Our impoverished response to human frailty

Katherine alerted our group this week to the story of two Belgian twins, deaf since birth who, when they discovered they were also losing their sight, requested (and received) euthanasia two weeks before Christmas because "they thought they had nothing to live for".  They were only 45 years old.  The Telegraph covered the story here.

I will leave the comment on this story to Professor Chris Gastmans, of the Catholic University of Leuven, who (in the words of the BioEdge site) "criticised the deaths as an impoverished response to disability".   Professor Gastmans said, "Is this the only humane response that we can offer in such situations? I feel uncomfortable here as an ethicist....  In a society as wealthy as ours, we must find another, caring way to deal with human frailty."

It seems to me that our view of what human life is and what makes it worth living has become so diminished that we no longer have any way to offer hope in suffering.  And that's bad news, because not only will suffering inevitably makes its presence felt to some degree or another in all our lives, but the degree of suffering considered bearable will likely diminish in a worldview that has less and less to offer to balance it.

Back to Basics: 1. From conception until natural death

Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2319.)

This is one of the most frequently quoted phrases by pro-lifers, one you've more than likely heard or read before. The Church has a lot to say about the sanctity of human life, she proclaims it boldly in fact, and it all stems from this one little sentence. In these 34 words more is said about the wonderful gift of life, its meaning and purpose than often meets the eye. And for some it also raises a lot of questions. I have tried to address some of the more frequently asked ones...

When does life begin?

Before I answer this question I'd first like to ask you one...when do you think a person becomes a person?

a) At birth
b) At 24 weeks
c) When there is an audible heartbeat and organs are forming
d) At conception

We asked this very question to our parish's confirmation candidates a few weeks ago and, whilst most of them answered d), there were some who thought c). There is a lot of conflicting opinion about precisely when human life begins; read different books, visit different websites and you will be told very different things. Part of the reason for this is that people often use strange, alien terms to refer to an unborn child during the various stages of development (e.g. zygote, foetus, embryo and many others) which dehumanise it and desensitise us to what it is too. But the fact is that a person is a human life from the very first moment, from the point of conception that zygote is an unborn child. Yes, he or she doesn't have arms or legs or a head yet but not being fully formed yet doesn't make them any less of a human being, in the same way that a toddler is no less a person than an adult purely because they haven't finished growing. A fertilised ovum will always result in a child growing in the womb of the mother, there is no point at which it suddenly becomes human having not been so before.

What does the Church have to say about life beginning at conception?

The Church has always believed that human life starts from the moment of conception. Until 1751 New Years Day in the English calendar was not January 1st but March 25th, the Feast of the Annunciation when the angel Gabriel announced to Our Lady that she was to become the mother of God (Luke 1:26-38). Our ancestors, along with the rest of the Body of Christ, recognised that Jesus' life on earth began long before his birth on December 25th. His incarnation began in the womb of the Virgin Mary, he became man at that moment, was fully human from that point onwards. The same is true of each of our lives; we are fully ourselves, totally human from conception. And because of this we have the same right to life as any other person. (CCC 2323)

What does it mean to be "created in the image and likeness of the holy and living God"?


Scripture and tradition speak at length about our innate dignity as human beings. That word, 'dignity', is one often thrown around, twisted and warped to mean a whole host of different things in a wide variety of contexts. But our true dignity stems from our being created in the image and likeness of God (CCC 1700), we are given a special gift, a unique honour in creation in that we resemble the divine. And this image and likeness, this dignity, is expressed in all of us, it is what makes each of us truly equal with our neighbour, none of us have more dignity than someone else. This image and likeness is expressed through the sick, elderly, disabled and dying, the toddler and the unborn child just as much as it is shown in the young, the fit, the successful and the healthy. Nothing can ever change this, no set of circumstances, no other person can ever alter the fact that we are made in God's image and that we are loved and cherished by him more than we could ever hope to fathom. And because we all share the same innate dignity we all have the same right to life. Just as no one can stop you from being created in God's likeness so can no one take away your dignity and your inviolable right to exist.

