Right To Die?

[Starwynd]

If there is a right to life is there a right to die? Would there be any scriptural support? What does the Church teach?

 

[1ke]

No, there is no such right. God is the author of life.

What the Church teaches:

**Euthanasia **

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.

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. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

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. Here one does not will to cause death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected.

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.

**Suicide **

2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him. It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life. We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls. We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us. It is not ours to dispose of.

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

 

[bilop]

If there is a right to life is there a right to die? Would there be any scriptural support? What does the Church teach?

No.

One has the right to refuse medical treatment, but one can not actively pursue one’s death. You can not refuse food and water.

God Bless

 

[joandarc2008]

I wouldn’t think so based on the fact that that would be ordinary care given to a sick or handicapped person. My question would be is shoving a feeding tube into a comatose patient for ten or fifteen years and feeding them “over-zealous.” that MAY change things but I am not a scholar.

God bless,

 

[puzzleannie]

If there is a right to life is there a right to die? Would there be any scriptural support? What does the Church teach?

the right to life protected in the constitution (protected, not conferred) is the right to keep the life God gave you, not the right to create your own life. God created you and gave you the gift of life. The constitution protects your right to that life. You have no right to decide when you will die, that belongs to God, and the Constitution protects you (at least it will until this country elects a candidate who publicly professes he wishes to overturn that constitutional protection) from anyone who wishes to deprive you of life without due process of law. You have no right to die, therefore the Constitution cannot protect or confer such a right.

 

[manualman]

I wouldn’t think so based on the fact that that would be ordinary care given to a sick or handicapped person. My question would be is shoving a feeding tube into a comatose patient for ten or fifteen years and feeding them “over-zealous.” that MAY change things but I am not a scholar.

God bless,

I’m not a scholar either, but I recall JPII making that issue very clear. Food and Water is basic primary care, even with a feeding tube. It really does not take a lot of high tech care to maintain a tube.

Food & water CAN be withdrawn in the final stages when death is approaching and likely to occur due to other causes before starvation and dehydration cause death. Especially so for those with cascading failure of internal organs whose suffering is made greater via forced feedings.

 

[joandarc2008]

I’m not a scholar either, but I recall JPII making that issue very clear. Food and Water is basic primary care, even with a feeding tube. It really does not take a lot of high tech care to maintain a tube.

Food & water CAN be withdrawn in the final stages when death is approaching and likely to occur due to other causes before starvation and dehydration cause death. Especially so for those with cascading failure of internal organs whose suffering is made greater via forced feedings.

Thank you manualman that was something I was wondering about. God bless,

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

If there is a right to life is there a right to die? Would there be any scriptural support? What does the Church teach?

This is a post-Biblical issue, because the modern euthanasia movement is exactly that: modern. So the Bible has no more to say on it than St. Augustine had to say about RICO or the EU; important as these are.​

There is no right to death - we have one right only: the right to damnation. A right to death is as meaningless as a right to be a unicorn: rights are not made rights by putting the words “There is a right to…” in front of a phrase. Doing that, is using language in the same silly way as people do when they argue that God is limited because He cannot lift a mountain of feathers. To use language in those meaningless ways, does not convey meaning - so a right to die is as meaningless as a right to lift a mountain of feathers.

Actually there is one other right: the right to be punished for one’s crimes. Somehow, I don’t think there are going to be any petitions for it to enforced: people don’t want rights - they want to be allowed to do what they wish. Which is a very different matter.

Rights imply duties, responsibilities: what responsibility is conferred on someone who exercises the “right” to die ? This is colossally selfish - it’s the very reverse of a right. Yes, life is tough - but millions are far worse off than the sort of people who campaign for the “right” to die.

This movement is part of a pattern - of legalising, then approving, divorce, contraception, abortion, sodomy, HIV therapy. It is a gross distortion of Christian freedom & love of others, because it is an attack upon all that makes for life & health. Euthanasia is not euthanasia, “good death”, at all, but dysthanasia: even its name is a lie. Death is the gift of satan, father of lies - it is the devil that is behind this. Christ brings life because He is Life - the devil brings death & destruction, & sells it as peace & happiness. Whom will we follow ?

 

[rpp]

This is a post-Biblical issue, because the modern euthanasia movement is exactly that: modern. So the Bible has no more to say on it than St. Augustine had to say about RICO or the EU; important as these are.​

I removed the remainder of this otherwise excellent post to respond to the above.

