Euthanasia

---

References

Contents

Introduction

1. Definition of Euthanasia

2. Types of Euthanasia

2.1. Voluntary

2.2. Involuntary

2.3. Direct Euthanasia

2.4. Indirect Euthanasia

3. Ethical Response

4. Biblical Response

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

This paper deals concerning euthanasia: its definition, types, and responses from the medical and biblical perspective. Euthanasia simply means ‘mercy killing’. It carries a mixture of views and interpretation as people does have different understanding, living in a vast geographical and cultural distances. Despite of many views, biblical response shall be the final answer and solution for this topic, as it is the sole authority for the Christians to follow.

1. Definition of Euthanasia

The literal meaning of euthanasia derives from the Greek words eu and thanatos which means easy or gentle death. Thomas Wood says “Euthanasia is an intentional ending of person’s life by action or inaction when that life is reckoned not worth prolonging.” According to J. Russell Chandran, “Euthanasia means a humane and merciful way of terminating the life of a person in the interest of the person as well as others.” John Stott defines euthanasia as, “The intentional killing by act or omission of a person whose life is considered not to be worth living.” It is also known as ‘mercy killing’ Therefore, euthanasia can be understood as an acceptance of death voluntarily or involuntarily to avoid pain and suffering.

2. Types of Euthanasia

2.1. Voluntary

Voluntary euthanasia is also known as assisted suicide. Death occurs at the plea of the patient.The choice is made by the patient. It can be done by either withholding life-supporting systems like oxygen tube or others. It is the case where the patient expressed a desire for life to end.

2.2. Involuntary

Involuntary euthanasia is the death occurs by someone else’s decision when the patient is incapable of giving consent. M. Stephen also says that this is done when the patient is in an unconscious state and the relative decides for him/her whether to administer euthanasia. In this process, the decision is made for the subject by some third party, usually the closest relative.

2.3. Direct

Direct euthanasia is also known as active euthanasia. It is carries out by removing the life-supporting mechanism. It is a deliberate action to shorten or end life. Active euthanasia involves some positive step to terminate life, such as administration of a toxic substance or injection of an air bubble into the bloodstream.

2.4. Indirect Euthanasia

In the indirect euthanasia or passive euthanasia, the drugs are administered in terminal illness to relieve pain, or to render the dying person unconscious in order that he might not suffer too much pain and mental anguish. But the treatment may hasten the death. It also involves simply by allowing the person to die through withholding or discontinuing treatment that would prolong life. Erickson says that passive euthanasia is widely practice today. Typically the situation is one in which there is no medical prognosis of recovery or even of improvement. The patient is ordinarily in great discomfort or even acute pain. Frequently, great sympathetic distress is felt by the patient’s love ones as well, and in addition, crushing economic burdens may be imposed on the family by prolong costly medical care.

3. Ethical Response

M. Stephen says that the experience of utter meaninglessness, pain and suffering is touching. This is what happens in the case of ‘incurability’ or ‘irreversibility’. If the patient is beyond cure, the meaningless life should justifiably be brought to an end through euthanasia. But this should be the last resort which has to be done with the consent of the patient or family. Laurel T. Hughes confirms that from a legal point of view, euthanasia must never be acceptable.

John Stott believes that Christian needs to defend and promote with increasing determination that we have intrinsic value because God has created us in His own image. Human beings are God-like beings, possessing a cluster of unique faculties (rational, moral and social) which distinguish us from animals. In particular, there is our capacity for the relationships of love, since God is love. He clarifies that euthanasia, whether voluntary or involuntary; is intentional killing.

Robertson McQuilkin states that killing others deliberately, whatever the motive, violates God’s law and should be condemned by human law. J. Russell Chandran states that whatever the circumstances, mercy killing is regarded as murder and is condemned as illegal and murder. Well known theologians like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth were opposed to it. Bonhoeffer comments that God is the author and finisher of life and death and there is no life that is not worth living. Barth also says “no” to the question whether society has the right to declare certain people as unfit to live. This is a type of killing which can be regarded only as murder.