This is an immense and beautiful gift given to us by our Father in heaven, our lives are not something that we can create or bestow upon ourselves or others but something that we have been entrusted with.

What is 'natural death'?

Our lives are a gift from God from the moment of conception and this carries on until the moment we die. Because our lives are not our own (man does not have full dominion over his life, he cannot control when he comes into existence and only has limited control over his mind, body and spirit) they are not ours to end prematurely. Our human existence is directed towards doing the will of God and we do this through the big and small, major and minor events of every day right up until we breathe our last breath. In living the life that God has ordained for us and dying when he chooses we offer him our full obedience (CCC 1011), we set our worldly desires and will to one side and set our eyes on the things of heaven.

But as bleak as this may sound to some death is not a negative, nor is living out our full life. In living a full life (i.e. a life not cut short) we are given the invaluable opportunity to carry our very own Cross, to walk with Christ, to journey with him towards the Father, to grow in love and holiness for God and our fellow man. And because of Christ's triumph on the Cross at Calvary death is not the end but only a gateway into life, life with God for all eternity (CCC 1010). It is something that we should look forward to and prepare ourselves for through a regular reception of the sacraments.

That being said it is not something that we can or should hasten. Suffering is something that is as painful to watch as it is to endure but that does not mean that there is no value in it, that a person's life in those times of darkness and pain is less worth of having than yours or mine. We are called to love our neighbour, to care for them as we would have others do to us (Mark 12:30-31), to try and ease their discomfort through the means at our disposal (e.g. pain medication etc.) but not to perform so-called 'mercy-killings' as, due to our innate dignity as human beings, that person is still created in the image and likeness of God right up until the end and we have no right to say when a life becomes 'worthless' or 'too hard to endure'.

Don't we have the right to an abortion or the right to die?


There is a notion that we have the "right" to an abortion or the "right" to die as and when we choose, some even refer to them as "human rights." Human rights were created and given international recognition after the Second World War to ensure that never again would the rights of our fellow man be violated in such a dreadful way. These rights are there to protect our lives, to keep our right to life from being threatened by others. We, to name but one example, have the right to live free from the threat of torture, something designed to keep us safe and well.

Abortion and assisted suicide/assisted death can never be "rights" as they fundamentally undermine our right to life, they purposely seek to destroy it and this is totally contrary to what human rights were created for in the first place. Abortion, assisted suicide and assisted death are attacks and violations of our dignity as human beings, they destroy that life which has been freely created and freely given and are not a "right" and can certainly never be the correct course of action to take.

Although I tried to think of a poetic conclusion to draw this post to a close it unfortunately didn't quite come together. So instead I leave you with the same quote I opened with and hope that you will see more in those 34 words, understand better the Church's need to proclaim the Gospel of Life than you perhaps did to begin with.

Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God. (Catechism of the Catholic Church 2319.)

Euthanasia, abortion and population control - misconceptions

Christian Medical Comment carries another good post today, on the subject of demographics and euthanasia.  As usual Peter Saunders has an array of facts and figures at his fingertips, which you can read here.

The essence of his argument is that most of our modern societies are at a crossroads.  Thanks to increased lifespans and smaller families, we are faced with growing numbers of older people in our populations and proportionately falling numbers of younger, working-aged ones to support them.  What do we do about the resulting pressures on our social and medical care systems?  Encourage people to have even fewer children in order to contain the population?  Put forward euthanasia as the socially-responsible alternative to being a burden in one's old age?

