
and offering only assisted suicide or palliative care.
In Britain the mother who cares for her paraplegic adult son James, who
had been injured in an accident as a child, says, “My fear is if
people
think of assisted suicide as an option, then the balance will change.
As a society, we will shift towards a different mindset, in which people
like
James appear expendable”.
Dr Philip Nitschke, Australia’s Dr Death, gets much flattering media
coverage. He has promoted the practice of people purchasing Nembutal
from veterinary clinics in Mexico. He claims 300 people have purchased
lethal doses and that 125 of them have killed themselves with this drug.
The National Coroners Service stated that of the 38 Nembutal deaths that
were fully investigated, only 11 involved people with chronic pain or
a terminal condition. We can only speculate that the other 27 took their
lives forpsychological reasons. What they needed was not a lethal end
to their pain, but love.
A woman in Western Australia, an academic, was 80 years of age and single
with no children. She was not ill but killed herself because she said
she was tired of living and had nothing to live for. I wonder if she could
have been saved had someone given her an affectionate dog, one from the
many abandoned ones in the local pound waiting to be put down if an owner
cannot be found. If she had had a dog that needed her, it is possible
both might have lived.
Benedict XVI
In an address to the Pontifical Academy for Life in February, Pope Benedict
said that with the rapid advance of technology, it is more imperative
than ever that bioethics be guided by the Natural Law that is “inscribed
by God the Creator in the heart of man. “When respect for the dignity
of the person is invoked it is fundamental that it be complete, total
and with no strings attached. Without the ‘universal principles’
of the fundamental right of all human beings to have their inherent dignity
regarded — a ‘common denominator for the whole of humanity’
— the result will be a ‘relativistic drift at the legislative
level.’ “Every law in every society is called to recognise this
right as inviolable and every single person must respect and promote it
...”.
In the debate on the Federal Bill aimed at overturning the Northern Territory’s
euthanasia legislation, one of the Senators won over to the pro-life side
was Senator Kay Patterson. Initially in favour of euthanasia, she quoted
from poet John Keats’ Ode to a Nightingale: “Darkling I listen,
and for many a time “I have been half in love with an easeful Death”.
Keats suffered from illness for much of his adult life — tuberculosis,
fevers and chills — and died young. No doubt he felt awful but still
could enjoy the ecstatic singing of a nightingale as he wrote: “Now
more than ever seems it rich to die, “To cease upon the midnight
with no pain ...”.
Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition,
Canada, has been promoting a leaflet titled, “Caring NOT Killing”.
That is the challenge for us: to ease the pain of the dying and the depressed
so that they might think, if not of nightingales, perhaps of angels.
Postscript
On 21 April 2010 Bill C-384, the private members Bill that would have
legalised euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada was decisively defeated
by a vote of 228 to 59. Alex Schadenberg commented: “It is our goal
to work with MPs and Canadian leaders to,
• improve palliative/hospice care throughout Canada;
• change attitudes and improve services for people with disabilities;
• institute an effective national suicide prevention strategy;
• promote programs that identify and eliminate the scourge of elder
abuse.
“We reject the concept that killing can be the answer to problems
that are properly solved by a caring society”.
This is the edited text of a talk given by Babette
Francis at Sherlake Cultural Centre, Chicago, March 2010.
Babette Francis is the National and Overseas Co-ordinator of Endeavour
Forum Inc., an organisation that is active on pro-life issues.
|