[Erin] All its allotted length of days

Our technologies allow many lives to continue well past the point where they would have naturally ended. Is choosing to not have one's life artificially extended past a particular point suicide? I don't think so.

I can envisage a future society where life could in theory be prolonged indefinitely due to technological advancement. Would this avoidance of death as long as is possible be a virtue or a failure of faith to face and accept mortality?

These things are not as straightforward as they may appear on the surface. Consider a minor modification to the last sentence of the above article:

"Either we are vessels of the Holy Spirit or we are not, but if we are, then it isn't up to us to decide that the vessel should be technologically held together beyond the natural point where it would otherwise be broken beyond repair."

Faith must allow for descent into the darkness that is death, neither grasping for life at any cost, nor throwing life away without regard to its worth.

yes, there are different ways to look at it...
even for those of us who do believe in God...
such as...
life is a gift from God, so a person is free to get rid of that gift if it seems right...

or...
a good "neighbor" would not want to burden others with large expenses for medical care and nursing home, especially when the costs for major medical procedures for those over 80 have very little long term return on investment...

or...
we Christians are not vessels of the Holy Spirit, since the HS is an ancient Myth and at most is just another name for God...
so in some situations wisdom, which is just human wisdom, would suggest that it's best for all concerned that an elderly person in a permanent strongly negative condition would exercise their gift of free will to choose to have their life end sooner rather than later...

life is so ridiculously short anyway...
I doubt it's a big deal to God that some persons shorten it a little more...

life faith hope love joy peace to all...

All due respect, Larry, but how do you know I never have "...suffered paralyzing depression. Where you have thoughts, at least, of severe self-injury EVERY SINGLE DAY OF YOUR LIFE..."?

The point is that suicide is indeed an act of despair, even though the despair might arise out of depression or mental instability or other causes which, even in Catholic teaching, can lessen or completely remove any moral culpability. (Indeed, I think you're misinformed about Catholic teaching on suicide; as far as I know the operating thought these days is that the person's state of mind was presumptively beyond the capability for moral action. I know it was different in the past--but in the past all of society misunderstood mental illness, didn't it?) But if I knew you were in a state of depression-induced despair for any reason at all, and were contemplating self-injury or suicide, wouldn't it be my duty as your neighbor to try and stop you from doing it? Your life is worth living, Larry; you are worth saving.

Poor little Megan; I read her story earlier this weekend. Wouldn't every one of us here have tried to stop the terrible events in her life from leading up to that act of desperation? Wouldn't we, given the opportunity, have tried to stop her, to get her help, to tell her, too, that she was worth saving and that her life was worth living? I'm a good Catholic, Larry; I pray for her soul. Why should I or any Catholic say that she is in Hell? I have no basis to believe any such thing about that poor, confused, lonely, and ill child.

If an elderly member of my church confided that she was lonely, that she had no one, that she was sometimes ill and in pain, and that therefore she was going to kill herself, should I say to her, "Well, you're right; you're just a burden, now, and your life is so empty. Have you found someone to help you commit suicide? Because if not, I'm free Thursday." Being elderly or in pain can cloud your judgment and sense of self-worth, too, but that's no excuse for the rest of us to fail to reach out in love to those who suffer.

And that's why I reject assisted suicide: despair of any kind should be met with love, not a clinical confirmation of the unhappy person's worst fears about their lack of value.

"Most puzzling of all are those who come from a Christian tradition and yet believe that it might be morally acceptable to end one's own life under certain circumstances."

It's interesting that sometimes church seems to justify a suicide. If a soldier runs to a tank and explodes it together with himself or lays himself on a barbed wire to let comrades pass through, formally he commits a suicide, but suicide is called a self-sacrifice then. It is shocking to learn that during wars many christian women killed themselves and threw their babies into wells, when it became clear that they would be seduced and children would be brought up by enemy as pagans and persecutors of christians. Some virgins who jumped from towers to avoid losing of chastity are venerated as saints.

So church considers motives sometimes.

Episode from history:
After pogrom in Ryazan princedom during the mongol-tatar invasion Prince Fyodor Yurevich was taken in prison by khan Batiy. Batiy took off his skin and killed. Prince Fyodor had a christian wife Evpraksia famous for her beauty and Batiy known as lecherous person of course heard about it and was very enthusiastic about taking her as concubine. When tatars beated off the door of her terem Evpraksia guessed what for they came, there was no much time to decide, she took the baby and run to the top of high terem, and before tatars reached them jumped from the roof together with baby. Despite an obvious suicide Evpraksia (together with husband) is venerated as local saint.

