Requesting one's own death

[ThinkingSapien]

In terms of offering one’s suffering up for the salvation for souls - is there a **better **

way to understand suffering in this world?
Nimzovik;9438540:

So. How does your

philosophy explain or deal with acute or general suffering?
Is there any value in suffering at all according to your lights?

I’m not sure what you are asking me here. I personally don’t like suffering if that tells you anything.

Ergo if said person, if in full possesion of his faculties, willfully participated in committing the murder of himself, then said person would be committing a sin.

I personally would not want that on my conscience at the Judgement seat.

Will said person go to hell? You would have to ask Our Lord that question.

Yes, I understand this is in the realm of prohibited acts and intentions.

One of the key components of murder is malice. But in this scenario one of the feelings that could motivate some one to comply with the request is compassion. So I don’t think murder is an appropriate word. (It might be man slaughter, which is a lesser offense). Having strong feelings both against killing and strong feelings against suffering is something that can result in a conflict in this scenario. Especially since the person undergoing the suffering has made it known he strongly wishes not to experience it.

Would you allow someone to commit assisted suicide if the person in question were depressed? Would you allow a person to kill themselves if they were recently divorced and felt that life were not living?

I’m not sure what “Allow” would mean since I have no such authority over other humans. When I have found myself with some one disclosing to me the she wishes to kill herself (it’s always females that disclose this to me) I’ve been able to contribute to them changing their position. This has involved trying to reduce the factors that are causing them grief, bring up consideration for the suffering that this would cause to other people that they love (and I’ll re-emphasize here, I don’t see suffering as a good thing. Neither did the females that were considering suicide). It’s also involved getting a therapist involved and at times distracting some one from their concerns. With enough time, therapy, and medication disaster has been averted.

Not sure I can transfer any of that to this scenario since in the suicide scenarios in which I’ve had involvement the factors were of the type that would change over time or the feelings for the factors could diminish with time. In contrast this is a person that is terminally ill and his quality of life, mobility, and daily pains will only get worst with time.

Yes… That succinctly delineates the Atheist perspective or perhaps, the Non- Catholic perspective.

I’ve checked with a couple of Catholics to which I have immediate access (far from an idea sample population). I’m not sure if I communicated it properly, but I asked them about this concept of “suffering being a gift to be offered up” and they had no idea of what I was speaking about. They confirmed their preference is to not suffer also. Perhaps it is a delineating line for Catholic philosophy, but I’m not confident that it is a delineating line for Catholics.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

It is all about one’s world view. We believe that Christ suffered to redeem us and purchase for us the reward of eternal life in the next, yet to be revealed world. By our baptism, we become parts of Christ’s mystical Body on earth. Just as Christ’s suffering was offered to God for the redemption of mankind, so also can our suffering be offered to God for redemptive purpose - for our own, or for others.

Not sure that I’ll be able to understand this, but I’ll try to make a behavior model for myself for this.

By our baptism, we are partakers of the Divine nature, and so may also offer our suffering to God for eternal benefit. By this world view, cancer has become a blessing. If I was taken back four years and given the choice, I would choose to have cancer. I am much more appreciative of life than I was four years ago. Life is not perfect, but then it does not last forever on this earth. I look forward with great hope to the next world.

Does this also mean that if you knew certain things raised your chances of getting cancer that you would not avoid them?

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

Heroic measures are not requisite.

So how fancy does a feeding tube have to be to be considered heroic?

 

[po18guy]

Does this also mean that if you knew certain things raised your chances of getting cancer that you would not avoid them?

Prudence dictates that we respect the life and the body which the Lord has given us. The concept of redemptive suffering is difficult for all who are not either Catholic or Orthodox Christians to wrap one’s head around, I will admit. Yet, once embraced, much will change. Much has changed.

 

[Durus]

I’ve come across a real life scenario.

There’s a person, Catholic, that is of deteriorating health. He’s contemplating his own death, gathering family to take care of his will, and doing other things to prepare for death.

Because of the direction in which he health is going he is concerned with finding himself trapped in his own body experiencing nothing but pain. Pain management with this person has failed due to reactions to pain medication. In preparing for this scenario he’s made a coded message asking that one of his friends be ready to help him die if his life reaches the point of being only pain.

How would you react to this scenario?

Until the law changes, shielding people who help those who wish to take their own lives while suffering with a terminal illness, I would do nothing, as I do not want to be prosecuted for 1st degree murder.

