It looks as if the Quebec MP who is so obsessed with assisted suicide legislation is not going to succeed but, frankly, the war on the old, disabled and weak will continue. It’s been some years now since the sordid culture of death found yet another hero when Marcel Tremblay killed himself in Ottawa, after announcing that he wished to “die with dignity”. One of the many tragedies of this event was that dignity was the very last thing with which the 78-year-old man died.
He became a minor player in a circus. No glorious death on a metaphorical battlefield here, but a lonely and sad dribbling away with a plastic bag around his head. That the media were made aware of all of this at every stage only goes to prove just how exploitative and lacking in grace it all was.
There was something achingly macabre about the whole process. He went out for dinner with his friends and family before the event, where they made jokes and told tales. A few journalists wrote stories about him, talk-radio warriors gave their opinions, lawyers prepared briefs. Not dignity but despair.
The basic contradiction, the obvious inconsistency, is that the man was able to enjoy good food and good humour right up until his death. He gave interviews, was cogent and clear, could walk and talk, consider alternatives and arguments. This in itself indicates a quality of life that he and his people denied existed.
Please don’t tell me about pain and suffering. My father died of cancer of the spine, after surviving a serious stroke and having lived for thirty years with psoriasis and arthritis. But then my dad was brave and not afraid of life’s challenges. Not afraid of death’s sting either and would have told the right to die mob to take a hike.
My mother had severe dementia and the words she uttered for the two years before her death no longer made any sense and she could seldom feed herself and tended to wander. This intensely intelligent and startlingly kind woman was deprived of so much of what made her who she was.
Yet the essential, the core, was still there. She was still the same person and the same soul. Yes, the soul. Created and given by God. To have sacrificed my mother as a martyr on the black altar of euthanasia would have been an obscenity beyond compare. That splendid and sagacious writer GK Chesterton once said that, “The man who kills a man, kills a man. The man who kills himself, kills all men; as far as he is concerned he wipes out the world.” Quite so.
The poor wretch in Ottawa was a victim of societal pressures and expectations, even if he wasn’t aware of it. I will not comment on his family but I will say that if either of my parents had reached the point where they wanted life to end I would have felt that I had been a personal failure.
I would ask why had I not found the right medical, spiritual and emotional support for them? Why had I not convinced them that life was good and that the sight of playing grandchildren, a new dawn, an old friend was worth the fight?
Virtually all pain can be controlled and experts in the field of dying and terminal illness agree that it is depression and the fear of a painful death that invariably cause the most distress.Indeed it is what seems to be the case in this latest engineered drama. Anxiety about an inevitable passing that could be unpleasant and, important this, out of one’s control. But that it what defines death. It is out of our control. Here, surely, is the essence of the argument.
The modern age screams against loss of authority. We must always be in control of the situation. Resist ageing, resist decline, resist anything that doesn’t appeal to us for any reason at any time. Death is the only taboo left. How appropriate it is, then, that the great egalitarian blade comes for us all.
We can shout and moan and complain but in the end we can do nothing. We slide and slip into the beyond. If we are confident that this life is merely the land of shadows, that real life hasn’t begun yet, then death is of only passing fear.
But if we have no such confidence, we have to die pretending that we are still in charge. A shame. Because a genuinely dignified death has nothing to do with plastic bags and reporters. I saw this with my parents and I see it with increasing regularity now as I age and some of my older friends pass away. If the culture misses them when they’re in the womb they try again when they’re old, ill or weak. Time to euthanize the culture and save its victims.
Inspired. Nice piece. (ps – hard to go wrong with Chesterton too!)
I’m glad you spoke of pain control, Michael. I’ve never read an argument in favour of euthanasia that didn’t bring up pain as one of the predominant reasons for ending a life. Well, killing the patient certainly kills the pain.
It has been found, when patients are free of pain, and have a reasonable expectation of remaining that way, they are much less likely to request death.
I don’t know how effective pain medications are these days. The Ontario doctor known as Gifford-Jones fought for years to have heroin legalized to treat pain. He finally succeeded, only to have doctors refuse to prescribe it. The company stopped producing it, because it wasn’t profitable.
The elimination of pain in sick and dying people is what should be getting the attention, not euthanasia.