You know, Brad, the vast majority of my post is about how CHRISTIANS view suicide, assisted or not. In fact, I thought I was being clear that I have no particular quarrel with the fact that the non-religious are often going to view this whole matter extremely differently than those who believe in God. I apologize if that was unclear; I didn't think I had to keep saying "...suicide is always an act of despair (for people who come from the largest religious traditions especially Christianity)...etc."

the bombastic pronouncement of the sort of hideously bloated ego

I don't moderate this thing (obviously!) but in my opinion this language is a tad over the line. Surely we can disagree with one another without accusing our opponents of "hideously bloated ego."

One of the drivers on "assisted" or "unassisted" suicide is the way we've engineered death, and I do mean engineered. The horror of being kept "alive" by machinery long after natural death would have occurred, perhaps indefinitely...the unmerciful "cure" of pneumonia in the terminally ill elderly (this disease was long known as "the old man's friend") so that the prolonged, painful death by cancer may proceed unabated...the shell of a person kept breathing after the brain is gone...no one wants that. Or if someone does, I have yet to meet them.

We don't seem to have developed the discernment to know when to apply these remedies, and when to leave off. I'm remembering the book-length account of the death of Philip Roth's father. Herman, nearly 90, had a brain tumor. Surgery was proposed, but the family realized that he'd never survive the surgery. So the tumor progressed, and finally it pressed on the part of the brain which controls breathing. The doctors wanted to hook Herman up to the breathing machine, but warned the son that once Herman was hooked up, it would be very difficult both emotionally and legally to turn the machine off. Philip and his brother (wisely) refused the machine, and their father choked to death.

These were only vaguely people of faith - non-observant Jews - but I think they took the right approach. Back in the day, that's how it would have gone, and no one could have done anything about it. And really in the end no one can do anything about it now but prolong the inevitable.

I do a lot of estate planning, and it's not only, or even chiefly, the young who fear "being attached to machines." My elderly clients, who have seen the deaths of contemporary friends and close relatives, fear it even more, and rightly I think. How do you stop them from doing this to you??

Sometimes the "answer" turns out to be taking matters into your own hands.

On suicide:

In this I found myself utterly hostile to many who called themselves liberal and humane. Not only is suicide a sin, it is the sin. It is the ultimate and absolute evil, the refusal to take an interest in existence; the refusal to take the oath of loyalty to life.

The man who kills a man, kills a man. The man who kills himself, kills all men; as far as he is concerned he wipes out the world. His act is worse (symbolically considered) than any rape or dynamite outrage. For it destroys all buildings: it insults all women. The thief is satisfied with diamonds; but the suicide is not: that is his crime. He cannot be bribed, even by the blazing stones of the Celestial City. The thief compliments the things he steals, if not the owner of them. But the suicide insults everything on earth by not stealing it. He defiles every flower by refusing to live for its sake.

There is not a tiny creature in the cosmos at whom his death is not a sneer. When a man hangs himself on a tree, the leaves might fall off in anger and the birds fly away in fury: for each has received a personal affront.

- GK Chesterton

Marian,

As with many issues, the oft-heard claim that the Catholic teaching regarding end of life care has changed is false. The Church's teaching regarding the use of extraordinary methods is the same as it has been for many years.

I have a hard time understanding why people favor assisted suicide because I can't think of any cases where it would be medically necessary. I'm not saying those cases aren't out there, but they must be very rare.

People have had the right to refuse medical treatment, and that hasn't changed. People can refuse medical treatment and die a natural death. Sometimes you're treated as if you're killing your loved one or killing yourself when you make those choices, but it's legal. My family experienced that both times with the passing of my grandparents. Both of them had severe lung disease. One had a stroke and one had a heart attack. We chose treatment up to the point of placing them on a ventilator. They died. I still think about that now and wonder if the right choice was made. But they were permitted to die a natural death. Refusing medical treatment in my mind is different from actively killing a person by giving an overdose of medicine.

We have the medical technology to keep people comfortable when they have cancer or other terminal illnesses. Sometimes the dose of narcotics that has to be given might contribute to respiratory depression or a drop in blood pressure that speeds up the eventual death, but I think that giving medications with the intent to ease suffering from pain is different from giving a lethal dose of medicine with the intent to put an end to life.

