Below is an essay I wrote this year concerning Physician Assisted Suicide. In the prompt I was supposed to argue a social controversy and use a fiction novel, poem, and short story that has been written on the topic. Annnnnd I of course picked a topic I had very little to no previous knowledge about, and a topic that almost no fiction literature has been written about.
I have to be honest, when first writing this I didn't come at it from a Christian viewpoint, but instead tried to simply argue why humanity should be against physician assisted suicide. Obviously I switched directions, but only after staring at my computer screen for 3 hours realizing I had nothing to say on the topic. I then shut my laptop and thought "ehhh I'll figure it out eventually." I knew then I wanted to come at it from a Christian standpoint but still had no idea what to argue, because I honestly wasn't sure if the Bible even had an opinion. (Note to self...the Bible always has an opinion on anything and everything.) Soon after this endeavor I attended a youth group session where the regular students were supposed to have listen to a sermon that discussed Imago Dei. (If you don't know what it is the essay explains it...don't worry I didn't even know it existed until I listened to the sermon.) Of course the sermon briefly discussed God's view on physician assisted suicide. Coincidence? Definitely not. I only had to drive 3 hours out of my way and go to a small get together in a youth pastors house, to get the direction my essay was going to go. God doesn't always work in the ways I find most convenient, but I'm grateful anyways. Anyways, from then on it was easy to write, and I leaned so much about my faith and God. I hope you enjoy reading, learning, or falling asleep because it is very long and could be considered boring. Happy reading
Physician Assisted Suicide VS Imago Dei
“If happiness were what life is all
about, then suffering would be the ultimate evil to be avoided at all costs”
(208 Physician Assisted Suicide). Since the 1990s there has been a public
concern about the care of those who were considered terminally ill, which has
led to the debate of whether legislation should allow mercy killing, also known
as euthanasia or assisted suicide. When first discussed, the focus was on those
with extreme amounts of pain or a terminal illness, but because of medical
advances to relieve pain and increase life span, the issue now lies with the
right of self-termination. A poll done by Gallup’s Values and Beliefs showed
that in 1947 only 37% of Americans were in support of euthanasia and physician
assisted suicide, but by 2014 the support had almost doubled. Although the
debate has never come to a final conclusion, and opinions are constantly
changing, orthodox Christians should be opposed to the idea of assisted suicide
due to the belief that all humans are made in the image of God and have the
certainty that God has the ultimate authority over life, even when facing terminal
illness, dementia, or permanent vegetative states. Allowing the legalization of
euthanasia or assisted suicide would corrupt the value of Christian belief and
at the same time endangers the weak, corrupts the purpose of medicine and go
against the Hippocratic Oath, and therefore should not be legalized.
Euthanasia, often called mercy
killing, is defined as a painless way to kill a patient suffering from a
painful and incurable disease or in an irreversible coma. Physician assisted
suicide, or PAS, is when a medical professional provided a patient with the
means, usually through medication, to end their life. Both PAS and euthanasia
are seen as suicide, and even murder.
From a moral standpoint, the decision to
partake in euthanasia or PAS is a difficult one to make. A person usually does
not want to take another person’s life into his or her own hands. Even in
fiction novels like “God is in the Pancakes” by Robin Epstein, main character
Grace, a candy stripier, has to question her morals about assisting Mr. Sands, a
patient of Grace’s and a close friend, when he asks her to assist in his
suicide. “I spend the rest of the night…in my room thinking about Mr. Sands and
his request. But the more I turn it over in my head, the more certain I become
that I can’t do it; it’s wrong. It’s just wrong” (20). Like Grace did, humans
have an immediate reaction to preserve life, and from a Christian reasoning
this root reaction comes from the idea of Imago Dei, or image of God. “The
Imago Dei is God’s investment in humanity of God-like glory and moral capacity
to reign and rule the earth as his representatives” (Beautiful Design). Although Grace did end up assisting in Mr.
Sands’ suicide, most people in reality wouldn’t be able to accept the deed they
had done because of Imago Dei.
“So God created mankind in His own
image, in the image of God He created them; male and female He created them” (Genesis
1:27 Bible). Imago Dei is a concept, which incorporates the ideas of
immeasurable value, relation, interdependence, and the management of care of
creation. From a Christian viewpoint this means that those made in God’s image,
which is all mankind, deserve above all other creation protection from abuse or
manipulation whether from accident or deliberate harm. Even from a non-Christian
viewpoint, the previous statement remains true. Nobody would agree that an
animal’s life is greater than a human’s. In a sermon about the roll of human
kind, Pastor Matt Chandler of the Village Church, located in Texas, uses an
analogy of running into a tough financial situation where he must let something
go. After describing that he has a wife, two children, a dog and a horse, he
asks the audience whom he should give up. At no point did the audience think he
should get ride of his wife or children, they became divided between the horse
and dog. Chandler then asked the audience why the choice wasn’t his family. He explained
how the decision to give up his pets rather than his family was based on the belief,
whether Christian or not, that humans have been “created distinct and above the
rest of the creative order” (Beautiful Design). People are not at liberty to
destroy human life, no matter how noble the motive may be.
