Dignity and Death: Part II
“How should Christians think about dying?” That is the question we considered in Part I. Additionally, we examined some historical considerations regarding physician-assisted suicide. We traced this issue from Dr. Kevorkian in the 1990s to the most recent form of legislation in California that allows physicians to prescribe medicine for terminally ill patients to end their own lives.
In this essay, we’ll focus our attention on the dangerous effect physician-assisted suicide can have in a culture that embraces death for those deemed unworthy or incapable of contributing to society. Lastly, we’ll give attention towards a proper view of dying well and ministering to those who are suffering.
Slippery-Slope
Thankfully, today’s medical technologies provide the ability to extend human life longer than ever before. However, what happens when physicians, those trained to heal us, become licensed agents of death? What about the potential for active, voluntary physician-assisted suicide to lead to involuntary euthanasia?
Before we look further into potential abuses, we need to distinguish between active euthanasia and letting someone die. Some medical care sustains natural processes, while other types of care replaces or carries out those processes. Our motive should never be to speed up the natural process of dying, but it may not always be ethically necessary to start or even continue every available medical treatment.[1] The danger that many are starting to see now is the possibility of active, voluntary physician-assisted suicide leading to involuntary euthanasia. Involuntary euthanasia happens when the patient is killed against his or her wishes.
Potential abuses are already happening in some places. David VanDrunen writes, “In the Netherlands, for example, studies have shown that a great many instances of PAS have gone unreported (contrary to legal requirement) and have raised concerns that the practice of involuntary euthanasia is not uncommon.”[2] Once this line of reasoning is established for physician-assisted suicide, a “slippery slope” can develop that leads one to think we can “get rid of” those who are unable to take care of themselves. We would then live in a world where the terminally ill and elderly would have to justify their continued existence.
The slippery slope argument reveals that once more and more avenues of physician-assisted suicide are opened to the public, more people will become interested. Ethicist John Keown, rightly affirms,
Once a doctor is prepared to make such a judgment in the case of patient capable of requesting death, the judgment can, logically, equally be made in the case of a patient incapable of requesting death. . . . If a doctor thinks death would benefit the patient, why should the doctor deny the patient that benefit merely because the patient is incapable of asking for it? If denying assistance in suicide to those physically incapable of committing it, and for whom death is thought a benefit, amounts to discrimination, why does denying euthanasia to those mentally incapable of requesting it, and for whom death is thought a benefit, not amount to discrimination? The logical “slippery slope” argument is unanswerable.[3]
Keown is right to note the consequences involved in permitting physician-assisted suicide and this illogical line of reasoning. Countries considering an allowance for these kinds of euthanasia laws should seriously consider the data found in the Netherlands.
Churches will also need to prepare for this unique ministry area and be able to answer questions concerning suffering in a fallen world. Christians will need to think carefully about how suffering plays a role in our world. What do Christians think about dying? These are important questions and issues to consider and the church must speak with clarity into these areas.
Towards a Proper View of Dying Well
Christians should seek to promote life on all fronts, including beginning and end-of-life issues. Each of these areas will require different kinds of arguments, but they each hinge on one important biblical truth: the inherent dignity of every human being. We noted earlier that each human being has inherent dignity and value because of the imago Dei. This value and worth must be considered and upheld in questions surrounding end-of-life issues. Proponents of physician-assisted suicide will often make their case by using terms like “Death with Dignity” or the “Good Death.” However, death as a strategy to end suffering is against the biblical ethic and completely ignores the inherent value of each human being.
Is there any purpose in our suffering and pain? The question in Scripture is not whether we should suffer, but how and why.[4] For starters, we should rightly understand that death is our enemy. Death is a direct consequence of man’s fall and should not be celebrated by ending suffering in this life. Therefore, we should understand death as being unavoidable in the human life. Our question should concern how we approach it. How will we approach our pain and suffering? As Daniel Callahan says, “What kind of a person do I want to bring to my suffering, and to the illness and fear of dying that provoke it?”[5]
Suffering is something that plagues every human being in this world. However, suffering may have redemptive purposes. Callahan rightly notes, “Acceptance of suffering, or understanding suffering as part of a religious interpretation of life, can provide a rationale for the suffering.”[6] The redemptive purposes of suffering are rooted in biblical teaching. The Apostle Paul speaks to this truth in Romans 5:3-5, “Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.” Paul knew all too well about suffering, and he knew the difficulty in bearing painful circumstances. However, he points out that our pain and suffering is not meaningless.