Some illnesses are scary. I'm thinking of something like Lou Gehrig's disease where you have a slow and progressive paralysis over time, keep your mental faculties, and don't want to live like Stephen Hawkins. In the end, you would die from malnutrition(if you refused artificial tube feedings) or from lack of air(refusing artificial ventilation) because your breathing muscles would become ineffective. Once again, I think that people have the right to say that they don't want to live with tubes, wheelchairs, and ventilators, and doctors need to be OK with that. Our responsibility to those people should be in keeping them comfortable with the medical technology that we have available, but should not go as far as helping to speed it along. We do have the medical technology to keep them comfortable.

Helping a person who has depression or is feeling despair to kill themselves is so wrong that, usually, assisted suicide laws are written to make sure that a person is not making decisions to end their life while experiencing hopelessness and despair.

I find it hard to understand why a Christian would want to participate in assisted suicide when compassionate alternatives are available.

Some illnesses are scary. I'm thinking of something like Lou Gehrig's disease where you have a slow and progressive paralysis over time, keep your mental faculties, and don't want to live like Stephen Hawkins. In the end, you would die from malnutrition(if you refused artificial tube feedings) or from lack of air(refusing artificial ventilation) because your breathing muscles would become ineffective. Once again, I think that people have the right to say that they don't want to live with tubes, wheelchairs, and ventilators, and doctors need to be OK with that. Our responsibility to those people should be in keeping them comfortable with the medical technology that we have available, but should not go as far as helping to speed it along. We do have the medical technology to keep them comfortable.

watsy, this seems as sensible a formulation as I have seen. More than most.

Erin, in reference to your tolerance of Brad, the definition of a "martyr" is "someone who lives with a saint." Be awarded the martyr's crown, at least in a minor matter. (A FEW leaves on the garland, not a whole lot!)

It's true I don't employ your sweet, silky, elliptically condescending prose; I simply called your obviously egotistical, patronizing bigotry for what it was, regardless of how sweetly or "civilly" you might have offered it, in the hopes you might recognize it as such.

Nice try, Brad, but I don't think you can provoke this Iron Lady into a response to this nonsense.

Good luck, though.

Brad, the only response you're going to get from me on this thread at this time about your inappropriate remarks is a warning. I can delete your comments and if your tone doesn't improve, I will.

Now, what part of the statement "Christians (generally) view suicide (generally) as an act of despair (generally)" don't you understand? I'm willing to work with you here, but your constant insistence that I'm attempting to judge the individual motivations of individual Christians tempted to suicide when it should be fairly plain that I'm not is puzzling; I know you're very intelligent, so I'm not sure what's not clear to you.

And as for dragging Franklin into this, I have no problem recognizing him as religious; his religion is paganism, and he believes in gods, small g, plural. If in order to satisfy your need for every 'i' to be dotted and every 't' to be crossed I had to write a sentence like "...the non-religious person's view (meaning, of course, as 'non-religious,' only those people who do not practice any religion, and excluding both definitively and implicitly all those who do worship any higher power at all, be it God, a god/goddess, an assortment of gods/spirits, the animating force of nature, or any and all combination of any of these things; and by "practice" I mean those who engage, not necessarily regularly, in the worship, spirits, traditions or rituals of any faith group or religious tradition, not excluding Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Paganism, Animism, Zoroastrianism, and any and all non-enumerated faith traditions which should not feel excluded simply because I've run out of space to write all their names, etc..." well, then, my prose would be even more clunky and pedantic than it already is, dontcha think?

...scratching my head here...

Well, good, Brad, I guess, except that as a Christian I was commenting on what Christians believe in the first place. I'd be wholly unqualified to write a post on, say, Zoroastrian beliefs regarding assisted suicide.

But hey, as long as you're happy... :)

isse/issue

Susan,

Certainly technology changes, and how Catholic teaching applies to these changes is important, but the underlying principles haven't changed, and that's important too.

As to the Schiavo case, one point worth making, that is almost always avoided, is that the issue from a moral perspective was not just about hydration and nutrition. Even in light of the recent pronouncements from the Vatican regarding nutrition and hydration, there is a difference between applying those principles to a person who is dying and one who is not. Terry Schiavo was not dying - she was severely disabled.

ds0490 your arguments are good ones.

