Religion and Theology

Preservation of life is the ultimate purpose of healthcare profession. But as F.H. Epstein (2007) wrote in his journal article The role of the physician in the preservation of life, concern on medical costs has put this traditional duty of medical science specifically of the physician into question. Besides any reason, the option for euthanasia has become seemingly favorable, at least for the family. And many cases of euthanasia have been recorded involving physicians freely and easily act upon the will of the healthy person to just take the life of a sufferer. Such as the case of Terri Schiavo, which has been the most controversial and challenging subject of life preservation in the United States. This paper argues that euthanasia is morally unacceptable and healthcare profession also adheres to it.

The Catholic Church, in its Doctrine of Faith (1980) laud the medical professionals effort of making their skills available to the sick and dying but they must also remember the necessity to provide them with comfort and sincere love. It declares condemnation on crimes against life that includes euthanasia. Life is a gift of God but death as part of His plan is unavoidable. Death marks the end of our existence but the opening to eternal life. It is not necessary to hasten the hour of death. What is important is to prepare and accept ones critical condition with full responsibility and dignity in accordance to human values and faith. Whatever the intention or the process of execution, euthanasia is clearly putting an end to the lives of sick, handicapped or dying people, thus constitute murder. As regard the use of painkillers or other remedies for the sick, the Catholic Church stands in favor of it with an advice that healthcare practitioners must administer the remedies carefully, and that which is necessary or useful to the patient. In case there are no other sufficient remedies, most advanced medical techniques, even those means are still at the experimental stage as long as it is without risk and most importantly, with the patients consent. Likewise, if such remedies fall short of expectations, it is still with the patients consent to interrupt these means. In case the patient is incapable to decide, the family may speak for her or him, as advised by the physician specifically competent in the matter. But refusal to these techniques should be considered acceptance of the human condition or for the expense of the family and the community. In any condition, the Catholic belief prioritizes the decision of the patient. In the Terri Schiavo case, Epstein (2007) emphasized that the moral and contractual obligation of the physician is to the patient, not to the family or the onlookers who are unaccustomed to the sight of tubes and other apparatuses to prolong life. The physician must consider, above all, the decision of the patient. What the spectators call suffering in these apparatuses is actually imaginary. It is not the patient that suffers but the spectators usually because of guilt coming from neglectful children of a comatose mother who is not suffering at all. This argument is true in the case of Terri. It is only the emotional burden of her condition that imposed suffering, not to her, but to his relatives which was fueled by other external factors as the general public and media.

According to Dr. Timothy Quill (2005) based on his review on her data, he never doubted that Terri was in a persistent vegetative state. There was no way that her cognitive and neurologic functions would improve. But her life could have been further prolonged with artificial hydration and nutrition, if only her husband understood her true condition. According to Quill, Terri was not consciously suffering.

Therefore, Terri could not decide for herself. If only the people around her have known, their thoughts could have been comforted. And the rift between her husband and her family should have not started. There should have been an effort to reassure and educate her family and the public of her condition, and that dying in such situation can be a natural and humane process because long before science discovered the use of feeding tubes, humans died the same way. And euthanasia should have not been executed, stirring moral, ethical, and legal fight. According to the Catholic Church, at the moment of death the preservation of life and dignity must be protected against technological abuse. Technology was successful in prolonging Terris life, for years, but no one was certain if she agreed with it. As regard her right to die, her right to rest in peace with human and Christian dignity as the church define it, has been stained by the issue of conflicting interests that surfaced more than her welfare. This death with dignity, as Quill calls it, is sometimes used to justify refusal to medical treatment and resort to comfort measures only. (Quill, 2005 p.4)

Comfort to the spectators, releasing them from the burdensome obligations of caring for the sick or the dying. But whether it may be to eliminate suffering, it is still gravely contrary to the dignity of the person and an act of disrespect to the Creator who is the source of life.  According to a known Bible preacher Eli Soriano (2007), to a believer, no person has the right to take someones life, whatever the circumstances may be. It is God and only He has this unquestionable power to take the life of man as He said in the book of Deuteronomy 3239, there is no god with me I kill, and I make alive I wound, and I heal neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.(KJV) God is our merciful Creator. He does not allow anyone to kill or take someones life regardless of the extent. Euthanasia known as mercy killing is tantamount as saying that there are people more merciful than God. In any case, euthanasia is not an excuse. Finally, God has allowed man to progress supposedly for the better. For generations, He allowed mans knowledge to invent possible ways for lifes survival and preservation, but not to overrule His purpose of creation. God deals with people not only in this life, as the Catholic Church agrees that there is life after death. On earth, no person can perceive what God has in store for anybody. God lets man suffer a little in this life with a promise of a great reward of eternal happiness to come as He said in Revelation 210 be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.