While mercy killing is still debated, those that have to live with a terminal illness and the pain that comes along feel euthanasia is a gift, especially when one decides in its favour
I usually do most of my soul-searching in the toilet. It is quiet and cool in there. I mean much more than the usual job when I say I am going to relieve myself. I think it is the ideal place to think about stuff like the rise of the Third Reich, the Cold War, politics of Chanakya and Casanova and other things related to life, death and afterlife.
I remember a part from the film Patch Adams, where 'Dr' Patch argues that making people laugh enhances the quality of life because all of us are dying anyway. Making terminally ill people laugh, therefore, does not go against the grain of doctor-like behaviour. This argument has another side to it: it provides subtle support to those who want a dignified or good death. Incidentally, the word euthanasia is rooted in two Greek words: ‘eu’ means good and ‘thanatos’ means death. When combined, it means ‘good death’. Dr Patch appears to have sympathy with those that want their plugs pulled. All he cares about is a good laugh. I agree with him because a wholesome laugh before kicking the bucket is rare. Mostly we try to cure people who don’t wish to be cured. In Osho’s words, it’s like helping a blindman cross the road without his consent.
Pro-mercy killing views are gaining ground because the modern man is evolving into a being that puts a high premium on practicality, though some might say that’s not the case considering that stuff like lingerie still exists (before you call me shallow, which I am, lingerie is a diaphanous tiny garment whose purpose is to motivate quick undressing. So, from Darwin’s point of view, it is an object whose practicality is suspect). Some say mercy killing rules out the possibility of a miracle. But that does not include rare circumstances where an easy death is the only miracle one seeks. Some say that legalising euthanasia would encourage murderers. Has the death penalty ever discouraged murderers? Since it hasn’t, I don’t think legalising mercy killing would encourage them either.
I remember my granny who had turned into a bag of bones and was forcibly kept alive with pipes and beeping machines. There was no dignity in the way she lived. She once wrote how she wanted to "just die". The day she died, a huge sigh of relief was heard around the house and the neighbourhood. Everyone said "finally she is happy" self-righteously. As I saw it, they had already killed her in their heads. If they were so sure she was "happy" why did they let her suffer for so long? Before her death, they just kept cursing her under their breaths and saying insensitive things like ‘is this living? she should go’. I think she deserved some compassion and respect. They should have had the decency to ask her if she needed any help to go with dignity. I was a kid then but I am sure she would she would have agreed if there was a law that allowed euthanasia.
However, the tide is turning. Just this week, an Australian woman called Shirley Justins was sentenced to 22 months in prison for helping her terminally ill partner, a 71-year-old man, die. She gave him a lethal dose of barbiturates. However, her sentence has an interesting parenthesis: she will have to stay in prison only during weekends. How dumb is that? But anyway, this judgement accepts one thing clearly: Justins is not a killer. She is someone who loves her partner so much that she is willing to help him fulfil his final desire. Her weekend punishment is silly because it is trying to address the ethical concerns of Justins’. While critics may say she took a life, the point is, what constitutes living? Waiting to die in pain isn’t life. Justins is brave because she helped him write the story of his life, and death is a part of such a story.
The story of 13-year-old leukaemia patient Hannah Jones is another case in point. The courst heard her voice and gave her the right to die. She is in pain and did not want yet another surgery (heart transplant in this case) forced on her to prolong her life. Instead, she wishes to spend the six months she has with her family and turn it into quality time. While some may say she is a kid and cannot give consent, the fact is if you are not in her shoes, her pain is an abstraction. We can theorise about it, but cannot feel it. I think instead of treating her to keep her alive in bed, it is better to treat her well and let her be.
I don’t understand how we justify putting an ailing old dog to sleep (who can’t consent), by saying it is in pain and not give the same benefit to a human being who can give consent. To use a diabetic analogy: one man’s sweet is another man’s poison. For those in excruciating and terminal pain, death is their sweet. Let us hear them out first. It is easy to theorise about moral stands when creation is kind to you.
