If it is true, as Richard Weaver famously put it, that “ideas have consequences,” it is also true that bad ideas have victims. On no other contemporary issue today is the connection between a bad idea and its victims clearer than assisted suicide. In no other nation today are the bad ideas and their victims more aggressively embraced than in Canada.
Is pain good or bad?
This was the question asked recently by physician and author Matthew Loftus in an essay entitled “Arcs of Life” published in The New Atlantis. Loftus makes the case that the contemporary obsession with avoiding pain has led to an increasing acceptance of doctor-assisted suicide and euthanasia, even for infants and for those suffering with mental distress. Our approach to pain amounts to, as Loftus puts it, “Eliminating suffering by killing the sufferer.” The appeal is made mostly to our collective commitment to autonomy:
The euthanasia regime begins with a pitch to the smartest among us. Wouldn’t you like to go out before the party winds down, before age and decrepitude shatter the autonomy and strength you cherish so deeply?
Assisted suicide, especially when extended to those most in need of compassion and care, subverts our collective understanding of human value. It subjects this value to feelings, both our own and (increasingly) that of medical professionals and government officials. When made available to cases of mental illness, assisted suicide undermines the battle a patient wages on their inner demons and thwarts efforts to recovery. In other words, it is the exact opposite of “care.”
This is yet another way that physician-assisted suicide or “medical aid in dying” corrupts medicine. Vulnerable people in most need of help will be the victims of these bad practices. For their sake, and for future generations who will inherit the world that we are unmaking, we must find a better way.
A coalition of Christian medical professionals won a major legal victory Friday when a federal district court ruled they are not required to participate in the state’s new physician-assisted suicide law.
n 2016, Canada legalized euthanasia through the euphemistically titled Medical Aid in Dying (or MAiD). Since passing, the number of Canadians who either “enthusiastically” or “cautiously” support the practice has risen slightly from 75 percent to 80 percent. The response from communities representing those with disabilities, however, has remained consistently opposed. Their fears, that Canada’s end-of-life policies would prove to be only the cliff edge of a moral abyss, have proven to be largely accurate.
A Canadian church held an assisted suicide ceremony, called a "Crossing Over Ceremony," last month for an 86-year-old woman diagnosed with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's disease.
A new California law that requires doctors to participate in physician-assisted suicide is being challenged by a coalition of Christian medical professionals who claim it violates their free speech and religious liberty rights.
Last week, the Dutch national health minister proposed that doctors should be permitted to euthanize “terminally ill” children under the age of thirteen.
Physician-assisted suicide is on the rise around the world. In his book The Thanatos Syndrome, Walker Percy described how a society devolves to the point of thinking that killing patients instead of healing them is compassionate.