I don't know the answer to your question. Neither does anyone else.

Full disclosure: I'm a dog person. I've had dogs since I was four years old. Life would be bleak without a dog.

The catch is, dogs live maybe 15 years, plus or minus. Thus, many fewer years than we do. That means, get deeply attached to a dog, and you're going to have to make some hard choices at the end, unless you get a break (the dog dies suddenly, and you can't do anything about it; or, you die first).

Analyzing the motives of God is pretty much a useless enterprise. We just don't know, and we can't know.

The problem with equating your dog with your mother is not in you, it's in the rest of humanity. For some people, as for you and me, dogs are "close friends and companions." So we treat our dogs as though they were people. (We spent thousands of dollars to treat the cancer of our last dog, ultimately unsuccessfully, alas.) I believe that that is the fulfillment, in our situation, of the charge to Adam to be ruler (and thus, protector) for the animals.

For other people, dogs are expendable. We treat our dogs as though they were human; the problem is with other people, who would treat their relatives as they do their dogs.

Expendable.

Theresa Schiavo, according to undisputed testimony, was not a practicing Catholic. She never went to Mass, for one thing. That her parents were and are practicing Catholics is neither here nor there. We're not interested in their opinion, we're interested in hers.

The court did the best it could under the circumstances. One can can disagree. (I, for example, think OJ Simpson guilty of the murder of his wife.) But we live here by the rule of law, not by the Rule Of What Susan (or Sean) Thinks.

ds0490 wrote:

"I have a problem with those folks who say to families that your relative's suffering is a gift from God. My God does not give such gifts. I would challenge them on what basis they know what is good or what is God's will for me and my family."

So do I. Certainly pain and suffering can enoble, but they can also
degrade and dehumanize. Jesus did his level best to relieve pain
and suffering amongst the people he encountered.

Susan: Counselor, thanks for not moderating, as you reminded us earlier you were not, because sometimes you appear to misunderstand who is speaking to whom, and not infrequently what they may or may not be saying.;-)

Your responses at 1:26 PM where you refer to "this Iron Lady" (in English, "this" would be you) rather than "that Iron Lady" (which would refer to someone elsewhere than this, possibly Erin) would indicate you misread attributions and mistakenly thought that since your name appeared in my quote, I was therefore for some reason replying to you rather than, as I was, to Erin. Either that, or you simply decided to gratuitously interpose yourself between us and dispense advice. In a post in the not too distant past you were telling us all to shut up, as I recall.;-)

Whether you speak for everyone else, as you would claim to at 1:28 PM, I will leave to everyone else to decide. Some will find my scrupulous phenomenological descriptions descriptive, if provocative, some opaque and only provocative, I suppose, if not insulting as well. For purposes of self-preservation, naturally, I'll be filing the edges off.

But to answer your latest question, with regard to the only element I spoke to, simply that there are a variety of reasons people, Christian and non-Christian alike, choose suicide, despair being only one of them.

Some do it, or claim they'll do it, out of sheer pride or stubbornness. I'm thinking of a tough old, thoroughly Christian bird I once knew who swore he'd never be caught dead in adult diapers, or if he was, that's when he'd put the shotgun in his mouth. Don't know if Sonny ever did, nor, of course if he was sufficiently or authentically Christian for others; he was for himself.

Some do it in order to not bankrupt their families. Russell shot himself because there was only years of treatment for one, and he didn't want Effie to live out her years as a pauper. Despair? Not knowing him. Self sacrifice? Maybe, but he'd have swung on me if I'd suggested it was anything but a rational, manly decision. He was of that generation that shot their own dog, took care of business that had to be done.

Some may very well do it for sheer adventure, for seeing what's next relative to what they are or have now. I tend to think the infamous Hunter S. Thompson fits this category far better than "despair", despite his grumblings. Was he Christian? I don't know. Was he Christian enough? I don't know.

Personally, since it's one's Last Act (at least on Earth, as individual X), I've always taken the position Be Sure, and whenever possible, Procrastinate. But certainly, I could see situations where I would make that calculation to commit suicide, where anybody could and would, and least of all from some weenie psychological or spiritual breakdown into despair, the condescending and patronizing conclusion I found so infuriatingly insulting, no matter to whom or of what faith or none at all it might be applied to.

Susan, just muddle through what I say as best you can, or don't.

"Susan, just muddle through what I say as best you can, or don't.

