Explain the Christian view on euthanasia

by erinruth99gmailcom (student)

AS and A Level Religious Studies & Philosophy

Explain the Christian view on euthanasia (35)

Euthanasia can be defined as, “the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma.” When considering euthanasia we must consider the difference between acts of commission and acts of omission. Acts of omission is when something is deliberately not done, e.g. not giving a blood transfusion and just perhaps leaving the person to die – this would not be classified as euthanasia. The BMA (British Medical Association) recognises a distinction between withholding treatment that may become burdensome on the patient and deliberately bringing a person’s life to an end. Voluntary euthanasia is an act of commission; a positive, deliberate action e.g. administering tablets deliberately to bring death.

There is a different between assisted dying and assisted suicide, although the two are closely linked. Assisted dying only applies to terminally ill, mentally competent adults and requires the dying patient, after meeting strict legal safeguards, to self-administer life-ending medication. Assisted dying is legalised and regulated in the US States of Oregon and Washington. Voluntary euthanasia, on the other hand, allows a doctor to administer life ending medication directly to the patient. Voluntary euthanasia is permitted in the Netherlands and Belgium. Christians are generally opposed to all forms of prematurely ending someone’s life, and in examining their reasons a good place to start is the Biblical argument.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Christians believe that the Bible supports the sanctity of life. Euthanasia is intentional killing of the innocent and so contravenes the Sixth Commandment: “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). This applies even in the case of suicide. The fundamental prohibition on killing, and the basis for it, is set out in Genesis 9:6: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” Our significance, and so the claim to protection, derives not from our ‘quality of life’ or gifts and abilities, but from our status as being made in God’s image. The Bible is clear that God is our creator. Human life is not our ‘property’. We may not just ‘dispense’ with it. As Job said: “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away” (Job 1:21). Our lives are meant for the service of God. It is not for us to ‘take’ life, even our own. The Bible strongly encourages mankind to care for his fellow man. We are to love our neighbour as ourselves (Matthew 22:37-40). Jesus also taught that a stranger in trouble was our neighbour (Luke 10:25-37). Therefore Christians should seek to help those suffering from terminal illness without resorting to euthanasia. The theologian Matt Slick wrote, “Essentially, assisted suicide is an attempt to deny God His sovereign right to appoint who dies when. We must be careful not to take into our own hands the right that belongs to God.”

Furthermore, many Christians and in particular Roman Catholics support the Natural Law stance. Such supporters claim that euthanasia is wrong because it is the direct taking of an innocent life. This theory sees the function of humankind to live and use life as a once-given gift, to be preserved to the natural end. To wilfully shorten life is to go against the basic instinct of life preservation. Euthanasia is intrinsically wrong because man is not the owner of his life and it is a moral duty to live life to its natural end. Euthanasia is wrong because it implies a rejection of God’s gift of life. However, with natural law comes the principle of double effect. Pain relieving drugs given to a patient may accelerate death. The intention in such a case however is clear - relieve suffering, not to bring death.

Another reason that Christians are against euthanasia is the slippery slope argument. Inevitably, voluntary would lead to compulsory euthanasia, just as in some places therapeutic abortion has opened the door to abortion on demand. If euthanasia is permitted under the emotional and moral claim that it is best for the individual, what is to prevent the government from eventually stepping in and determining who else needs to be terminated? Might the definition of euthanasia be expanded to include those who are suffering from chronic depression--or just don’t like living--or are not productive in society? We must ask that if the door to killing people in their old age is opened, can it ever be closed again? Suggestions have already been made for delayed euthanasia, using anaesthesia with the guarantee of non-arousal, so that useful experiments could be made on human material.

Christians would prefer to support palliative care; this is the name given to the specialism of care for the dying. It is a realistic and life respecting response to the needs of the dying. Palliative care is defined as the active total care of patients and their families when the patient is no longer responsive to curative treatments. Palliative care upholds absolute respect of human life and at the same time recognises human mortality and the limited dominion we have over life.

Overall, euthanasia is an extremely sensitive issue and all sides of the argument should treat those involved with the upmost compassion and respect. To quote Pamela Bone, “I'm not afraid of being dead. I'm just afraid of what you might have to go through to get there.”