Doctors and nurses should be the very last to accept euthanasia. They never should be willing or force to take an active role in practicing euthanasia at another’s request, especially since they have pledged to use their skills for curing their patients and not for killing them. And a doctor should know the precise moment when his curing capacity is futile and turn the patient over to the caring hands of those who help people die naturally and without pain.

All doctors know that beyond a certain point further treatment in some illnesses can no longer be curative. Medical responsibility then shifts from sustaining life and making it as comfortable as possible, to allowing a person to die, making their dying as comfortable as possible. There is no Christian justification for a doctor to sustain life for as long as possible at whatever cost. His or her responsibility is to relieve suffering, which is not always the same thing.

Some people say that there is no difference between omitting to give treatment when death is the likely result of such omission, and acting to cause death. And, of course, if you only measure the results, there may seem little difference. But Christian morality is concerned with intention as well as with consequences. Although sometimes treatment could be withheld with the intention of causing death, there are many times when treatment could be withheld for other reasons and without intending to cause death.

Some of these ‘other reasons’ may include the burdensomeness of the treatment itself, and unwelcome side effects which are likely to be more harmful than helpful. They may also take account of the patient’s own wishes about acceptance or refusal of such treatment. The decision whether or not to withhold or withdraw treatment must be made on the basis of medical indications about the patient’s condition and of the character of the treatment itself, rather than on the basis of the person’s ‘usefulness’ to the society or to his judgment about the ‘worthwhileness’ of his ‘quality of life’

4. Biblical Response

A Christian’s attitude is determined by his or her understanding of life of life as God’s gift-to be received as a gift (Psalm 139:134ff). Human beings are ‘made in the image of God’ (Gen. 1:27), capable of fellowship with God, and this confers on human life a sacredness which means that it can never be right to choose death as an end. This is the faith which underlies the biblical prohibitions of murder (Ex. 20:13; Matt. 5:21) and of other actions which result in the loss of innocent life (Gen. 9:6; Matt. 27:4). It underlies the careful distinctions in the Mosaic Law between deliberate and accidental homicide (Ex. 21: 12-13) and the concern with preventing accidental death. But more than a gift, life is a trust. We are not the owners of our lives: they are on trust from the Lord, and we are the stewards of His gifts (Gen. 1:26; Ps. 116:12ff). To choose death, therefore, is a denial that the Lord is trustworthy in trusting us with life and it is to side with the ‘last enemy’ rather than with the Lord of life. To choose death as an end, whether in rational or irrational suicide, or in euthanasia, is not an option for Christian morality. Conclusion

The word ‘euthanasia’ itself connotes a negative attitude because it has to do with life-risking and even to the degree of death. Today, it is very controversial but has also become unavoidable for many. A good number of scholars have been arguing about this and many of them concluded that euthanasia is not applicable for the Christians to practice. The Bible is precise that God is the giver of life and has created humans in His own likeness and no human has the right and power to take it away. No life is worthless or meaningless as life comes only from God. However, there are certain cases when euthanasia is implemented due to situational compulsion and consensus. This has to do by personal conscience and conviction causing no regret and remorse. Above all not violating God’s laws and depriving the meaning of life.

Bibliography

Atkinson, David. Pastoral Ethics. London: Lynx Communications, 1994.

Chandran, J. Russell. Christian Ethics. Kashmere Gate, Delhi: ISPCK, 2011.

Erickson, M.J. “Euthanasia,” in Walter A. Elwell (ed.). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd edn. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2001. 404.

Hughes, Laurel T. Journals on the Science & Sale of Life: Issues Conscience. Florida: Bridge-Logos Publishers, 2000.

McQuilkin, Robertson. An Introduction to Biblical Ethics. 2nd edn. Secunderabad: OM Books, 2005.

Stephen, M. Introducing Christian Ethics. Kashmere Gate, Delhi: ISPCK, 2013.

Stott, John. News Issues Facing Christians Today. Mumbai: GLS Publishing, 2005.

Wood, Thomas. “Euthanasia,” in Wesley Carr. The New Dictionary of Pastoral Studies. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002. 210.

Fiekenje Bosu (Killing)

This article "Euthanasia" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Euthanasia. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.

This page exists already on Wikipedia.

---