Despite protestations by those in favour of euthanasia that there would be safeguards ensuring that only the terminally ill are helped to die, one can easily imagine that the pressures to revise those safeguards would become stronger with every report of old people left wallowing unfed in their filth in some underfunded, badly-staffed geriatric ward or care home.  Apparently Minette Marin of the Sunday Times already wrote a year ago, "old people who, entirely of their own free will, decide to take their lives without pressure from anyone else [? why are they doing it then? - there must be pressure from somewhere, because it isn't human instinct to want to die without reason] are, I think, to be admired and thanked. They are sparing themselves and their families a great deal of suffering and are relieving those around them and the welfare state of a burden [ah, so there's your pressure after all]. Surely that is an honourable act."

Mr Saunders - pointing out, by the way, that "it is rich people in the affluent West, rather than the poor in the Global South" (the latter tend to live in societies where age and experience are valued and respected) "who say they can’t afford to look after their dependents and are clamouring for euthanasia" - puts forward his own concept of what it is to act honourably. "The real answer is not euthanasia. The real answer is in our grasp, but it requires a completely different mindset to that which has led us, in our reckless pursuit of affluence and personal peace to mortgage our present, bankrupt our futures, and see those who rely on us as a burden rather than a privileged responsibility.

"We need instead, as a society, to stop killing our children, build up our families, live more simply, give more generously and focus our priorities on providing for our dependents, especially the older generation which fought for our freedom in two world wars, provided for our health, education and welfare, and left us the legacy of wealth, comfort, peace and security which we have squandered and taken for granted." 

In a previous pro-life newsletter in our parish, our Group reported on that old chestnut that we need to make sure we have small families in order to avoid over-population and too much strain on our social welfare systems and other resources.  I have copied our short article below.  It is worth remembering how increasingly acceptable abortion has become as, in effect, a form of family planning.  How can we say confidently that the same process of liberalisation will not take place in the case of euthanasia?

* * * * * * * *

 

We hear a great deal about the necessity for “population control” and “reproductive health care rights” (which phrase usually includes access to abortion) because of our world’s apparently burgeoning population. Much of what we read and hear makes us think that without drastic action, we will soon be fighting for space, food and water. Is this picture, however, entirely accurate?

Steven W Mosher says not. He is President of the Population Research Institute, a non-profit research organization with headquarters in Front Royal, Virginia. In a recent interview with CWN he put a very different case. In 2010, the UN Population Division (UNDP) affirmed that for the next few years the world’s population will slowly creep up, peaking at around 7.6 billion in 2040. (Bear in mind that we are already at nearly 7 billion.) After that, the projection is that we will see not a population explosion, but an implosion. By the turn of the next century the world’s population is projected to be at about 5 billion – and it will be a much older population than is currently the case.

Mosher points out that according to the UNDP’s 2010 figures, 79 countries had fertility levels below that needed to ensure the long-term survival of the population. What may surprise many is that this figure includes 36 in the less developed world. Most of the rest, UNDP believes, are likely to enter the same danger zone over the next few decades.

This is not just a question of falling numbers of people, but about demographic distribution. As a baby boomer, Mosher lived through the doubling of the global population in the second half of the twentieth century – a rate of increase never previously seen. At the same time, however, fertility rates were falling. The reason for the population increase was not unfettered reproduction: it was falling death rates. People were living for far longer than ever before. The increase in life expectancy was most dramatic in the less developed countries.

With less children being born, and all of us living longer, it does not take a degree in population studies to work out the net effect. Aging populations with fewer young people to support them. Further demands on social security services, yet fewer economically productive younger adults to fund them or indeed to care for the human needs of so many older people. The impact on quality of life in every area will be far reaching.

We don’t often get shown this perspective on the issue of global population. Could it be that the Catholic Church’s respect for large families and pro-life teachings make good practical sense after all...?                   (Source: “The Catholic World Report”, 1 November 2011)

Euthanasia? Choose hope instead

Thanks to a post on John Smeaton's blog I've just taken time out to listen to an amazing BBC World Service interview with Alison Davis. Born with spina bifida, Alison had for many years a fixed desire to die but is now a passionate anti-euthanasia activist and national coordinator of No Less Human, a division of SPUC which works to raise awareness of the value of the lives of the disabled (see our sidebar).  Please do go here and listen too because it's a truly inspiring and moving interview.