In many cases we take lousy care of our elders. Many other cultures use families and so on to take care of their ailing seniors whereas we warehouse them sometimes in decrepit conditions. With us in the west its often a case of out of sight, out of mind. With the latest advances in pain management and with proper nursing care the end of life can arrive more peacefully.
“The basic contradiction, the obvious inconsistency, is that the man was able to enjoy good food and good humour right up until his death. He gave interviews, was cogent and clear, could walk and talk, consider alternatives and arguments. This in itself indicates a quality of life that he and his people denied existed.”
Making him perfectly capable of being the decider of whether he was to live or die. You may think these people cowards and hey, you might be right. Good thing it doesn’t matter since it ought to be up to them.
You say that a person who took charge of his own death is a wretch, but a person who can hardly move to feed, let alone remember, themself and withered away is not?
I suppose your religion has something to do with it: As you’ve mentioned, you believe in a soul and all the life is sacred baggage that comes along with your creed, but also the glorification of suffering oh so common with people of your type.
It’s awful to hear of how your parents died, but do you not think there may have been some value in allowing them, if they had chosen, to skip all the suffering for inevitable (And Marcel was terminally ill, pain or not) end, and just pass on?
Michael,
This is a compelling and passionate work, one of your best of late. Wonderful writing. I’ve explored this subject in some depth and am pleased to see your contribution.
Still I can’t help but think characterizing the “right to die” movement as a war on the “old, disabled and weak” is a little off. The right to die typically means the right to take one’s own life, sometimes with help, but in any case with full choice in the matter.
It’s different from euthanasia, in which someone must decide for someone else. If deciding for oneself is the issue, then we’re talking about the “old, disabled and weak” making war on themselves – and as individuals, not as a group.
Having seen the effects of cancer on my father-in-law, (who was able to die at home, in his bed with his loved ones by his side even if it was over a 10 month period) and the death of my mother in a 30 day span (who was totally cognitive of her surroundings to the bitter end) from another form of cancer I can tell you two things:
One, the right for someone to chose to terminate their life should be provided – even for those who, like me, may think that the miracle cure might come at the last minute…
Two, noone should have the right to dictate (even less our gov’t) how & when we should die…
Having said this, we will always have two sides of this controversial dilemna – and I’m sure that both can be substantiated as being the right choice… for totally different situations…
Michael Coren said: That splendid and sagacious writer GK Chesterton once said that, “The man who kills a man, kills a man. The man who kills himself, kills all men; as far as he is concerned he wipes out the world.” Quite so.
So if I murder an innocent person, that doesn’t say anything about my attitude towards human life, it just means I killed someone?
But if I decide to kill myself because I have an incurable disease and am looking at spending the last remaining years of my life mostly bedridden, high on pain killers and unable to go to the bathroom myself—I’m killing all men, wiping out the world, committing more than genocide so to speak?
I can see why you like GK Chesterton so much, he sounds like a real smug fellow that’s fond of ignoring the true complexity of life in favour of his own facile rhetoric, like you.
So my right to live my life as I see fit and to end it as I see fit is invalid because your religion says so and I should be drugged to the eyeballs to dull the pain just to hang on for a few more days in a pointless puddle of drool and piss?
I empathize with the natural, perhaps involuntary impulse to sentimentalize human life and death —I do it all the time myself. I guess this kind of anecdotal, emotional appeal funded on a particular belief system is good chicken soup for some, maudlin arrogance to others. Fortunately—in a free society, we are both right. Especially in matters of death, which is hardly taboo. It happens in between coffee breaks, countless times a day. Death is about as mysterious as a day-old cruller.
There is also a difference between the value of human life and the sanctity of it—most religious arguments against euthanasia and abortion (which is the real money game MC gives away in his silly last sentence) tend to conflate the two. One can feel great empathy for the ill and the infirm; for people in general—without believing they are obliged to wait for a supernatural tap on the shoulder before being ushered into some sort of celestial champagne lounge.
Nor need we acquiesce to silly fantasies about indiscriminate murder running rampant in our hospitals and nursing homes. Can we agree that dying with a sack over our heads, or in a listless narcotic haze in a hospital bed are both unpleasant? Death is rarely pretty. MC is just arguing that god gets to hold the sack, on his timetable. I will never understand that sort of thinking.
Yes, it would be wonderful to imagine all of us will gently drift away in a warm bed, comforted by Chesterson-esque bon-mots; that our parents stoutly went into that good night with Churchillian swagger— but that’s really not what happens. That’s not what’s going to happen. Not for most of us.
