Consistent
Life Ethic > Life Issues > End
of Life
| Resources |
"Legalizing
euthanasia would also violate American convictions about
human rights and equality. The Declaration of Independence
proclaims our inalienable rights to "life, liberty
and the pursuit of happiness." If our right to life
itself is diminished in value, our other rights will
have no meaning. To destroy the boundary between healing
and killing would mark a radical departure from longstanding
legal and medical traditions of our country, posing a
threat of unforeseeable magnitude to vulnerable members
of our society. Those who represent the interests of
elderly citizens, persons with disabilities, and persons
with AIDS or other terminal illnesses, are justifiably
alarmed when some hasten to confer on them the "freedom" to
be killed. We
call on Catholics, and on all persons of good will,
to reject proposals to legalize euthanasia. We urge families
to discuss issues surrounding the care of terminally
ill loved ones in light of sound moral principles and
the demands of human dignity, so that patients need
not
feel helpless or abandoned in the face of complex decisions
about their future. And we urge health care professionals,
legislators, and all involved in this debate, to seek
solutions to the problems of terminally ill patients
and their families that respect the inherent worth
of all human beings, especially those most in need of
our
love and assistance.” Statement
on Euthanasia - September 12, 1991 National
Conference of Catholic Bishops |
During
the past half-century, advances in technology and health care
have left many Americans to fear that the end of their lives
will be dehumanized by technology. Another major concern of Americans
is that in the dying process they will suffer unbearable and
untreatable pain. These two concepts have lead Americans to consider
physician assisted suicide and euthanasia as possible ways to
end of life.
In
1997, the US Supreme Court decided that the Constitution does
not protect a right of a competent, terminally ill individual
to commit suicide with the aid of a physician. In ensuing years,
referendums in Maine and Michigan affirmed that when people understand
that pain can be controlled and that their wishes not to have  invasive
treatment at the end of life will be respected, physician assisted
suicide and euthanasia are rejected.
The state of Oregon allowed physicians to prescribe lethal doses
of federally controlled drugs for the purpose of a patient ending
his or her life since
1997. The administration of President Bill Clinton chose to support the legislation.
In 2001, the administration of President George W. Bush ruled that the
Oregon statute was violating federal laws regarding controlled substances.
It is anticipated that this case will be taken to the Supreme Court to affirm
or deny Oregon’s physicians ability to prescribe lethal doses of federally
controlled substances.
In
addition to violating the sanctity of human life, physician assisted
suicide and euthanasia call into question the following:
Will
physician assisted suicide be suggested as a health care cost
containment tool as society grapples with escalating end of life
health care costs?
Will
individuals be pressured into choosing self-inflicted death rather
than to appear to be “a burden” to their caregivers?
Will
physicians encourage physician-assisted suicide rather than prescribing
pain relief medicines and treatments?
End
of Life Resources
These
resources are only available in .pdf format.
If you need to download a free Adobe Acrobat program to view
this file, please click
here.
United
States Catholic Bishops
Human
Life
Hospice
Care
Jann
Armantrout (585)
328-3210 x 304
Life Issues Coordinator, Diocese of Rochester |
