Regional Synod of Canada - Reformed Church in America

Pioneer Christian Monthly

Date - Mar/92

Contributor - Jennifer Skelly

Title - Euthanasia: Issues in the Current Debate

Topic - Euthanasia

In 1982, two women both in their early forties, were told by their respective physicians that they had breast cancer. The first one believing that she faced a lingering and painful terminal illness, took her own life with the assistance of her husband. The other woman was also afraid of the suffering and what the future might hold. However, with the help of medications, she has spent the last 10 years as a volunteer in her local hospital comforting those who are dying. These two women represent two vastly different philosophies and approaches to their diagnosis of cancer.

Modern technology permits us to prolong life almost at will. This ability as well as the desire to be in control has drawn us into a debate concerning who decides how and when we are to die. There have been numerous books and articles written in recent years which try to present both sides of the argument. The debate at present is focused on those persons who are terminally ill. However, if a precedent can be established it will only be a matter of time before others such as the frail, elderly and disabled could be included. In this article we will try to explore some of the medical and ethical issues involved as well as reflecting upon what I believe to be the Christian perspective on this whole question.

Euthanasia is defined in the Oxford dictionary as the bringing about of a gentle and easy death for a person suffering from a painful incurable disease. It is described in the literature as either "passive" or "active".

Passive euthanasia is said to occur when treatment is withheld which, if continued, would in all probability prolong the patient's life. The decision to stop treatment is usually a mutual one between the patient and the physician. Active euthanasia is the death of a human, purposely brought on as part of the treatment.

The Central Issue

The central issue in this controversy is suffering and whether suffering should be relieved by willed or assisted death.

Those who favour euthanasia contend that no form of intervention should be prohibited if its aim is to relieve or eliminate suffering. Our society considers suffering as an ultimate evil, while euthanasia is seen as a lesser evil. Many would argue that withholding euthanasia is inflicting suffering. Prolonging life should only concern human life of a quality that the person concerned wishes to prolong. Seen from this perspective the final phase of life would be easier for all concerned, individuals and families will no longer worry as much about exhausting their savings.

Those who argue against euthanasia believe that it detracts from developing better care for dying patients. They are concerned about possible abuse resulting in patients being euthanized involuntarily, under duress or secretly. What is needed are more effective ways to relieve pain and permit patients to continue as useful productive persons rather than a lethal dose to end life. Specialists in palliative care report that sick and dying patients rarely request euthanasia. They want to live until they die. The percentage of terminally ill who actually suffer from serious pain problems is approximately 15 per cent, they need relief of pain not death.

Suffering is Personal

Dr. Elizabeth Latimer, an specialist in the field of palliative care, suggests that euthanasia may be proposed as relief from senseless suffering, but because it is so personal, society has little real understanding of what suffering is about. Removing the sufferer is not the answer to removing the suffering, the greater challenge may be to find meaning in suffering.

A Gallup Poll released in November, 1991 reported 75 per cent of Canadians in favour of legal euthanasia by doctors. This is an increase of 30 per cent from 1968 when 45 per cent approved. It is interesting to note that while 78 per cent of those between 18 and 29 years old favour permitting euthanasia, only 58 per cent of people 65 and older supported this view. One wonders whether there might be a significant mind change on the part of these younger advocates as they approach retirement age.

In 1984 Professor Gerald Larue, professor emeritus of religion at the University of Southern California, conducted a survey of religions' attitudes to euthanasia. He concluded that leaders' responses confronted the issue from a theological point of view, rather than from direct contact with pain and suffering. The majority of the churches surveyed accepted passive euthanasia but most were opposed to active euthanasia. The Reformed Church in America was only one of six denominations who were opposed to both forms of euthanasia.

The Christian response to the issue of euthanasia is clear. Life belongs to God and therefore cannot be taken. God alone has control over human life. The Belgic Confession affirms us that God after He had created all things, did not abandon His creation to fortune or blind chance, but that according to His holy will He rules and governs His creation in such a way that in this world nothing happens without His direction or permission.

We are provided with many examples of suffering in the Bible. The classic example in the Old Testament is that of Job who underwent extreme suffering. The account of Job's suffering calls us to enter, with him, into a pain filled struggle and so to better understand our own suffering. In the New Testament, Jesus through his suffering accomplished the wonderful saving purpose of bringing us to God. Often we do not know why we are called upon to suffer. But the fact that God's own Son suffered speaks therapeutically to our suffering, even when we cannot understand it. Like Job and like Jesus when suffering comes we must simply put our trust in Him.

The Request of Nancy B.

As I write this article a landmark decision has been rendered in Quebec, in relation to a young woman's request to have her ventilator disconnected which will result in her death since she is presently unable to breath on her own. Justice Dufour ruled that the woman has the right to control her own life and therefore the right to demand cessation of the respiratory support she is receiving. Dr John Thomas, noted expert in the field of Medical Ethics, suggested in a recent interview that a new problem has now been created for physicians, who have traditionally been dedicated to the saving of life but have now been placed in the position of becoming the executioners.

As I follow this case I cannot help remembering another patient with the same disease who also spent two years of his life connected to a ventilator. He was not able to speak but you could tell by the spirit reflected in his eyes that he had not given up. Finally after two years, the feeling in his body slowly started to return he was able to breathe on his own and soon after was transferred to a rehabilitation unit. He is now home with his family walking and talking almost as well as before he became ill. I asked him what kept him going when it must have seemed as if things would never improve. He said he never gave up hope that one day he would go home again. The Lord does not ask us to bear more than we are able. His grace is always available and is always sufficient.

Dr. Margaret Somerville, the director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, suggests that trends like the current swing towards euthanasia do not happen by themselves. She notes that there appears to be an underlying shift from accepting the sanctity of life to stressing the quality of life. Such a consumer society mentality implies that if you cannot earn love you will not get it. The resulting fear of being unloved and abandoned as death approaches can lead people to consider the option of euthanasia. Dr. Somerville warns us that we had better alter this perception that love is tenuous, that it is conditional and that it must be deserved.

We must always seek His will and not our own way. And that is a great struggle for many of us in a society where we are encouraged to take control of our lives and do only that which makes us feel good. God does not promise us unending health, wealth or success. But He does promise us the possibility of experiencing a unique peace and joy in the daily moments of our lives, even when surrounded by the trials and sufferings.

Please click the "Back" button of your browser to return to previous page.