I remember a part from the film Patch Adams, where 'Dr' Patch argues that making people laugh enhances the quality of life because all of us are dying anyway. Making terminally ill people laugh, therefore, does not go against the grain of doctor-like behaviour. This argument has another side to it: it provides subtle support to those who want a dignified or good death. Incidentally, the word euthanasia is rooted in two Greek words: ‘eu’ means good and ‘thanatos’ means death. When combined, it means ‘good death’. Dr Patch appears to have sympathy with those that want their plugs pulled. All he cares about is a good laugh. I agree with him because a wholesome laugh before kicking the bucket is rare. Mostly we try to cure people who don’t wish to be cured. In Osho’s words, it’s like helping a blindman cross the road without his consent.
Pro-mercy killing views are gaining ground because the modern man is evolving into a being that puts a high premium on practicality, though some might say that’s not the case considering that stuff like lingerie still exists (before you call me shallow, which I am, lingerie is a diaphanous tiny garment whose purpose is to motivate quick undressing. So, from Darwin’s point of view, it is an object whose practicality is suspect). Some say mercy killing rules out the possibility of a miracle. But that does not include rare circumstances where an easy death is the only miracle one seeks. Some say that legalising euthanasia would encourage murderers. Has the death penalty ever discouraged murderers? Since it hasn’t, I don’t think legalising mercy killing would encourage them either.
I remember my granny who had turned into a bag of bones and was forcibly kept alive with pipes and beeping machines. There was no dignity in the way she lived. She once wrote how she wanted to "just die". The day she died, a huge sigh of relief was heard around the house and the neighbourhood. Everyone said "finally she is happy" self-righteously. As I saw it, they had already killed her in their heads. If they were so sure she was "happy" why did they let her suffer for so long? Before her death, they just kept cursing her under their breaths and saying insensitive things like ‘is this living? she should go’. I think she deserved some compassion and respect. They should have had the decency to ask her if she needed any help to go with dignity. I was a kid then but I am sure she would she would have agreed if there was a law that allowed euthanasia.
However, the tide is turning. Just this week, an Australian woman called Shirley Justins was sentenced to 22 months in prison for helping her terminally ill partner, a 71-year-old man, die. She gave him a lethal dose of barbiturates. However, her sentence has an interesting parenthesis: she will have to stay in prison only during weekends. How dumb is that? But anyway, this judgement accepts one thing clearly: Justins is not a killer. She is someone who loves her partner so much that she is willing to help him fulfil his final desire. Her weekend punishment is silly because it is trying to address the ethical concerns of Justins’. While critics may say she took a life, the point is, what constitutes living? Waiting to die in pain isn’t life. Justins is brave because she helped him write the story of his life, and death is a part of such a story.
The story of 13-year-old leukaemia patient Hannah Jones is another case in point. The courst heard her voice and gave her the right to die. She is in pain and did not want yet another surgery (heart transplant in this case) forced on her to prolong her life. Instead, she wishes to spend the six months she has with her family and turn it into quality time. While some may say she is a kid and cannot give consent, the fact is if you are not in her shoes, her pain is an abstraction. We can theorise about it, but cannot feel it. I think instead of treating her to keep her alive in bed, it is better to treat her well and let her be.
I don’t understand how we justify putting an ailing old dog to sleep (who can’t consent), by saying it is in pain and not give the same benefit to a human being who can give consent. To use a diabetic analogy: one man’s sweet is another man’s poison. For those in excruciating and terminal pain, death is their sweet. Let us hear them out first. It is easy to theorise about moral stands when creation is kind to you.
1 comment:
In Switzerland there are 2 organisatons which are legally allowed to carry out euthanasia. The condition of the individual has to be certified by an authorised doctor as qualified for the euthanasia, and when it comes to it, the individual has to be able to drink the lethal mixture by themselves, so that it is clear that they are doing so of their own free will.
There was a documentary on one of these organisations in which they followed the process of a man who had a very serious condition through which he slowly lost control of his own body (I can't remember exactly what it was).
In response to the argument of some who say that euthanasia goes against God's law and that God decides when someone should die, he very aptly said that by that reasoning, performing an operation (e.g. a transplantation) to save (and thus prolong) someone's life would also be going against God's decision to end someone's life. Yes.
Post a Comment