In any event, kindly pencil me in for the joyous dinner with friends over some beautiful lie of eternal life gained after weeks of pain and loneliness. Not sure if I could smother myself. Not sure if I’m that brave. Anyways, there’s always the tweeting machines, toxins and colostomy bags. It’s called choice my friends. If I was the praying sort. I would pray to have one. I will not hold my breath.
Not expecting to convert anyone on this point. I just think that what Michael meant to say was his own death with dignity has nothing to do with plastic bags and reporters. Good for him.
However, do leave my life and death alone.
Dear Mr. Coren,
I wish to write and say that I am a great fan of your TV show and columns.
Euthansia is a topic that people appear to support without all the fact, or without thinking the whole issue through. I loved the comments Margaret Sommerville made on your show regarding euthansia, and the dangers that come when you devalue life in that way.
Though I am a Catholic, my opposition is based on my personal experience as well as the teachings of the Catholic church. A close family member recently died after a long illness. Midway through their decline, they had expressed a sense of hopelessness, and the desire to end it (not euthansia specifically but a general tiredness of life). This was enabled in a large part, in my opinion, by their care taker, who was someone ill equiped to deal with a person in pain. When someone better able to handle the issue took over, the desire to end it all was gone. Pain relief medication did a huge amount, and the doctors and nurses who help the sick and suffering, especially near the end of life, deserve a huge amount of thanks. My experience might not be anyone else’s, but if you give someone love, make them feel wanted and cared for, they don’t want to die.
The great divide seems to be between people who believe in life after death, and those who do not. If there is no survival of consciousness, then life is meaningless, just a Darwinian accident. If life has no design or purpose, it matters not when we check out, or whether we were even here.
On the other hand, if life on Earth is part of a continuum of experience, there is something to be learned here that is unique to this time, place, and dimension. Although I do not believe suffering is noble or necessary, as long as a person is alive, he is learning (on some level). He may also be providing valuable lessons that his caregivers require. Although it is always up to the individual consciousness, I don’t think he’s doing himself any favours by leaving early.
But, to an atheist, my argument is moot.
I’m sure the last question or thought that will go through the minds of all religious,atheist, or agnostic persons will be, “What if I’m wrong!?!” And the answer is……………..”So what!”
While my father lay in bed dying of cancer in pain and eager for the end, with the understanding that there is a difference between living and existing and that if you cant get better get out fast as a long time family belief, he commented as follows….”we treat dogs better David”
He was correct, we treat dogs better, and cats and horses and all other injured unrecoverable existances are treated better (more “humanely”) than suffering humans that actually want to make the choice for themselves to end their own pain and suffering.
What more simple human right than to self determination.
What more ignorant than to leave any animal suffering to die a slow painful death.
Certainly hope you don’t linger Mr. Coren….the less time you have to do damage the better.
Moe—that’s right. It doesn’t matter that we live and die. Not objectively anyways. Death is just a mundane fact of existence. More mundane than birth, which for humans requires a certain degree of intentionality. Death is always on the guest list—invited or not.
All the more reason to scrounge as much joy from this life as humanly possible. With apologies to Doug Adams, why must life have “meaning?” beyond the very fact of it?
My goodness. You’d think a laughing baby; a sunset and the English language might be enough reason to find some scrap of joy in this world! But no, strangely there must also be an intractable, ancient spirit demanding strict adherence to his spectral commands. Talk about macabre.
Why would our individual consciousness even matter in a universe filled with billions upon billions of life forms? How did we get so arrogant? And, you’re right—even though you seem reluctant to say so— life is a continuum of experience. Actually, that’s a fairly succinct definition of living. We live. We die. We fertilize the earth. From the earth, a plant grows. Its fruit is picked and eaten. And so it goes. So in that sense, we are eternal.
Death an inviolable fact whether we die in muted, managed pain; in a car accident; of starvation; or by our own hand. The end result is exactly the same. Life goes on. It always does
“Atheist” is a useful political epithet for the religious (witness the latest, pronouncements from Mr. Benedict) but it really doesn’t mean anything. Not without the implied assumption that ghosts and spirits and creator gods are possible in the first place. No, gods do not exist. Nor do vampires. Or sentient sock puppets
Fortunately, we are free to worship all three, if one so desires. For me, it’s a peculiar way to spend one’s life. I’d rather watch the sunset.