However, if the law changed, I would of course help them end their lives humanely at the time and place of their choosing.

 

[Durus]

**Thinking Sapien wrote: “**While the person preparing for his own death is Catholic I get the impression that his view isn’t in total agreement with this since he’s requesting that some one truncate the final protracted suffering from his living experience. He’s already stated that he’s not in total agreement with the Catholic church with some things and feels they should not have a say-so in certain aspects of his life.”

Nimzovik Responds.

Yes, it appears you are quite correct,apparentl, he is not in perfect conformity with the will of Holy Mother Church or the will of Our Lord if said person were to request to be assisted in suicide.

Ergo if said person, if in full possesion of his faculties, willfully participated in committing the murder of himself, then said person would be committing a sin.

I personally would not want that on my conscience at the Judgement seat.

Will said person go to hell? You would have to ask Our Lord that question.

My turn.

Would you allow someone to commit assisted suicide if the person in question were depressed? Would you allow a person to kill themselves if they were recently divorced and felt that life were not living?

Terminal Illness, is a condition where there is no chance of recovery and death will result in a short period of time.

Depression is a treatable condition.

Apples to oranges.

 

[Durus]

Prudence dictates that we respect the life and the body which the Lord has given us. The concept of redemptive suffering is difficult for all who are not either Catholic or Orthodox Christians to wrap one’s head around, I will admit. Yet, once embraced, much will change. Much has changed.

Suffering in agony while immobile in a bed is of no value…to anyone.

To see someone suffer in agony, watch them fall into a coma and then wait 5 or 7 days for them to die of dehydration.

Is the definition of inhumane in my humble opinion.

We don’t allow animals to suffer when facing imminent death, but for some reason we allow people to lay in beds in horrible pain, waiting for their bodies to final stop working.

It’s madness.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Prudence dictates that we respect the life and the body which the Lord has given us. The concept of redemptive suffering is difficult for all who are not either Catholic or Orthodox Christians to wrap one’s head around, I will admit. Yet, once embraced, much will change. Much has changed.

So does all suffering have a redemptive value to you or only certain types of suffering? If the latter then how do you distinguish between the two?

 

[Sair]

Suffering in agony while immobile in a bed is of no value…to anyone.

To see someone suffer in agony, watch them fall into a coma and then wait 5 or 7 days for them to die of dehydration.

Is the definition of inhumane in my humble opinion.

We don’t allow animals to suffer when facing imminent death, but for some reason we allow people to lay in beds in horrible pain, waiting for their bodies to final stop working.

It’s madness.

Yes, it is madness.

It is nothing less than the preferencing of the imagined demands of undemonstrable supernatural beings over the needs of real, present, natural human beings. No wonder ethics is such a fraught battlefield when this is what we have to contend with…

 

[Sair]

So how fancy does a feeding tube have to be to be considered heroic?

Hmm…apparently “selfless” Christian love doesn’t extend to imperilling one’s immortal soul for the sake of relieving the suffering of a fellow being…

 

[Sair]

I’ve come across a real life scenario.

There’s a person, Catholic, that is of deteriorating health. He’s contemplating his own death, gathering family to take care of his will, and doing other things to prepare for death.

Because of the direction in which he health is going he is concerned with finding himself trapped in his own body experiencing nothing but pain. Pain management with this person has failed due to reactions to pain medication. In preparing for this scenario he’s made a coded message asking that one of his friends be ready to help him die if his life reaches the point of being only pain.

How would you react to this scenario?

With utmost respect to the wishes of the person involved.

One thing that is often overlooked in the euthanasia debate is the intimacy and trust involved in one person asking another to peacefully bring about their death.

What would you earnestly wish for in such circumstances? A friend who respected your wishes and had your interests at heart, or someone who prevaricated over fine points of dogmatic religious morality? The ethic of reciprocity comes to bear in such a case.

Like you, I see no value whatsoever in suffering for its own sake. If you believe this life is all we get, then the quality of that life is worthy of serious consideration.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Hmm…apparently “selfless” Christian love doesn’t extend to imperilling one’s immortal soul for the sake of relieving the suffering of a fellow being…

I actually thought about something atheistgirl said in the other thread about ones state of mind and poor health possibly motivating self sacrifice as a means to an end without directly violating the prohibition against suicide. While that’s another discussion (and one that seems to have gone far astray) there’s some overlap.

With utmost respect to the wishes of the person involved.

