Most advocates for legalizing assisted suicide, particularly in the USA, pretend that theirs is a limited agenda, designed for only the “terminally ill,” or the “hopelessly ill” to achieve “deliverance.” In actuality, assisted suicide ideology believes we have absolute ownership of our bodies, and as a consequence,–either implicitly or explicitly–we should be entitled to assisted suicide for whatever reason we want.
Australia’s Philip Nitschke was very clear about this in the NRO years ago, saying that suicide pills should be available in supermarkets, even available to “troubled teens.” Ludwig Minelli, who has reportedly become a millionaire helping people kill themselves, says likewise in this BBC interview. From the interview:
Can I ask you about the Dignitas philosophy on people who would come to you who are mentally ill rather than physically ill? Why you think it’s okay to help someone with a major mental illness like schizophrenia to commit suicide?
As a human rights lawyer I am persuaded that the right to make an end of life decision belongs to every person who has capacity of discernment, most persons with mental illness have full capacity of discernment, of course. And I think this capacity to make an end of life decision should also apply to a healthy person, so the British discussion about terminally ill persons is completely obsolete. And I want to implement this last human right.
What if someone came to you who was neither physically nor mentally ill but expressed the wish to die. Would you be able to help them?
Of course. For instance a very old person which has no illnesses at all, has some difficulties because in old age you will have some difficulties, has no longer family, has no longer friends. Why should we say no?
The logic is impeccable. If choosing the time, manner, and method of death is the “ultimate civil right,” how can it be limited logically to people with serious physical conditions.
Moreover, because the second ideological pillar of assisted suicide/euthanasia is that killing is an acceptable answer to human suffering, it opens the door to non voluntary and even involuntary euthanasia–as we have seen happen in the Netherlands and Belgium. And, with money tight, the real threat exists that assisted suicide will be offered instead of expensive life-extending treatments. Oh yea, that has already happened in Oregon.
Assisted suicide/euthanasia is bad medicine–actually, it isn’t really “medical” at all, as Minelli’s lay suicide clinic illustrates–and even worse public policy that opens the door to abuse and abandonment of the vulnerable despairing and expensive for which to care.
July 2nd, 2010 | 12:37 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Lisa. Lisa said: BIOETHICS WATCH => Assisted Suicide Candor: Death Clinics for Anybody http://dlvr.it/2FHGf #912 #ocra #ucot #rs #tcot #tlot #sgp [...]
July 2nd, 2010 | 1:36 pm
[...] First Things (blog) [...]
July 3rd, 2010 | 2:01 am
As antilibertarian as this sounds, sometimes we do have to protect people, even from themselves. And, suicide, and assisted suicide, fall into this category.
Certainly, most people who “choose” suicide, are mentally ill. And would choose not to, if given proper counseling, and/or medication.
And the rest, we can safely conclude, could be talked out of it. They probably don’t want to be nonexistent, per se, they likely have some seemingly insurmountable problem,that, could be rectified, if discussed with an objective, compassionate person.
I am mostly libertarian concerning the choices that people make. If one’s an adult, I think that the government should stay out of one’s life. And, this is precisely why I’m against suicide, or assisted suicide: it’s a false choice. And sometimes people can be wrong about what’s best for them. How can the choice, not to exist, be a good choice?
July 3rd, 2010 | 10:01 am
I in fact have more sympathy ofor people who say suicide should be allowed for anyone than for those who say it’s only allowed for the disabled or ill. At least these people don’t discriminate against marginalized people such as those with disabilities or illnesses, and no-one beside the person themself is deciding whether they suffer or not.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
July 3rd, 2010 at 11:42 am
Astrid: Me too, because it is honest. That is the argument that should be had, not the baloney that is pitched today, which is intended to get us there by stealth.
July 3rd, 2010 | 12:14 pm
I just came across this article on The Onion and it made me think of your blog:
Suffering Blue Whales Plead With Environmentalists To Let Them Go Extinct Already
NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN—Claiming that their miserable lives had become too depressing to endure, the world’s remaining blue whales surfaced Monday and desperately pleaded with environmentalists to immediately cease all conservation efforts so the species could “just be done with it and finally go extinct.” … [ http://www.theonion.com/articles/suffering-blue-whales-plead-with-environmentalists,17619/ ]
Not really sure what to take from that, but thought I’d pass it along..
July 4th, 2010 | 7:48 pm
brett: your statements are ignorant and offensive. You draw baseless conclusions and assume that anyone on the edge of suicide is crazy or wants someone to talk to. Sometimes suicide is the moral, intelligent, rational choice.
For instance, consider how hard it is to live morally in america anymore. If you buy anything, you support capitalism, which with its free market principles, is trending towards rampant immorality because that is whats most profitable and no one will stop them because they run our government and our media. Even if this wasn’t true, and it is, when you pay taxes, you have become a fiscal conscript, drafted basically, into any number of secretive, contrived, immoral conflicts most rational decent people would have nothing to do with. You can thank the CIA and its policy of TOP SECRET we-know-better antics for that.