The idea of writing is that you make it clear to your audience, not that you throw it in their faces and say, Well, whatever."

Susan, my audience always understands what I write, so your consternation and agitation puzzle me. Can you perhaps be more clear on where and why your particular ability to understand is failing you?;-)

The only people who should make end of life decisions are the patient, family, and healthcare professionals involved in the case. The general public (and specifically Americans) is unforgivably ignorant about the differences between chronic and terminal illness, pain management, and medically futile care.

Here Susan, The History of Nonsurgical Enteral Tube Feeding Access

Gail Cresci, MS, RD, CNSD, LD and John Mellinger, MD
Department of Surgery, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, Georgia

Correspondence: Gail Cresci, MS, RD, CNSD, LD, Medical College of Georgia, Department of Surgery, Room 4072, 1120 15th Street, Augusta, GA 30912. Electronic mail may be sent to gcresci@mcg.edu.

Specialized nutrition support, particularly enteral feeding, ***** has been used for centuries*******. Technologic advancements have affected the provision of enteral feeding. Feeding solutions and devices, as well as the techniques to place the feeding devices, have evolved. This article reviews the history of bedside placement methods for short-term enteral access devices.

Breathing machines (ventilators) have been around since big polio epidemics. It was invented by people who took shifts manually bagging patients for weeks at a time.

With many advanced cancers and certain specific cancers the only way to relieve the horrendous pain (sarcoma anyone) is to drug the patient into a stupor. DRUGGED. Unconscious, with ragged breathing, too intoxicated to interact in the last few weeks with family, but still in pain, because the health care professionals don't won't to "kill" the dying. But the cancer is chewing through brain, bone, and organ and inch a week, chewing, bleeding, stinking.

Have you ever HEARD someone screaming from unrelieved pain like that.

You have know idea what a burden you place on afflicted men, women and their families with your cold-eyed judgement, and your happy-clapppy talk of suffering as rather sadomasochistic god's lathe, to build good character and moral fiber.

Erin, there are many Christian who heartily disagree with what you've written here. We are no less Christ followers, or droves of despairing droogs. But there is no disagreement that we will all die, why do you insist that we all suffer?

Sooooooooo God spared a dog of whom you had no connection with, but let my 5 yo cousin die a slow agonizing death despite hundreds faithful prayers because............ ?

or perhaps my cousin was worth more than sparrows, but not a nice doggy?

Sappy stories like this set my teeth on edge, slightly less than the forward this if you really love Jesus.

Sheesh.

"Susan, my audience always understands what I write

Brad, I don't understand your attempt at prose. I hold a doctorate, so I'm not stupid (maybe?).

Your statement boils down to, I'm not your "audience" I guess. Good luck to those who are."

Thanks, Susan, I'm done with discovery now; and congratulations on that doctorate.

I hate to repeat a line from earlier in the thread, but for Chesterton to write that, he must never have suffered from severe depression.

That said, Erin, since I've calmed down about this a bit (remember this is not only a personal issue to me, but THE MOST PERSONAL issue to me), I'm going to share a post I made on (yes) Beyond Blue today:

Therese (Borchard) is telling the truth -- and lying -- at the same time (about depression).

Because the worst of depression will pass, and you will find yourself in a better place again.

And then you will find yourself in a worse place again. Because depression -- no matter how carefully you "titrate" your medication regimen, no matter how deep you go into therapy, no matter how well you eat and exercise -- still comes and goes in waves. And worst of all, we can't predict them (in the cosmic sense; we do learn our triggers after time, of course).

It begs the question of what "a life well-lived" really means. Much of the time I can't possibly imagine that a G-d who allows people to feel this much pain (and not just from depression, obviously, from numerous other diseases as well) could demand from us "a life well-lived."

But I realize there's another way of looking at it.

My favorite song ever to describe the everyday feeling of bipolar disorder (though U2 certainly didn't intend it this way) is "Vertigo." The refrain goes:

Hello, Hello
I'm at a place called vertigo
It's everything I wish I didn't know
Except you give me something I can feel
Feel ...

If a life is lived at 50% capacity (give or take) to fully experience its highs and lows (including/especially the lows), vs. someone who exists without much consciousness but is never ill, what is the "life well-lived"?

Our lives can't possibly appear that way in this world. But I can see how, to a religious person, they might from the next world.

Even if that's little comfort to us now, experiencing "everything we wish we didn't know."