HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!

 

John Paul II and letting a person die

Voluntary euthanasia - the terminally ill patient freely asks to be killed by the doctor who obliges.
 
Non-voluntary euthanasia - when the terminally ill patient is mercy-killed but could not consent perhaps due to being in a coma.
 
Assisted dying - when a terminally ill person is given the means to take their own lives.
 
Assisted suicide - is deliberately giving another the means to take their lives even though they are not terminally ill.
 
The Roman Catholic Church forbids all these. John Paul II taught in 1980 that if a person is suffering terribly and is dying it is acceptable to refuse to give her or him any treatment that will prolong life. That is getting involved in causing the person to die. In that hypocritical religion, if you just let them die it is not a sin and implies respect for life! But if you do something to them to make them die it is a sin! But allowing to die is doing something. Doing nothing is doing something. The Church wants people to blind themselves to that.
 
When deciding if a person should be allowed to die, John Paul said the following need to be considered,
 
#Is there a good enough risk that any treatment will do insufficient good? This question is fine.

#Is letting nature run its course considered to be acceptance of the human condition and its vulnerability to death? But letting nature run its course has nothing to do with accepting the human condition .

#Is it best for the hospital, community and family - perhaps financially - that the person is allowed to die? It is startling that this would even come up! John Paul's doctrine of the absolute sacredness of life implies that the question is about the sacredness of life and so no other consideration matters or should matter. In so far as the needs of the hospital and community and family are brought in, in so far the sacredness of life is ignored. John Paul II undermined the sacredness of life!
 
What if a person would die soon if their feeding and drinking tubes were removed? It is better to inject them to put them to sleep or should the tubes be removed to let nature run its course? Christians prefer the latter action though it may lead to worse torment for the person. It is even forbidden if it is known for sure that it will bring horrendous torment.
 
Is giving a dying person who is in agony some morphine to manage the pain good though it will speed his or her death? Is extending life a few weeks or months less important than handling the pain?


 
Moral Questions, A Statement by the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1971
Ethics: The Fundamentals, Julia Driver, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2007
Questions of Life and Death, Christian Faith and Medical Intervention, Richard Harries, SPCK, London, 2010
The Choice of Hercules, A C Grayling, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 2007