1

Carr
Alethea Carr

Justin Pearl

Faith, Religion, and Society

December 6, 2018

The Catholic Social Position on Euthanasia

Section 1: The Ethical Debate of Euthanasia

A teaching tradition jokingly referred to as the “best kept secret of Catholicism” that

began in 1891 with Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum and continues to grow to this day with Pope

Francis is referred to as the Catholic Social Tradition (CST). The CST represents the position of

the Catholic Church, as declared by letters from the Pope, on certain social, economic, and

cultural issues. In the catholic community, there is a strong opinion about the topic of euthanasia,

or physician assisted suicide (PAS). According to Euthanasia and cryothanasia, euthanasia is

defined as a medical act aiming at painlessly ending the life of a person affected by unbearable,

prolonged and incurable suffering in order to prevent her from experiencing such suffering.

(Minerva) In Greek, euthanasia translates to “good death”, but would the CST agree with this

particular translation? Many people have different ways of thinking about euthanasia because it

is difficult to see through the circumstances of the patient. To some practicing Catholics, there

are certain concerns about the detour of God’s plan for each individual person. Religiously

affiliated hospitals find themselves in hard positions as they struggle to keep up with the growing

medical field. These foundational issues are examined in educational texts about euthanasia.

Sean Murphy said “Religiously affiliated hospitals are incorporated into the state health care

system on terms which seem to have largely respected their denominational integrity. Now they

face increasingly strident demands that they be forced to provide the procedures.” (Murphy)
2
Carr
Conveniently enough, the CST has published documents that describe the position of the

Catholic Church on topics such as human life, human dignity, and the relationship between

science and conscience. The principles of the CST help to draw clear lines when dealing with

controversial topics such as euthanasia as well as many others that have been debated politically

and ethically in the past. Generally, the CST has an unfavorable attitude towards voluntary

euthanasia.

Section 2: Position of CST Based on Central Principles

Currently, a social debate exists in the United States on whether or not the practice of

PAS should be legalized considering all the ethical questions it raises for different groups of

people. The Supreme Court ruled the decision of legalizing euthanasia would be left up to the

individual states to decide. In most states, the practice of euthanasia remains illegal due to the sea

of controversy that PAS swims among. However, patients looking for the procedure are allowed

to participate if they are in the states of Oregon, California, Washington, Colorado, Vermont,

Hawaii, and Washington D.C. The reason the opportunity to exercise the right to end one’s own

life is a current social debate is because euthanasia crosses the power of God when it places a

physician and the patient in charge of their own death. According to the CST, every human life is

sacred. Pope John Paul II said “Life, one's own and that of others cannot be disposed of at will: it

belongs to the Author of life.” The CST states that every human holds basic values whether it be

in the womb of a mother or until the natural end God has planned. The absence of these basic

values to protect the rights of humans would threaten society and send us down an irreversible

slope of misfortune. With that in mind, it is the general idea of the CST that euthanasia is not a

favorable practice because it does not affirm life. Euthanasia would be considered the opposite of

this way of thinking because it calls for the disposing of one’s own life at will. One of the seven
3
Carr
basic principles of the CST proclaim the importance of the life and dignity of a person.

Importantly, the CST advocates for absolute respect to human life no matter the decision of the

patient themselves. In the eyes of the CST, when a patient decides they want to terminate their

life, despite the severity of their illness, they are committing a selfish act that provokes death not

cultivated in God’s plans.

A common issue with human progress in the world of science is that an ethical

conscience is usually forgotten in scientific investigation. Ethical and moral respects are usually

pushed to the back burner while scientists and in the case of euthanasia, medical professionals,

strive to make newer and newer preferential options for those who are suffering. Pope John Paul

II said “…always be concerned with the moral implications of your methods and your

discoveries.” The CST puts an emphasis on the importance of asking “why” first and “why not”

second. The knowledge gained when discovering the possibilities that arise to help a patient end

their own life is only authentically served when it is joined directly to conscience. When dealing

with topics as euthanasia, the CST encourages the importance that scientists keep ethics in mind.

Euthanasia is possible because of the scientific advancements that allowed the community to

create a drug that was powerful enough to end the life of another human. These types of

discoveries are strongly encouraged to reveal the mysteries of the universe and find a deeper

appreciation for God’s power but cannot be used in a way that would crumble the morals that are

instilled in humans.