Though raised a Christian in the Protestant tradition, Alison was for many years an atheist and even when she decided to explore the possibility that believers in God might be onto something, Catholicism was the last religion that she wanted to have anything to do with.  As you will guess, she is now a committed Catholic! Her conviction of the redemptive value of suffering when united to that of Christ on the Cross (she is in more or less constant and often agonising pain) is one of the factors that has made her feel life is worth living.

However, she describes other factors too which are not necessarily dependent upon a religious faith.  One initial turning point came after a visit to some disabled children in India when she turned to her carer, Colin, and said, "I think I might just want to live.  I think I could help these children."  She had, she says now, started to think about what she could do for others despite her circumstances, not what they could do for her.  She is rightly convinced that even those who are quite incapacitated can be of immeasurable value and help to others, simply by giving them opportunities for compassion and service and thus bringing out the best in them.

In a similar vein, she draws out the importance of human support and companionship in making life worth living.  She describes moments of friendship and laughter, of real joy, that have meant so much to her, particularly after the advent of her carer Colin into her life (as a student he offered to help her for a fortnight, and is still her carer 23 years later.  His testimony about how serving Alison has changed his life and formed his character is moving in its own right).  She had been lonely, she says, and it was partly for that reason that her suffering seemed unbearable, though she mentions the caring attentions of friends over the years which actually led to her life being saved after suicide attempts.

Above all, Alison says, we all need hope, and we are able to carry on living and finding a meaning in life if we have it.  Euthanasia robs people of hope by suggesting that death is the only way forward, but none of us "can second-guess what is round the corner". 

She also points out that euthanasia is never a decision that involves only one individual. Like abortion, like marriage, the debate about euthanasia is something that concerns society as a whole and once you allow it for one person, others are inevitably affected.  Therein lies a clarion call: because society as a whole is involved, then society (i.e. each and every one of us) should be looking for ways to carry other people's burdens, not dispose of those people as though they were burdens themselves.  As Christians, we follow Christ in so doing. "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows..." (Isaiah 53:4)

Like Ruth Pakaluk (see previous post), Alison is a pro-life heroine, a saint in the making for our times, and like her she is someone who it is not beyond any of us to emulate.   Thank God for her example and her courage.

Suffering - to be avoided at all costs?

As a small and poor tribute to Palm Sunday and the opening of Holy Week, here is the Editorial from today's St John's pro-life newsletter.

Holy Week... Jesus enters Jerusalem for the final days of His life, when, for our sakes, He will voluntarily shoulder a Cross as heavy as all the sins that ever were and ever will be committed, and will submit to suffering unto death.  Foolishness indeed to the world in general, as St Paul points out in 1 Corinthians, but to Christians “the power of God” – a pathway to blessings beyond imagination.

It is no different today.  Our society sees suffering as the evil to be avoided.  Death itself is preferable to it.  Not death arrived at through a process of seeing suffering through to the bitter end as Jesus did, but as an alternative, swallowed down quickly as a pill or potion or administered by lethal injection.  What happiness can there be when suffering makes its appearance on the scene?  What meaning and value can we find to our lives if they contain pain or severe physical limitations?

Seen through this perspective, euthanasia (or the abortion of a disabled foetus) becomes the compassionate – the only compassionate – option to offer the severely incapacitated.  The Catholic viewpoint, that we have no right to take our own or anyone else’s life whatever the circumstances, is seen as meaningless if not downright cruel.  Try to talk about the positive value of suffering and you are likely to be rhetorically stoned for, firstly, condemning someone to bear their pain no matter what and then for adding insult to injury by telling them suffering is good for their soul...