So there is no way to buy anything in america, or hold a job, without helping immoral dregs of society make everything even worse as they kill anyone in their way. So if someone wanted to live morally, they would have to grow their own food on land they’re squatting on, and resign themselves to a life of abject poverty.
Death sounds better, to me. This doesnt make me crazy. You are welcome to try to ‘talk me out of it’ but you sound small minded and believe me, I’ve tried to find viable options. I’m not going to just up and leave the country, start over somewhere with no family, friends, job prospects or possessions. I’m not going to go live on treebark and dandelions on park land. Self termination sounds both reasonable and moral to me. Maybe if enough of us opted out of this system we’ve been shoehorned into, the system would change. Its only by virtue of ignorance, mass media and tremendous amounts of repetition that this crap is permitted anyways.
July 4th, 2010 | 11:06 pm
1) we have absolute ownership of our bodies
2) therefore, we should be entitled to assisted suicide for whatever reason we want
Where is the problem? Makes perfect sense to me.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
July 5th, 2010 at 1:06 pm
Abandonment. Nihilism. Surrender to despair. Nobody has a “right” to kill themselves. They have the power. But more to the point, they don’t (or shouldn’t) have the right to others’ participation. I have seen many cases where the idea of suicide was a “loved one” who wanted the “suicidal” person out of their own misery. See George Delury.
July 5th, 2010 | 7:00 am
Wesley writes: “In actuality, assisted suicide ideology believes we have absolute ownership of our bodies…”
Well, Wesley, tell us: is there someone else who owns your body besides you; or someone else who owns my body besides me? And by what authority?
I thought we abolished slavery in this country a century and a half ago.
July 5th, 2010 | 4:04 pm
Assisted suicide/euthanasia is bad medicine–actually, it isn’t really “medical” at all…
I firmly believe that placing assisted suicide/euthanasia in a medical context has been done purely to lend the practices the veneer of respectability that being associated with medicine conveys. There is no therapeutic benefit to killing someone, and there are numerous simple methods of killing that non-medical personnel could accomplish easily. Perhaps the only “benefit” of associating AS/Euthanasia with medicine is that it cheapens medical practitioners, and makes them suspect in the eyes of all patients.
The first big push should thus be to disassociate AS/Euthanasia from medicine altogether, and let society debate the utility/ethics of killing people just because they (or someone else) wants them dead.
Joe
July 7th, 2010 | 7:01 am
The person who gets to decide this issue, is God. To see where I’m coming from, define god as “the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong”. Everyone believes in God. Either God is the God of the Bible, another god, or themself. Arguments based upon logic, sentiment etc. all ultimately come down to the person being “convinced” or “deciding” being god. That is pretty much the norm in our secular, moral relativistic day and age. Each person has his/her set of beliefs which are “right”, and divergent beliefs are “wrong”. I like to call this “buffet moralism”. IMHO it’s folly to argue anything on this basis because why is one person’s (or groups) opinion ultimately any more correct than any other? This is one more reason I am/will be eternally grateful to God for revealing His truth to me in the Bible. It’s actually a great relief to be told with certainty (or able to infer from guidelines) what is right and what is wrong. Since all human life is sacred because we are made in God’s image, He forbids the unlawful taking of anyone’s life, including our own – so suicide is always wrong.
July 7th, 2010 | 7:41 am
Wesley:
You make claims and then, predictably, avoid answering any questions about their validity. So I’ll ask again:
DO WE HAVE ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP OF OUR BODIES OR DON’T WE; IF WE DON’T, WHO HAS THE SUPERIOR CLAIM, AND BY WHAT RIGHT IS THIS CLAIM ASSERTED?
Simple enough question, isn’t it? Yes? No? Why?
HW
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
July 7th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
I answered that. How many times are you gong to ask? No. Sometimes society has the right to stop us from doing what we want for the societal good, as in stopping us from injecting heroin.
July 8th, 2010 | 4:32 pm
Matt: thanks for your comment. I believe that life is precious, and we should do all we can to help anyone who is feeling suicidal. I certainly did not mean to offend anyone. I’m not trying to tell anyone how to run her/his life. But suicide is a very final choice. There’s always a better way. Your life, and all life is too important to think otherwise. Take Care.
July 8th, 2010 | 4:41 pm
Matt: I would also like to say, that your life is very important. I understand the way you feel. I’m not talking down to you. I respect you, and your intelligence. But please, please, seek help, and tell someone you trust, if you feel suicidal. Your life is too important. I understand thar life is hard. I’m sure that I don’t know what you’re going through, but I respect you, and hope the best for you. I don’t know if you’re religious, if not, that’s your right, and i respect that. But I believe that God loves you, more than you’ll ever know.
July 9th, 2010 | 6:23 am
Thanks Wesley: I know you answered it. I just like to hear you keep insisting that you have no real use for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that ultimately government has superior rights over us than we ourselves. I always suspected you were a closet fascist.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact