There’s good news and bad news today in the field of bioethics. First the bad news. Holland, it seems, will soon be considering offering assisted suicide to anyone over the age of 70 who requests it. When the supporters of this measure collect a sufficient number of signatures — which they expect to do in the next few weeks — the Dutch Parliament will debate the issue.
Holland has for a long time accepted assisted suicide and euthanasia -- ever since the 1970’s, although a law allowing these practices was not passed until 2002. Long before that, authorities did not bother any doctor who followed official “guidelines” concerning termination of a life. In the beginning the guidelines specified that the patient had to be an adult, suffering from a painful and unacceptable illness, had requested life termination twice, had had two doctors examine him or her, etc.
But gradually the country slid down the slippery slope: children and babies were allowed to be killed, adults in good physical health but with mental problems were terminated, people were euthanized who never requested the procedure themselves. And now comes the proposal for another slide — terminating people who are just tired of life. As one article expressed it: “Supporters say it would offer a dignified way to die for those over 70 who just want to give up living. They might include widows and widowers overwhelmed by grief, those unwilling to face the frailties of extreme old age or people determined to ‘get out while they’re ahead.’” The only thing that the terminators would be obliged to investigate is that the desire of the patient is not just a whim or temporary depression but a sincere desire to shuffle off the mortal coil.
The Dutch group “Of Free Will” is pushing this movement. And their members are very clear that giving people who are tired of living the right to die is their purpose. Opinion polls in Holland show that there is “significant support” for the group’s proposal but the Royal Dutch Medical Society, which does not oppose the present law and custom, is opposed to it.
It is easy to see the opportunity for abuse if the new proposal is adopted. The elderly could well feel pressure from family or society to take the ultimate step. And as a Dutch pro-life advocate Alex Schadenberg, notes: “Often our mothers continue to want the best for us, even after we have grown up. It would be easy to convince some of them that death is preferable to living with special needs. These women will feel that by agreeing to euthanasia they are doing ‘what is best’ for their children.” We can add that some fathers would feel that way too. Furthermore, the proposal wants trained non-doctors as well as doctors to administer the deadly cocktails. This drive is bad news for the people of Holland — and for all of us who support life.
But there is good news too. In California, a grass roots campaign has begun calling for the following amendment to the State Constitution: “The term ‘person’ applies to all living human organisms from the beginning of their biological development, regardless of the means by which they were procreated, method of reproduction, age, race, sex, gender, physical well-being, function, or condition or physical or mental dependency and/or disability.” Such an amendment would guarantee protection for the unborn, as well as for those whom some people want to classify as “non-persons” because they are mentally handicapped or comatose.
The proponents of this “Personhood Now” campaign argue from the words of the Declaration of Independence which speaks of “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” as self-evident truths and the inalienable right of every American; from the 14th Amendment of the Constitution (“nor shall any State deprive any person of life … without due process of law”); and from the words of George Washington and other Founding Fathers. The proponents argue convincingly that the statement which they wish to add to the State Constitution carries on the agenda of our first president and his peers. The arguments have succeeded in bringing in the support of people or organizations like Dr. Alveda King (niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.), the Family Research Council, Theology of the Body Institute, the Frederick Douglass Foundation, and many others.
It will be an uphill battle to succeed in this campaign, given the widespread acceptance of abortion, but in any case it is making people in California aware of the strong support for life that is to be found in many of our primary civil documents. Incidentally, a state legislator in Iowa, Dwayne Alons, is seeking to introduce in his state a similar bill, declaring that a person begins at conception. Maybe a trend has begun!
Father John A. Leies, SM, STD, is president emeritus of St. Mary’s University and was formerly head of the Theology Department there.