In fact that is the great message of Easter; that we will all find crosses, great or small, in our lives but that through faith in Christ those crosses – the things we most fear in life like pain, illness, paralysis - can be transformed into blessings.  What then is left to for us to be afraid of?  Encouraging someone to “hang on in there” is neither cruel nor pious nonsense because God “will not let you be put to the test beyond your strength but with any trial will also provide a way out by enabling you to put up with it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).  Where suffering abounds, grace abounds all the more, to slightly adapt the words of St Paul.

This isn’t an easy concept, especially as you probably have to walk some dark roads yourself before you can testify to the hidden light to be found there.  Such witnesses can be found.  Alison Davies is a sufferer from spina bifida who herself passed through a stage of wanting to die; now she works to promote a positive view of disability through No Less Human, a branch of SPUC.  Chelsea Zimmerman was paralysed from the chest down in a car accident whilst still a teenager; she is passionately pro-life and writes an inspirational blog, Reflections of a Paralytic.  Alison and Chelsea are witnesses to the light, people who have made – and are making – a difficult journey and learning along the way to value life all the more.  There are others like them, finding blessings and meaning blossoming like those hardy wild flowers one sees obstinately thriving between the rails of train lines or on rock faces.

Every flower must receive water and nourishment from somewhere, however.  As we meditate on what Holy Week can tell us about suffering and grace, can we also respond to the challenge it gives us?  Like Simon of Cyrene, Veronica and the women of Jerusalem, do we have hearts big enough to help shoulder the crosses of those who suffer so terribly -  showing them what comfort we can, weeping with them when the pain feels too much and, well, just loving them?  True compassion will always try to offer a reason to live, not a way to die.

*Perhaps it should be mentioned that this editorial is discussing unavoidable suffering.  Of course it is our duty to alleviate suffering and seek a cure wherever possible; but not at the price of deliberately taking a life.

Meetings, MPs and Missals

Attendance goal for our next meeting

Last night saw the St John's Pro Life Group, or more accurately a remnant thereof, getting together for one of our regular meetings.  Unfortunately half term and illness had between them spirited away several members: we offer ongoing prayers for Chris and Stella that they may soon be restored to wholeness and health.  The remaining three of us gathered upstairs in the church hall and, with the assistance of Our Lady, prepared to fight the good spiritual fight.  Whilst it would of course be wonderful to see large numbers gathered together in the pro-life cause, there's something paradoxically encouraging about being one of just a few getting together and entrusting ourselves to the Lord.  I suppose because it reminds us that we can only achieve anything in God's strength - the only way we are doomed to failure is if we rely on our own puny efforts alone - and that for Him, "all things are possible".

Fighting the good fight last night mostly involved wielding flowers and cakes.  Some years ago a local SPUC group, sadly no longer in existence, established a "Memorial to the Unborn Child" in our local cemetery (Hills Farm).  Over the years people have been visiting to remember their children lost before birth for any reason, be it miscarriage or abortion, as evidenced by the touching mementoes often to be found there; but without regular maintenance the site was looking a little bit sad and run-down.  As someone involved in the original fundraising and setting-up of the Memorial, I was delighted when the new Pro Life Group enthusiastically took it up as a project and already Stella and her daughter Becca have worked wonders digging the ground and tidying the site.  Becca plans to visit soon to nourish the ground with some horse manure (might keep a distance during that period) and then at the end of March we should be able to get planting, in order to surround the Memorial with all-year colour and provide both a fitting remembrance for these little ones, and a beautiful, peaceful place for their parents to sit and hold them in their hearts.

Sometimes the weapons of spiritual warfare look like this

Our cake and home-made cards sale goes ahead this Sunday after 9am Mass in St John the Evangelist Church hall (3 Springfield Road, Horsham; do visit if you're anywhere near and buy yourself a pre-Lenten treat!).  Again, I am really grateful to the group who are donating all proceeds from the sale to Aila's Fund.