The question arises from the people in pain and who are suffering as to why they have to

remain ill. If a medical professional diagnoses a patient with a terminal illness destined to bring

endless amounts of grief and suffering until the day of the patient’s eventual natural death, then it

only seems right that the patient should be allowed to end their own life. Suffering patients
4
Carr
believe they should be able to choose peace and comfort over the impending misery of a long

and dreadful illness. In the Apostolic Letter Salvifici Doloris, the CST claims, “For, whereas the

existence of the world opens as it were the eyes of the human soul to the existence of God, to his

wisdom, power and greatness, evil and suffering seem to obscure this image, sometimes in a

radical way, especially in the daily drama of so many cases of undeserved suffering and of so

many faults without proper punishment.” However terrible life may seem at its end, the CST

recognizes there may not be a definitive answer to the question of why humans have to suffer.

By this, the CST means to address the goodness of God may seem powerless and unjust when

innocent people have to suffer. The understanding is that there may seem to be no reasoning but

that followers of The Lord should believe that it is in God’s plan to lead us all in the right

direction.

Section 3: Personal Convictions in Regard to the CST

Personally, I agree with the CST’s position on the legalization and practice of euthanasia.

Currently, I am studying to be a Physician Assistant which is partly why I chose to cover this

topic for my research. I believe the intentions of the patient could be clouded by poor judgement

due to the lack of mental clarity arising from being terminally ill. Commonly, patients who hear

they are not expected to live very much longer spiral into the darkest parts of their minds and

may consider things, such as euthanasia. Although they may want to live until their natural death,

their illness clouds their judgement into thinking the only way to escape their misery is to end

their own lives. It is my conviction that the legalization of practice of euthanasia is at the peak of

a slippery slope into many different issues ethically, morally, and socially. The field of medical

research is in danger of becoming less important should patients be given the option to end their

lives instead of seeing to the natural end of their lives. Medical researchers work every day to
5
Carr
look for cures to these illnesses, some of which drive people to want to end their lives. My worry

would rest in the quality of care these patients would begin to receive if physicians knew they

could simply suggest euthanasia as a way out instead of trying to help their patients in any way

they can. The intense research would seem almost pointless and physicians may inadvertently

place pressure on patients to consider euthanasia without even realizing it. The urgency to find a

cure would diminish and fall to the wayside. Ethically, I also agree with the CST on the position

that science should be joined with a healthy conscience. Just because science has given us the

ability to end lives does not automatically make it moral or just for humans. I was raised in a

Catholic household and have always been held to the opinion that every human life is sacred and

should be treated as so from womb to the end of life.

Overall, the position of the CST on euthanasia remains that it is morally and ethically

wrong to interfere with God’s plan by ending a life prematurely, even by medical means. Human

life is both sacred and valuable at any stage no matter the extent of injury or illness. Science in

medicine often invades the ethical boundaries in society and makes it difficult for the CST to

take a stand which pleases all of its followers and non-followers across nations. Possibly the

greatest issue that arises are the problems surrounding human suffering. It is proclaimed by the

grace of God every human life is valuable and has a predetermined direction meaning that the

reason for every ill person’s suffering is justified in some way. The precious lives of the children

of God which would be lost because of the decisions of man would be wrongfully taken in the

eyes of the CST.

6
Carr
Works Cited

II, Pope John Paul. "Church Defends Moral Rights of Citizens." Catholic Social Tradition

L'Osservatore Romano.Weekly Edition in English (1997).

—. "Every Human Life Is Sacred." Catholic Social Tradition L'Osservatore Romano.Weekly

Edition in English (1997).

—. "Salvifici Doloris." Catholic Social Tradition L'Osservatore Romano.Weekly Edition in

English (1984).

—. "Science Serves Humanity Only When It Is Joined To Conscience." Catholic Social

Tradition L'Osservatore Romano.Weekly Edition in English (1997).

Minerva, Francesca, and Anders Sandberg. “Euthanasia and Cryothanasia.” Bioethics, vol. 31,

no. 7, Sept. 2017, pp. 526–533. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/bioe.12368.

Murphy, Scan. “Legalization of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Foundational Issues and

Implications.” BYU Journal of Public Law, vol. 31, no. 2, June 2017, pp. 333–

394. EBSCOhost, setonhill.idm.oclc.org/login?

url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=afh&AN=123908135&site=ehost-live.

USCCB. Life and Dignity of the Human Person. 2018. November 2018.

<http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catholic-social-

teaching/life-and-dignity-of-the-human-person.cfm>.

—. Seven Themes of Catholic Social Teaching. 2003. 26 2018 November.

<http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catholic-social-

teaching/seven-themes-of-catholic-social-teaching.cfm>.
7
Carr