One thing that is often overlooked in the euthanasia debate is the intimacy and trust involved in one person asking another to peacefully bring about their death.

Despite the debate I get the impression that this isn’t as uncommon as some might think. From speaking to a couple of hospice workers it seems that such requests are not entirely unheard of. I’m just sharing one that came up in conversation. And yes, there is a certain intimacy closeness that is suggested in one person asking another for such a request. As to how much they are actually executed, I get the feeling it may be overlooked; when the terminally ill person dies the family might not request an autopsy and it wouldn’t raise a brow since the person is already terminally ill.

(Side note, I also can’t help but think of the ending to Million Dollar Baby).

What would you earnestly wish for in such circumstances? A friend who respected your wishes and had your interests at heart, or someone who prevaricated over fine points of dogmatic religious morality? The ethic of reciprocity comes to bear in such a case.

I’d hate to find myself on either end of this situation for obvious reasons. If I found myself on the end of being the requester I don’t know what I would do (which means that there’s a possibility that I’d look into how to fulfill the request).

Like you, I see no value whatsoever in suffering for its own sake. If you believe this life is all we get, then the quality of that life is worthy of serious consideration.

Yes, I think that quality of life is a serious issue. And some elements of the platinum rule comes to mind too.

I’m trying to understand this view of suffering being a gift. Is that something that is unconditionally held as true? If not then when? I’ve got lots of other questions on that too.

 

[Nimzovik]

So how fancy does a feeding tube have to be to be considered heroic?

Precisely. A feeding tube is requisite. I am in agreement with you.

 

[Nimzovik]

Thinking Sapien wrote:

“One of the key components of murder is malice. But in this scenario one of the feelings that could motivate some one to comply with the request is compassion. So I don’t think murder is an appropriate word. (It might be man slaughter, which is a lesser offense). Having strong feelings both against killing and strong feelings against suffering is something that can result in a conflict in this scenario. Especially since the person undergoing the suffering has made it known he strongly wishes not to experience it.”

Point taken in terms of ‘Slaughter’ and “malice.”

As far as for Atheists and Non- Christains I can see why they would thinks such as to the mercy aspect of acute suffering.

We Catholics, of course can not permit ourselves as it is a directive from heaven to not do so. Also we see a beneficial aspect in terms of ‘redemptive suffering’ which gives meaning to suffering IMHO.

 

[Nimzovik]

**Thinking Sapien Wrote: **

**…"**I’m not sure what “Allow” would mean since I have no such authority over other humans. **When I have found myself with some one disclosing to me the she wishes to kill herself (it’s always females that disclose this to me) I’ve been able to contribute to them changing their position. This has involved trying to reduce the factors that are causing them grief, bring up consideration for the suffering that this would cause to other people that they love (and I’ll re-emphasize here, I don’t see suffering as a good thing. Neither did the females that were considering suicide). It’s also involved getting a therapist involved and at times distracting some one from their concerns. With enough time, therapy, and medication disaster has been averted. **

Not sure I can transfer any of that to this scenario since in the suicide scenarios in which I’ve had involvement the factors were of the type that would change over time or the feelings for the factors could diminish with time. In contrast this is a person that is terminally ill and his quality of life, mobility, and daily pains will only

Bold Lettering mine.

Nimzovik Responds:

Ok. To play antithetical advocate here-…
I am curious, about something. Hypothetically, If after all the intervention techniques fail, and the said ‘woman’ in this case, after for say 2 years, the woman *still *wants to have herself killed - then my question is why not? If you are going to argue that she should not allowed herself to kill herself - on what grounds do you deny her this privilege to do what she wants to do with her life? Assuming, of course, she is mentally competent? Why not let a healthy person, in all aspects of her life, kill herself? What if she deems life not worth living?

 

[Sair]

First of all, I must apologise for what I think was a terribly sanctimonious tone in my previous post - I fear I’ve let my impatience with a couple of other threads bleed through into this one

I actually thought about something atheistgirl said in the other thread about ones state of mind and poor health possibly motivating self sacrifice as a means to an end without directly violating the prohibition against suicide. While that’s another discussion (and one that seems to have gone far astray) there’s some overlap.

Quite true. And it’s very hard, sometimes, to hold down a discussion between two fundamentally different worldviews.

Despite the debate I get the impression that this isn’t as uncommon as some might think. From speaking to a couple of hospice workers it seems that such requests are not entirely unheard of. I’m just sharing one that came up in conversation. And yes, there is a certain intimacy closeness that is suggested in one person asking another for such a request. As to how much they are actually executed, I get the feeling it may be overlooked; when the terminally ill person dies the family might not request an autopsy and it wouldn’t raise a brow since the person is already terminally ill.

It’s interesting that, whilst the Hippocratic oath officially binds medical professionals (doctors, at least, I believe) to do no deliberate harm to patients and to preserve life, there comes a time when this rather black-and-white obligation comes under philosophical and ethical attack in view of psychological considerations - if a terminally ill patient cannot (and does not wish to) cope with prolonged suffering, it seems inordinately cruel to subject them to it for the sake of keeping to the letter of the law.

I’d hate to find myself on either end of this situation for obvious reasons. If I found myself on the end of being the requester I don’t know what I would do (which means that there’s a possibility that I’d look into how to fulfill the request).

To be sure, it’s a situation fraught with difficulty and anguish; I honestly don’t know what I would do or what I would want, were I to be the terminally-ill person involved. I guess it would have to depend on my state of mind at the time. I would like to think, however, that I could trust that if it were someone I knew and loved who was in that situation, that I could meet their wishes, whichever way they might go.

Yes, I think that quality of life is a serious issue. And some elements of the platinum rule comes to mind too.

I had not heard of this particular variation, so had to look it up - but it does seem like the most advanced form of reciprocal ethics, one that requires more than just seeing the world in one’s own way. Theoretically, this might mean that even if one were personally opposed to euthanasia, such opposition might be overcome by consideration of the needs and wishes of the terminally-ill person. It’s an extremely fraught question, as to whether one could or should subvert one’s own principles for the sake of another - that seems to require an almost superhuman degree of selflessness…on the other hand, if the terminally-ill person knew that their most trusted friend was seriously opposed to euthanasia, exercising the platinum rule would mean allowing them to hold to their own principles, even if it meant prolonging one’s own suffering. Interesting…

I’m trying to understand this view of suffering being a gift. Is that something that is unconditionally held as true? If not then when? I’ve got lots of other questions on that too.

When I was growing up as a Catholic, I remember often being told, when I was in pain or undergoing some other unpleasant experience, to “offer it up” - the implication being that my suffering was somehow a sacrifice to god/Jesus, or a sharing in Jesus’s redemptive sacrifice, or an acknowledgement that others in the world were suffering worse than I was. It didn’t seem to have any dependence on circumstances - any given instance of suffering could be “offered up” for some supposedly higher good. Looking back, such an admonition might just have been intended as a means to help one cope with misfortune, but in reality, I think if anything it fueled a subconscious resentment against a supposedly benevolent god. To suppose that all suffering has a higher purpose seems patently erroneous -really, why would we strive to cure diseases and heal the afflicted if we really thought their pain was serving a higher good?

 

[Nimzovik]

The Catholic Church has indeed done way more that it’s fair share to fight pain and illness. Generally speaking, disease, as well as pain, is to be militated against. Via medicine and prayer.

My understanding is that so -called ‘victim souls’ are given the choice to suffer or not.

However it is to be noted that sin does indeed cause suffering in this world. A criminal that causes in the course of a robbery (sin) someone to be a parapalegic because he shot someone (sin) is an example.

Now here is a question. In the ‘Mystical body of Christ,’ when a part of the said Mystical body, meditates on committing sin - does that negatively affect the rest of the body? Could disease result from that?

Could disease be affected by maintaining a positive attitude? Does offering it up act as a positive attitude? Could ‘offering it up’ reverse a negative thought/condition of sin in the Mystical Body of Christ?

Did Christ’s sufferings avail us anything? Do we get a chance to assist Christ in salvation, in a sense, when we are offering up suffering?

 

[atheistgirl]

I’m trying to understand this view of suffering being a gift.

I’ve been trying to understand that thinking too, and I have to admit, it’s beyond me at present.

If my veterinarian were to visit to see the horses, and discovered I had been keeping one of my dogs, suffering in agony, without doing anything about it, I expect she’d want an explanation and quick.

If I were to go on and say, the dog has a terminal illness, is in agony day and night, but I’m keeping her alive because I believe this suffering and pain and agony is a gift from Wakan Tanka, I’d expect a trial date and to be banned from owning animals ever again.

My veterinarian would immediately end the animals suffering, regardless of what was being offered up to Wakan Tanka!

Yet apart from a few clinics in Switzerland, humans are not affort this dignified ending of their suffering.

As I understand it, the idea of ‘‘offering up’’ ones suffering, or viewing it as ‘‘a gift’’ and being joyful about it, is linked in some way to coupling ones suffering with the suffering of Jesus while He was here on earth.

By doing this, the suffering is ennobled.

I think I can understand how, for a believer, seeing this suffering as having some kind of redemptive quality, this idea might be helpful in coping with the agony of the terminal illness.

But I can’t understand how observers of this suffering receive any dignity from it. I can think of few things more horrific than watching the long lingering agonizing death of a loved one, especially when that loved one is being forced to stay alive against their wishes, and those watching can do nothing but watch.

It must be a horrific memory to be left with - knowing your loved one was in agony, knowing your loved one wanted to end their suffering, and knowing there was nothing you could do but watch over a period of days or weeks as they suffered the inevitable agonizing end.

But I guess if the relatives and family also viewed this suffering as having a purpose, and being a ‘gift’ or having a redemptive quality then they too may well be able to cope.

It seems a rather strange ‘‘gift’’ for an all loving God to give.

At what point does this ‘‘gift’’ kick in, and become redemptive?

When the person is receiving treatment and the medicos are managing the pain and the person is in little or no discomfort, even though he has the very same disease that will eventually kill him, is that redemptive?

Or does it only become redemptive when the person is informed they will die, and their pain is agonizing and unremitting?

Sarah x

 

[davidv]

I’ve been trying to understand that thinking too, and I have to admit, it’s beyond me at present.

If my veterinarian were to visit to see the horses, and discovered I had been keeping one of my dogs, suffering in agony, without doing anything about it, I expect she’d want an explanation and quick.

If I were to go on and say, the dog has a terminal illness, is in agony day and night, but I’m keeping her alive because I believe this suffering and pain and agony is a gift from Wakan Tanka, I’d expect a trial date and to be banned from owning animals ever again.

My veterinarian would immediately end the animals suffering, regardless of what was being offered up to Wakan Tanka!

Yet apart from a few clinics in Switzerland, humans are not affort this dignified ending of their suffering.

As I understand it, the idea of ‘‘offering up’’ ones suffering, or viewing it as ‘‘a gift’’ and being joyful about it, is linked in some way to coupling ones suffering with the suffering of Jesus while He was here on earth.

By doing this, the suffering is ennobled.

I think I can understand how, for a believer, seeing this suffering as having some kind of redemptive quality, this idea might be helpful in coping with the agony of the terminal illness.

But I can’t understand how observers of this suffering receive any dignity from it. I can think of few things more horrific than watching the long lingering agonizing death of a loved one, especially when that loved one is being forced to stay alive against their wishes, and those watching can do nothing but watch.

It must be a horrific memory to be left with - knowing your loved one was in agony, knowing your loved one wanted to end their suffering, and knowing there was nothing you could do but watch over a period of days or weeks as they suffered the inevitable agonizing end.

But I guess if the relatives and family also viewed this suffering as having a purpose, and being a ‘gift’ or having a redemptive quality then they too may well be able to cope.

It seems a rather strange ‘‘gift’’ for an all loving God to give.

At what point does this ‘‘gift’’ kick in, and become redemptive?

When the one suffering units themselves with Christ’s suffering on the cross.

What do you think redemptive means in this context?

When the person is receiving treatment and the medicos are managing the pain and the person is in little or no discomfort, even though he has the very same disease that will eventually kill him, is that redemptive?

Or does it only become redemptive when the person is informed they will die, and their pain is agonizing and unremitting?

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

When the one suffering units themselves with Christ’s suffering on the cross.

How does that happen? Is it tied up with the mind of the sufferer? In other words, if the sufferer is railing against the pain and suffering, that’s not redemptive, but, if in their mind, they say something like ‘‘Jesus, I am offering this pain up as a penance for my sins and the sins of the world, in a poor imitation of what you suffered to redeem us’’ then that would be redemptive from that point on. But prior to that it isn’t redemptive?

What do you think redemptive means in this context?

Something about suffering the pain in resignation by remembering the pain that was suffered by Jesus for the world, in the hope that going through this pain, the persons sins might be more easily forgiven, or that indulgences could be purchased for the sins of others.

I’m not expressing that very well, it’s a bit of a mosh pit in my mind.

Sarah x