Humans were not designed to bear suffering. It was not a part of God’s original intention for creation. With this in mind, the likelihood of suffering as death approaches is troubling for all human beings. Since death is our enemy, we should never describe it as something that is good or filled with dignity. To take life would interrupt and undertake the Creator’s role in this world.
We cannot forget that God created human beings in His image, and God Himself takes life away. Death as a strategy to end suffering is a mark of the same pride that resulted in human beings’ ejection from Eden. As John Piper says, “Giving and taking life is a responsibility reserved only for God.”[7] Therefore, we should not seek any possible avenue to end our lives by our own means. And we should not give consent to physicians to administer the medication for doing so.
Conclusion
As medical technologies advance and arguments increase for “death with dignity,” Christians will need to help people struggling with death apply biblical truth with clarity and compassion. One important aspect of this ministry is observing the underlying motivations involved with considering any form of suicide, responding promptly when signs of depression emerge in friends or family members. Perhaps the most obvious evidence of depression is a feeling of worthlessness.[8] If a person senses that they aren’t worthy of living, it should cause us to minister promptly. Paul speaks to this truth in Galatians 6:2, “Bear one another’s burdens.” Thoughts of suicide or escaping pain are very serious problems, and should not be taken lightly. Christians bear the responsibility of ministering to those around them that show signs of these problems.
Compassion is the virtue we want to show towards those considering end of life issues. We need to look no further than our Lord Who modeled for us what showing compassion looks like (e.g., Mt. 9:36, 14:14, 15:32; Lk. 7:13). We should not assess people’s value according to what they can contribute in this world. They are already valuable based who they are in essence.
Kenneth Magnuson rightly notes, “Compassion that is rightly ordered to human dignity will not promote or tolerate such a view, but will instead seek to comfort and care for those who are suffering because they matter to us, and they have immeasurable value as human beings made in the very image of God.”[9] Indeed, showing compassion will reaffirm each person’s inherent dignity. This dignity is not dependent on their functionality, but is simply rooted in who they are in God’s eyes.
Active euthanasia is disastrous when those in power use subjective criteria for the value of human life. Therefore, the church should offer protection against the evils of this age, including its embrace of death. It should show mercy and compassion to others (cf. Mic. 6:8).[10] Perhaps the greatest hope we all have at the end of our lives is to know the truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The resurrection proves Christ has defeated man’s greatest enemy, death. Likewise, Scripture tells us that nothing can separate us from God’s love (cf. Rom. 8:38-39). Not even death.
____________________
[1] For a helpful discussion on this topic read, “On The Nature Of Tube Feeding: Basic Or Medical Care?” by Erik M. Clary. Read here: http://www.etsjets.org/files/program_units/Bioethics_papers/ETS_2010_Bioethics_Clary.pdf
[2] David VanDrunen, Bioethics and the Christian Life: A Guide to Making Difficult Decisions (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009), 206.
[3] Daniel J. Hurst, “Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: A Slippery Slope Indeed,” Canon and Culture, July 29, 2015, http://www.canonandculture.com/physician-assisted-suicide-and-euthanasia-a-slippery-slope-indeed/, quoted in John Keown, “A Right to Voluntary Euthanasia? Confusion in Canada in Carter,” Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy, 28, no. 1 (2014): 23, http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol28/iss1/1/ (accessed October 25, 2015).
[4] Committee on Medical Ethics Episcopal Diocese of Washington, Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Christian Moral Perspectives (Harrisburg: Morehouse Publishing, 1997), 49.
[5] Daniel Callahan, The Troubled Dream of Life: Living with Morality (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993), 136.
[6] Callahan, The Troubled Dream of Life, 135.
[7] John Piper, “We Are Not Our Own: On God, Brittany Maynard, and Physician-Assisted Suicide,” Desiring God, October 31, 2014, http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/we-are-not-our-own-on-god-brittany-maynard-and-physician-assisted-suicide (accessed November 1, 2015.)
[8] Eddie Moody, First Aid for Emotional Hurts: Helping People Through Difficult Times (Nashville: Randall House, 2008), 89.
[9] Kenneth Magnuson, “On Human Dignity, Compassion, and Physician-Assisted Suicide,” Cannon and Culture, October 20, 2015, http://www.canonandculture.com/on-human-dignity-compassion-and-physician-assisted-suicide/ (accessed October 22, 2015).
[10] See “Some Thoughts on Ministering to the Sick and Dying” by Kevin DeYoung. Read here: http://blogs.thegospelcoalition.org/kevindeyoung/2016/01/08/some-thoughts-on-ministering-to-the-sick-and-dying/
Recent Comments