Two of us had received replies from our MP, Francis Maude, in response to our letters about assisted dying (see this earlier post) for which we thank him.  The letters, whilst avoiding overt personal commitment to specifics, read very encouragingly, particularly a sentence which commented "I am concerned that leniency towards those assisting in euthanasia will send us further down the slippery slope to legalising euthanasia itself".  Our Group had not itself offered any view about how either doctors or relatives assisting patients to die under our present laws should be dealt with, but we were delighted with this implication that Mr Maude is not in favour of legalised euthanasia (for so the sentence would seem to read).  We were also happy to read Mr Maude confirming his belief that "human life is intrinsically valuable" and that "terminally ill patients should receive the highest quality palliative support and that those patients, and their families, should be certain that their end-of-life care will meet all of their needs".  It follows, of course, that adequate resources and energy need to be expended towards providing that support and not diverted towards assisted dying...

A heartening evening.  In meetings like this, there is a sense of fellowship in shared goals and efforts that gives one courage to continue.

A beautiful Missal for a beautiful Mass

OK, the following isn't strictly speaking "pro-life", but I'm so thrilled that I have to mention it. My evening was completely made after the meeting when Katherine produced a 1953 Catholic Missal that she had found on eBay saying "Saw this and thought of you".  She knew that my husband Edek and I are trying to attend Extraordinary Form Masses twice a month as we are privileged enough to have several regular EF Masses within reach.  It contains (in English) all the prayers and readings for every Sunday of the Year (traditional calendar, obviously) and Holy Days of Obligation, set out in full for each Sunday so that one doesn't need to go backwards and forwards.  It's got a gorgeous embossed leather cover, gilt edged pages and is full of sumptuous colour pictures... I love old books anyway and what can be better than an old book that is also holy and useful?!  (Sadly it doesn't show off properly in this photo taken on my mobile.  My mobile... let's not go there...) Thanks Katherine!

Note to Demelza (also there last night):- I am not trying to flaunt my gift before you, please remember that you were offered a fab Ipsos Mori biro that is bound to be a collector's item in 100 years.  When that happens look back and remember that you were given the chance of ownership.  Note to blog readers:- Demelza makes AMAZING cakes and she is making LOADS of them for Sunday's sale!

Assisted dying "should be banned across Europe"

The Catholic Herald reported on Monday on a Council of Europe ruling that euthanasia and assisted suicide "must always be prohibited" in every country across Europe.

The Council of Europe cannot pass legally binding laws but has a role of "harmonising human rights laws" across Europe and thus fostering European integration.  Thus this resolution is a question of influencing rather than legislating, but Simon Caldwell at the Herald writes that it "will help to define the principles that should govern the application of living wills across its member states" and thus help governments resist pressure to legalise euthanasia or assisted suicide. 

Mr Caldwell describes it as "a major set-back" to assisted dying campaigners in the UK.  Let us hope so.

Giving each other reasons to live

Lord Falconer’s report on Assisted Suicide is one of the issues exercising our group members at the moment.  As our group Chair, Katherine, remarks, it makes chilling reading: pop over to Five Feet Above Sea Level for her lucid yet passionate commentary on the report.  I suspect readers of the blog will already know about the report and its conclusion that there is a “strong case” for assisted suicide to be legalised in the UK (if not, Katherine summarises the gist very well.  See also the letter our group wrote to our MP, below).

Since the issue of disability touched our family directly, I have been increasingly conscious not only of the value we place on various human lives, but on how we encourage people to value themselves.  My daughter, now 16, was diagnosed two years ago with Friedreich’s Ataxia, a degenerative neurological disease which is gradually but inexorably robbing her of her coordination, balance and mobility.   The diagnosis came out of the blue when, almost overnight, she stopped being able to control her hand well enough to write or draw.  Until then we had thought she was just “a bit clumsy” (well, like mother like daughter), partly thanks to her own valiant attempts to conceal just how much she was struggling with simple daily tasks like doing up buttons and zips.  At diagnosis we were told that she would be confined to a wheelchair in 10-15 years.  In reality, she is already having to rely on a wheelchair or a crutch + somebody’s arm in order to walk for any distance.