Mankind can also come to the conclusion
that PAS is unorthodox due to the fact that human’s relationship towards one
another is different than animals. When a lion attacks another lion, there
isn’t a huge concern, but relationship between humans though is completely
different. Genesis 9:6 says that “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall
his blood by shed, for God made man in his own image” (Bible). Because of Imago
Dei our “relationship with one another…is different than our relationship with
the rest of the created beings” (Beautiful Design). The Bible also references
how God makes a point that intentional self- destruction is looked down upon
and is a defilement of the Imago Dei. Even in a non-Christian environment,
suicide is never considered the right option. Euthanasia also goes directly against
the Bible because it can be considered as murder. In Exodus 20:13, God tells
Moses, a prophet, to write in the ten commandments to not murder one another
(Bible). Christians should not allow euthanasia or PAS to be legal because it
would corrupt their belief values and go directly against the word of God, and
even non-Christians should be against it because of an existing moral
obligation to preserve life.
Although people are usually already
morally against PAS, there are of course many of those who have ignored their
basic instincts in support of the idea that there is a personal right to die.
Vermont, Montana, California, Oregon and Washington have all legalized PAS,
with strict rules (Dugan). Unfortunately, when supporting the idea of euthanasia
or physician assisted suicide, these states are also supporting the idea of
allowing termination of the elderly and
handicapped, or unfair termination of the weak. Most advocates don’t realize
that when they say they only support PAS they also support euthanasia. “The
logic of assisted suicide leads to euthanasia because of “compassion” demands
that some patients be helped to kill themselves, it makes little sense to claim
that only those who are capable of self-administering the deadly drugs be given
this option. Should not those who are too disabled to kill themselves have
their suffering ended by a lethal injection?” (Anderson 3). Advocates would
have to agree with the killing of those whose lives were deemed disabled and
‘not worth living’. Between the lines, this is saying that humans have the
right to claim if a person’s life has quality, but the word of God disagrees
with this logic. The Bible never gives man power over each other, but instead
power over all other creation. “Let us make mankind in our image, in our
likeness, so they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky,
over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that
move along the ground.” (Genesis 1:26 Bible). In fact, a person could read the
entire Bible and never find a verse where God gives man power to have ultimate
rule over each other, or to determine the quality of life.
James Bredin’s fiction poem, “Death with
Dignity Please Poem” is about how a person, who doesn’t have a terminal illness
would still like the option of having a way out. Bredin argues that even though
religious groups think PAS is wrong, he should still have the right to end his
life. Bredin questions the idea of suffering for long periods of time, and
basically states ‘it’s not worth it’ through the line, “…but why suffer for
years in pain and disease waiting for your last breath?” (Bredin). Although
Bredin is making a point that suffering is horrible, he neglects to realize
that many people are born with disabilities that they will have for the rest of
their lives.
Even from a scientific standpoint people
cannot argue whether another person’s life is worth living or not.
Scientifically, human life begins at conception. Everything that is necessary
to define a human is present in the womb and the DNA strand. A person could
argue that because the fetus doesn’t have a personality, or cannot make
decisions, or the fetus still depends on others to live that it isn’t a human,
but this logic would mean all mentally ill’s lives are disregarded. The counter
argument would also allow society to disregard the quality of an elderly
person’s life. When a pet owner’s animal begins to become so old where it needs
constant care just to stay at a minimal comfort level, the owner usually makes
the decision to put the animal down. Nobody looks twice at the decision, but if
a person were to try to ‘put down’ his or her elderly mother, where would be an
uproar. People would become upset because they inadvertently know that she,
like the rest of humanity, has a distinct dignity that was given to her by God,
and only God can take it away. Using the analogy of human verses animals, even
non-Christians can agree that PAS is unacceptable. Although the majority of
people would become upset at the idea of doctors or others killing off the elderly
or handicapped, two countries in Europe legalized doctors to euthanize the
elderly and those with disabilities like blindness, deafness, or a mental
illness. These countries have specifically created laws against humanity and
have deemed the quality of a person’s life is of lesser value because of a
handicap or because they came close to the end of their life. Even from a
non-Christian viewpoint, the idea that a person’s life is of lesser value
because of a quality they cannot control is illogical and goes against natural
morals. By allowing physician assisted suicide and euthanasia, humanity is
allowing diminish of the quality of life for those with disabilities or
terminal illnesses, and endangers them form others essentially killing the off.
Dr. Kass, a certified pediatric pulmonologist, made the comment when addressing
the legalization of PAS, “Won’t it be tempting to think that death is the best
treatment for the little old lady “dumped” again on the emergency room by the
nearby nursing home?” (Anderson).