Actually St. Augustine is credited with giving the first cogent and complete arguments against suicide and euthanasia. In Pagan Roman times, suicide was often done to regain some type of lost honor or to preserve family honor. Euthanasia was considered acceptable in certain circumstances but especially among the elderly and crippled.

In his book, City Of God, which was aimed mainly at Pagans, St. Augustine roundly condemned all forms of suicide and euthanasia.

I will add that you are correct about the modern euthanasia movement being completely different than in ancient times. In ancient times, the concept of “quality of life” did not exist. Pagans euthanized people because they were a burden, not because they did not feel good. Oftentimes, the poor person with either pressured into agreeing to be euthanized or was euthanized against their will (murdered). Children were the most common victims of euthanasia, especially in some pre-Christian Greek cultures like Sparta.

Now, of course, the modern Euthanasia movement claims that they do not want to force or convince people into suicide, but that is not the reality. Here in Oregon, where it is legal, the Oregon Health Plan will not pay to treat a person who has less than a 5% 5 year survival chance. Instead, they will only pay for palliative and assisted suicide, which is legal in Oregon. When this became public knowledge earlier this year, the OHP redefined assisted suicide and put it in the category of palliative care.

It will not be long before commercial insurance companies follow this pattern. Especially if Washington State voters pass their assisted suicide ballot measure.

 

[joandarc2008]

Even though I am against euthanasia I think it is wrong to say that we don’t have “rights.” After all I think many of us on these forums are “pro-life” and believe that all have a right to life. I believe people should not be so quick to add “rights” however lets not be so quick to take away the right to dignity. I for one do not wish to be hooked to life support with no chance just because someone in my family can’t make the decision of what is “heroic” and what is not. It just brings to point where the line is. I think we make those choices everyday in society when we leave certain people off of transplant lists just because they have other genetic disorders. Is it right? yes and no. after all if a perfectly healthy mother of three needs the same kidney that a down syndrome person needs most of us would say the mother of three should get it. Yet, how many of us wouldn’t be up in arms when we heard about the down syndrome patient not being put on the list. I think it is very hard to put absolutes on any situation. No, we are all given trials and we all should live to the best of our abilities and preserve life until the day Our Father wants us with Him. Yet, there are gray areas where decisions are made and life cannot be preserved.

God bless,

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

If there is a right to life is there a right to die? Would there be any scriptural support? What does the Church teach?

There is a “Right to Die” a natural death, in the sense that a human person has the right to die with dignity, to refuse extraordinary means to prolong life, to receive the final Sacraments prior to death. It does not mean that they have the right to determine when or where, or how they will die absoultely, nor do they have the right to shorten their life as they see fit, or to avoid suffering.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

There is a “Right to Die” a natural death, in the sense that a human person has the right to die with dignity, to refuse extraordinary means to prolong life, to receive the final Sacraments prior to death. It does not mean that they have the right to determine when or where, or how they will die absoultely, nor do they have the right to shorten their life as they see fit, or to avoid suffering.

Re: avoiding suffering.

It’s my impression that painkillers can be legitimately given to the terminally ill at whatever rate is needed to keep the pain under control. Most common painkillers like morphine depress respiration, and can lead to death.

So long as the intended effect is the alliviation of pain, this unintended effect is considered acceptible.

If this is incorrect, I’d very much like to be corrected.

 

[rpp]

Re: avoiding suffering.

It’s my impression that painkillers can be legitimately given to the terminally ill at whatever rate is needed to keep the pain under control. Most common painkillers like morphine depress respiration, and can lead to death.

So long as the intended effect is the alliviation of pain, this unintended effect is considered acceptible.

If this is incorrect, I’d very much like to be corrected.

As long as the overdose is accidental, yes, you are correct.

 

[Sam_Maloney]

As long as the overdose is accidental, yes, you are correct.

If by ‘accidental’ you mean death isn’t the desired consequence, I think you are right.

But if by ‘accidental’ you mean it is an unforeseen consequence, I think you are wrong.

So long as the intention is the releif of pain, the drug is licit. If the dose required for that licit end also hastens death [foreseen, but not desired], this secondary effect does not prevent its use.

Oddly, I’m currently involved in two threads on this forum right now about the principle of secondary effects, which [not so oddly] isn’t usually something I spend a lot of time thinking about.

[edited for spelling]