Suddenly all our expectations of the future were fundamentally altered.  At first my daughter thought her life was over.  She withdrew and wanted to die.  It was a very black time.

We’re lucky.  My husband and I have faith, family and a parish community around us.  Drawing on these and on some wonderful caring professionals we have been able to support my daughter and together we have staggered through the initial blackness into what I’d maybe describe as a state of “lightening grey”.  But the effects on my daughter’s emotions and psychological balance have been huge.  It’s not just that she is coping with an illness whose progress cannot be accurately predicted because it varies from individual to individual, something which is frightening enough.  Over and above that, her own self-image and her estimation of her own worth have been rocked.  She’s 16, after all, and female, and bombarded with images of women air-brushed to such a level of perfection it wouldn’t even be found in paradise.  The messages she’s getting from the media about sex and relationships give matter for a whole blog post in themselves. And on top of all that, she has a wheelchair accessory to add to every outfit and she thinks it ruins her look... That’s a somewhat facetious way of saying that she’s struggling to establish her worth now that she can’t walk or write and finds it easier to drink out of a cup with a lid on it, and she can’t see how that fits in with the often very superficially based expectations around her.

What do we, as a society, have to say to her?  “Chin up love, none of that matters to us, you’re still the same person you ever were and we love you just the same.  Just by being you you’re making a huge contribution to the world.  You’re infinitely precious and valuable and your vulnerabilities serve to bring out the best in us and give us opportunities to serve, to care, to do good, to focus on what’s really important in life.  We’ll invest our money and our efforts into making sure that you have what you need to help you cope with your challenges, because at the end of the day, it’s human friendship that will make your life worth living and give you things to look forward to. We’ll be there for you, right there with you in your suffering.”  

Or, “Chin up, it’s true that your life has limitations, you’re not perfect and you’re not going to have the perfect life that is the obvious right of every one of us; you have pain, you may never be able to hold down a full-time job and you’re going to be making demands on the resources of the State and your loved ones... but don’t worry, we’ve been spending loads of time and money ensuring that we can give you something that will take all that away forever.  You can look forward to dying before it all feels too much.”  Advocates of assisted suicide may well have good intentions, but is this the mindset we want to become prevalent?  There’s a better path for compassion to seek.

We work hard, every day, at trying to reinforce our daughter’s self-image, to cheer her up, to help her develop a positive “can-do” attitude – generally, make her realise how much she’s worth. Bit by bit, little by little, she’s getting there.  Thank goodness for that, because she means everything to us and we want to give her reasons to live, not die.  Lord Falconer’s report helps us not one jot. 

Below is the letter our group have sent, as individuals, to our MP.  If you’re reading this in the UK, feel free to send a customised version to your own MP.

Dear...

I am writing to regarding the Falconer report and the recent campaigns for euthanasia and/or assisted suicide to be legalised in the UK.  We believe the Falconer report gives great cause for concern and should the question of the legalisation of ‘assisted dying’ be raised once again in the Commons, we would urge that you please vote against it.

Bias in the report

The Commission which produced the report was heavily biased from the outset having been funded by Terry Pratchett, a known supporter of euthanasia and the patron of Dignity in Dying, and with nine of the eleven members of the panel being strongly in favour of the legalisation of assisted suicide. The deal to run the Commission was negotiated by Demos with the think tank run by Kitty Usher, a former colleague of Patricia Hewitt who, along with Lord Falconer, tried unsuccessfully to change the law in 2009. The Commission was founded with the clear intention to bring about a conclusion in their favour, as its stated aims betray: to ‘…investigate the circumstances under which it should be possible for people to be assisted to die; recommend what system, if any, should exist to allow people to be assisted to die; identify who should be entitled to be assisted to die and recommend what changes in the law, if any, should be introduced’.  In light of all the above over 40 organisations (including the British Medical Association), as well as many high profile individuals, boycotted the Commission.

