EDITORIAL COMMENT: Thin line between euthanasia, murder, suicide

16 Oct, 2016 - 00:10 0 Views
EDITORIAL COMMENT: Thin line between euthanasia, murder, suicide Desmond Tutu

The Sunday News

Desmond Tutu

Desmond Tutu

Desmond Tutu, the Archbishop emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa, and a Nobel Peace laureate, recently torched a worldwide storm when he announced, on the occasion to mark his 85th birthday, that he supported euthanasia.

Euthanasia is taken from a Greek word which means “good death” and is a practice of intentionally ending a life in order to “relieve pain and suffering.” There are different euthanasia laws in some countries, for example, the British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as “a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering”.

In the Netherlands and Flanders, euthanasia is understood as “termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient”. Euthanasia is also categorised in different ways, which include voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary.

The topic has always been the subject of debate as the issue of life and death goes hand and glove with issues to do with custom, religion and general laws of the land. But it was the announcement by Archbishop Tutu, an outspoken man of the cloth and commentator on issues to do with religion and politics in the continent that brought the topic back into discussion once more.

Professor Sean Davison, founder of Dignity South Africa, who campaigns for assisted death, said the intervention by Archbishop Tutu will help his cause for assisted death. The professor said Archbishop Tutu was only “highlighting something that is going on very quietly throughout humanity.”

Making the option of assisted death available could help people avoid attempting suicide, says Davison. Sometimes the suicide attempts go horribly wrong and they end up in a worse situation than before. He says a law change could actually save lives and believes that things will soon change for the better. By changing the law and making the option for an assisted death available, people may not attempt to take their lives and go on to have a natural death, he argues.

He is certain the Supreme Court of Appeal will rule against the state’s appeal of a High Court ruling allowing the assisted death of Robin Stransham-Ford. The ruling takes place in Bloemfontein, South Africa on 4 November.

“Throughout my life, I have been fortunate to have spent my time working for dignity for the living. I have campaigned passionately for people in my country and the world over to have their God-given rights. Now, as I turned 85 on Friday, with my life closer to its end than its beginning, I wish to help give people dignity in dying. Just as I have argued firmly for compassion and fairness in life, I believe that terminally ill people should be treated with the same compassion and fairness when it comes to their deaths. Dying people should have the right to choose how and when they leave Mother Earth. I believe that, alongside the wonderful palliative care that exists, their choices should include a dignified assisted death . . . Terminally ill people have control over their lives, so why should they be refused control over their deaths? Why are so many instead forced to endure terrible pain and suffering against their wishes?” Archbishop Tutu was quoted as saying.

He said he had prepared for his death and had made it clear that he did not wish to be “kept alive at all costs.” Tutu has been in and out of hospital in recent years as a result of prostate cancer treatment he has been receiving for nearly 20 years.

However, there are many who believe euthanasia is a form of suicide and should not be allowed. “Euthanasia is a long, smooth-sounding word, and it conceals its danger as long, smooth words do, but the danger is there, nevertheless . . . ,” according to American author Pearl S. Buck

“The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government . . . ,” said Thomas Jefferson. “The terminally ill are a class of persons who need protection from family, social, and economic pressures, and who are often particularly vulnerable to such pressures because of chronic pain, depression, and the effects of medication . . . ,” from the state of Alaska’s arguments that assisted suicide is dangerous. Subsequently (Sampson et al. v State of Alaska, 09/21/2001), the Alaska Supreme Court ruled unanimously that state laws punishing assisted suicide as manslaughter are to be upheld.

We also believe that euthanasia is bad. Everyone has a right to life and it is only God, the creator of Heaven and earth, who has the power and authority to end someone’s life. We therefore find the good Archbishop offside.

Share This:

Survey


We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey

This will close in 20 seconds