The United Kingdom’s House of Commons backed a proposal last week 330-275 to permit terminally ill adults with a life expectancy of six months or less to seek assistance to end their own lives. The practice is known as “aid-in-dying.”
While the bill still faces an uphill climb, as it will now be subjected to a three-month debate among members of Parliament and the public, it will only become law with the approval of both Houses of Parliament.
Action on the bill has prompted numerous responses. Faith leaders across the UK penned a letter in response to the proposed legislation. Part of the letter read, “Our pastoral roles make us deeply concerned about the impact the bill would have on the most vulnerable, opening up the possibility of life-threatening abuse and coercion. This is a concern we know is shared by many people, with and without faith.”
The clergy went on to state: “We believe that a truly compassionate response to the end of life lies in the provision of high-quality palliative care services to all who need them. While there are many examples of excellent palliative care in this country, it remains worryingly underfunded. Investment in palliative care is the policy of a truly compassionate nation. It is the way to ensure that everyone in society, including the most vulnerable, receive the care they deserve at the end of life.”
While clergy demonstrated their deep reservations and concerns about the bill, the public had other thoughts. According to the latest opinion poll conducted for the “Observer,” two-thirds (64%) support making assisted suicide legal, with a fifth (19%) opposing it.
The stark contrast between the clergy and the public is telling. In the United States, the bill prompted the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, to lament: “So called assisted death endangers the weak and marginalized in a society and it corrupts medicine and erodes our obligations to family. And we will promote and respect every life, no matter how old or sick or weak those persons may be.”
Earlier this year, Senate Bill 3499 moved through the Illinois legislature. It would allow certain terminally ill patients to end their own lives with a doctor’s help. The Associated Press interviewed a terminally ill patient, Deb Robertson, about the bill. Robertson said: “Medical aid in dying is not me choosing to die. I am going to die. But it is my way of having a little bit more control over what it looks like in the end.”
The Illinois bill is still being debated, but eleven other states and districts in the U.S. currently have some form of assisted suicide bills on record. California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Montana, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington passed different “aid-in-dying” bills.
The United Kingdom bill forced me to reconsider the ethical and theological dilemmas surrounding “aid-in-dying” bills. For years, I have not wavered in my belief that terminally ill people should have the right and ability to choose how they depart this world. The decision is solely between the individual, their family, and physicians.
While I understand the ethical and theological arguments against such bills, I contend that “aid-in-dying” bills empower a personal ethical standard and promote a compassionate theology of a sympathetic Creator. Of course, there needs to be parameters for such delicate legislation, but the right of a terminally ill person to end their life is theirs alone.
Humans have varied ethical standards based on individual backgrounds, cultures, morals, or religions. Granted, we must create communal ethical standards that consider the rights and well-being of others, but the issue of “aid-in-dying” is a very personal choice.
Suppose a terminally ill person concludes they do not want to physically suffer or become a financial burden due to the exorbitant cost of healthcare. In that case, they should have the right to decide to end their life in consultation with a physician. The decision is personal and does not bring harm or injustice to the rest of society.
In addition, I conclude that “aid-in-dying” is theologically sound based on the values of compassion, sympathy, and ontological realities. Making a theological argument that God wants humans to suffer at the end of life inserts a sadistic nature to the divine.
Does the Creator genuinely want people to suffer? If it’s acceptable at the end of life, we must also accept the notion throughout life. In my reading of the Bible and understanding of God, I do not believe God wants or requires humans to suffer.
While suffering is a physical reality of life, it does not mean God requires it. In truth, God attempts to avoid human suffering through grace, mercy, sympathy, compassion, justice and love.
God celebrates life but also sees death as a final extension of life.
We must stop seeing death as the enemy of life. While I understand the complexity and complications of this statement, I am not talking about the unethical and immoral acts of taking another person’s life. I am talking about living life in a way that welcomes death at its conclusion.
The ontological argument for this view stems from the Apostle Paul’s words. In First Corinthians 15:55, Paul wrote, “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?”
As a person of faith, I do not fear death. Death is very much a part of my life and existence. Death is not a stranger to be feared but an old friend helping me through a final transformation.
Whether by natural causes or a terminally ill person choosing “aid-in-dying” care, the reality persists and death is not our enemy. Again, my conclusions are not about premature deaths brought about by violence or unjust consequences. My thoughts are solely addressing “aid-in-dying” circumstances for the terminally ill.
As a pastor for over two decades, I’ve had countless conversations with terminally ill parishioners and stood by bedsides, witnessing the process of death up close. Some parishioners wanted to fight to the end–even when reality seemed to be against them. That was their choice, and I supported it wholeheartedly.
Others, however, decided to stop swinging and ease into death. While I have never participated in or witnessed assisted suicide as most people define it, I cannot pretend I did not have a front-row seat to several long-term “aid-in-dying” processes.
In almost every case, there comes a point when pain management intervenes for terminally ill patients. Physicians provide a cocktail of drugs to numb the patient while they and their families await death’s arrival. We can pretend this is not “aid-in-dying” care, but we would be fooling ourselves.
Offering terminally ill patients the right to choose “aid-in-dying” care gives them power over death. It lets them decide how they will depart this world.
It provides dignity for those who seek it. It offers grace and mercy to other family members who might be forced to make the heart-wrenching decision to stop end-of-life care.
More so, it places Paul’s words in the patient’s voice: “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O Death, is your sting?”