Stepping away from the logic of Imago
Dei, physician assisted suicide and euthanasia also corrupts the use and
purpose of medicine. Medicine has two major uses; to use in the practise of
treatment and prevention of disease and the promotion of health, and to treat
and cure diseases and promote health (Medical News Today). By this definition
of medicine, using the tools for healing for any other purpose than to promote
health would be unethical and would corrupt the entire reason for their
existence. “Allowing doctors to assist in killing threatens to fundamentally
corrupt the defining goal of the profession of medicine” (Anderson).
Not only would it corrupt the use of
medicine but would also endanger the doctor to patient relationship. Dr. Kass’s
physician friend once stated, “Only because I know that I could not and would
not kill my patients was I able to enter most fully and intimately into caring for
them as they lay dying” (Anderson). By allowing physician assisted suicide,
doctors will be forced to accommodate in the termination of their patients
life, and risk losing the touch and drive for their first intended purpose.
In the fiction short story Mercy by
Richard Selzer, a doctor is pressured to end one of his patient’s lives.
Although he understands his patient is in extreme amounts of pain and there is
nothing else he can do for him short of death, he is conflicted on whether to
end his life. From this struggle, society can deem that physicians are not
qualified to assist in suicide decisions, whether they are the patient’s wishes
or others. Even though the doctor in the story tries to help end the man’s life
by an overdose of morphine, the man doesn’t die. The doctor then turns to the
family that wished for the patients death and says, “‘He didn’t die,’ I say,
‘he won’t…or can’t.’ They are silent. ‘He isn’t ready yet,’ I say. ‘He [is]
ready,’ the old woman says, ‘[you] [ain’t]’” (119). This display shows that in
reality doctors don’t want to kill their patients, but instead want to promote
life, although in reality a doctor could not accurately say if it was a persons
time or not. “Death is a natural occurrence.
Sometimes God allows a person to suffer for a long time before death occurs:
other times, a person’s suffering is cut short. No one enjoys suffering, but
that does not make it right to determine that a person should die” (Got
Questions Ministries).
This doctor like thinking comes from the
idea of Imago Dei, and also relates to a code of ethics that doctors take. The
Hippocratic Oath, which is a proclamation for doctors, states; “I will keep
[the sick] from harm and injustice. I will neither give a deadly drug to
anybody who asks for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect”
(Anderson). By allowing PAS, the code of ethics doctors promise to keep would
be violated, along with their morals.
J.M. Dieterle, a specialist on PAS and
euthanasia, once argued that “even though he cannot provide any affirming
arguments for legalizing physician assisted suicide, there are not enough
sufficient arguments against it, so therefore it should become legalized”
(Eckholm). Dieterle is wrong when stating there aren’t enough sufficient
arguments against physician-assisted suicide. Not only does PAS go directly
against Christian values and beliefs, including the idea of Imago Dei, it
endangers the value of life for the elderly and weak. Physician assisted
suicide also corrupts the purpose of medicine and the relationship between
doctors and patients, and also goes directly against the Hippocratic Oath.
Whether a person is a Christian or not, allowing the legalization of PAS or
euthanasia would be an illogical and immoral decision, and therefore PAS and
euthanasia should not be legalized.
Citations
Anderson, Ryan T. "Always Care, Never Kill: How
Physician-Assisted Suicide Endangers
the Weak, Corrupts Medicine, Compromises the Family, and Violates Human Dignity and Equality." The
Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation,
25 Mar. 2015. Web. 20 Feb. 2016. <www.heritage.org>.
Cap, Adam. "The Morality and Legality of Physician Assisted
Suicide." Adam Cap. 27 Mar.
2009. Web. 24 Feb. 2016. <http://adamcap.com>.
Dugan, Andrew. "In U.S., Support Up for Doctor-Assisted
Suicide." Gallup. Gallup, Inc, 27
May 2015. Web. 20 Feb. 2016. <http://www.gallup.com>.
Eckholm, Erik. "Assisted Suicide Now Legal in 5
States." Telegram.com. Gatehouse Media,
LLC, 08 Feb. 2014. Web. 24 Feb. 2016. <http://www.telegram.com>.
Epstein, Robin. God Is in the Pancakes. New York: Dial
for Young Readers, 2010. Print.
"What Does the Bible Say about Euthanasia / Assisted
Suicide?" GotQuestions.org. Got Questions
Ministries. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
Hunter, James Bredin - Poem. "Death With Dignity Please
Poem." Poemhunter.com. 05 Oct.
2012. Web. 22 Feb. 2016. <www.poemhunter.com>.
New
International Version.
Bible Gateway. Web. 25 Oct. 2012.
"Physician-Assisted Suicide." (1922): 208-16. Web. 22
Feb. 2016.
Selzer,
Richard. "Mercy." The Iowa Review 11.2 (1980): 117-119. Web.
22 Feb. 2016.