Our major concerns

·         The report readily uses the term ‘assisted dying’ when referring to both euthanasia and assisted suicide, thus clouding the distinction between them.  This fudging of terms could potentially lead to 13,000 deaths a year in Britain should ‘assisted dying’ ever be made legal (as outlined in the 2005 House of Lords report).

·         The report over-emphasises the need for assisted dying without suggesting that any extra effort or investment be placed in improving our current long-term and palliative care systems. Sadly PCT-run palliative care facilities and hospitals vary vastly in terms of care depending on one’s postcode. Hospices, especially the local St Catherine’s Hospice, deliver excellent care and devotion to their patients but are usually over-subscribed. This situation leaves the terminally ill and elderly in a very vulnerable position.  

·         Given the circumstances mentioned above, depression would undoubtedly play a huge role in affecting the patient’s judgement; yet the Commission did not make sufficient allowance for the possibility that some people would be pressured into choosing assisted dying at a time when both their physical and psychological health are at their most fragile.

·         We are concerned that the report will encourage pro-euthanasia campaigners to renew their efforts to have assisted dying made legal in Britain.  These efforts will tend by their very existence to promote a subtext which runs as follows: when someone can no longer support themselves due to illness or old age they constitute a ‘burden’ to family and friends or a drain upon State resources; as they are no longer economically productive there is no basis for them to enjoy a sense of self-worth; it is therefore a kindness to allow them to choose to end their lives with ‘dignity’ before their condition worsens.  

      Unless we work to change the way illness, disability and age are perceived by our society, there will be no incentive for us to concentrate effort and finance on developing pain management, aids to help patients keep their independence as long as possible and compassionate nursing care.  Legalised euthanasia will be seen as the logical and easy option for those faced with the prospect of a long, painful illness. As a result many will miss out on months or years of worthwhile life and our society will be impoverished by the lack of individuals who, by their very vulnerability, can foster the best in human nature in others.

·         We fully appreciate the apprehensions of terminally ill patients who are facing the prospect of a long, painful illness, perhaps with the loss of faculties.  However we feel that the report fails to give due consideration to the difference in quality of life that can be made through palliative care as mentioned above.  The support of other human beings can in itself make life worth living even when it involves suffering. 

·         Should it become relatively commonplace for people to kill themselves when they are at their most vulnerable this would affect the human value of each and every ill, disabled or aged person. In effect we would have defined them either as non-productive ‘second-class citizens’ or hopeless victims of irredeemable suffering.

·         In reply to those who argue that not everyone would choose to die we would draw attention to the words of Els Borst, the former Health Minister for the Netherlands, who pushed for euthanasia to be legalised in her country. She has since said that the Dutch government responded too quickly to demands for euthanasia to be legalised without correct attention being given to support for the dying. She admitted that this was ‘not in the proper order’ and that, ultimately, many have suffered and chosen to die because of this upside-down, hasty decision. This is a truly tragic set of circumstances, one we must not allow to be repeated here in Britain.

·         We are writing as a Christian group and as such have a strong belief in the sanctity of human life and the innate dignity of each and every human person, each one of whom is not only made in the image of God but is also a unique individual loved beyond measure by his/her Creator.  Whilst we appreciate that not everyone will share our belief in God, we strongly feel that the Christian voice has a right to be heard along with all others in our democratic society, particularly as Christian values have been foundational to the shaping of our country’s laws and governance, a fact of which the Prime Minister David Cameron reminded us only recently.  We also believe that the Christian perspective on the value of each human person in his/her own right, independent of their economic productivity or physical ‘perfection’, is equally valid across all spectrums of belief and philosophy and has an important contribution to make to this particular debate.

We hope that you will consider our statement along with those published by organisations such as Care Not Killing, LIFE and dozens of others along with the countless individuals who view human life as inherently dignified and valuable beyond economic price.

Yours sincerely