Great to have you back, Mr. Coren. I don’t wish to give up my right to end my own life, just yet, but I still take great comfort in having you back.
It’s not often I agree with Michael but on this one he is 100% correct.
Moe said: “If there is no survival of consciousness, then life is meaningless…”
If you say so.
You just gave me one more reason why I think Christianity is such a dreadful belief system, because it teaches people that the only thing worth valuing in life has to be everlasting and indestructible, and that the fragile and fleeting things in life are not to be cherished, simply because they don’t last, and so are meaningless.
C.H., I’ve never said I was a Christian. My beliefs about the nature of reality and consciousness have more in common with quantum physics than with religion.
“the fragile and fleeting things in life are not to be cherished, simply because they don’t last, and so are meaningless.”
I don’t think Christianity teaches people to not cherish all the good in life; but, it does discourage people from becoming too attached to earthly things, because they are transitory. By meaningless, I mean purposeless. If there is no reason for mankind to exist, apart from living as well as possible in the confines of one short lifetime, then ultimately, life does have no purpose or meaning.
I am convinced that there is a purpose because I believe consciousness is never destroyed. That means it takes with it what it has learned over many lifetimes.
Well……that’s the kiss of death right there; Yukon agreeing with Coren!!! There seems to be a way for catholics to hurry their way to the kingdom of heaven,though. Apparently it is acceptable to the church for the faithful to commit suicide and still go to heaven. You just have to stop eating. Just drink water and wait while you starve to death. It will take about a month and a half. You will be quite insane at the end but I imagine there is a really good chance you will become sane in heaven. Little loophole for the real zealots who want to slip this mortal coil.
Al,
The RC’s condem the soul of a person who commits suicide to the everlasting fires of hell. In addition the RC’s refuse to give them a Christian burial in consecrated ground. How’s that for forgiveness?
LHZ – Beautifully written, have you ever thought of having a blog of your own?
I’m a little shocked over the sentient sock puppets though.
Moe – why do I keep hearing this argument that somehow life without the belief in god simply has no meaning? It may not have any meaning for you but it does for me and it appears a great deal more meaningful than life being nothing more than subservience to some imaginary deity. Where is the meaning in that?
It’s my life and it will be my death, I’ll make my own decisions if possible and not someone else. If I leave it a little too late however and need a bit of help carrying out my decision then I would hope I can find that help somewhere. If I fail to make a decision or are incapable of making and communicating my decision then God gets to be next up my hit list.
Assisted suicide YES, euthanasia NO.
So Mr. Drip-Van-Winkle wants to put us to sleep during tough times?
I suggest you rent the DVD GATACCA with Jude Law and Alan Arkin because there is a very sad ending that few people notice but did catch my eye.
Basically, it’s somewhat like THX1138 where you must qualify to get married and be tested for the State Approved DNA, or can even use the Designer baby service.
But the ending shows a disabled person from an auto accident(fail suicide) that wants to purify the race and end the suffering as a rare person in a able-body world. The mini-Crematorium in most homes was how they made the world better,the hard struggle into the device may have started with good intentions to reduce Health care costs, but the person sits there very relaxed and hits the switch to rid the Earth for 1 less useless burden that others must pay for.
Funny how these Compassionate-death people never perfect their invention and then take THEIR life to prove how committed they are to the cause. Much like the ECO-Facists that fly in Gulfstream Jets and own 5 houses as they tell us that WE are the problem and that Polar bear are almost extinct.
Moe said “…But, to an atheist, my argument is moot.”
Actually, to anyone with half a brain, your argument is incoherent.
Padre says “The RC’s condem the soul of a person who commits suicide to the everlasting fires of hell. In addition the RC’s refuse to give them a Christian burial in consecrated ground. How’s that for forgiveness?”
Of course they do – if suicide wasn’t “bad” there would be no reason for the commited catholic/christian/fool not to kill himself. Heaven is “good” afterall.
That is pure myth.The Church allows suicides to be buried in Catholic Cemetaries.The Church NEVER says whether a person is saved or damned.A full Funeral Mass is offered for every suicide.We can’t judge-only God can lest WE be judged.
I think someone’s been reading Lorraine Boettner’s thorougly discredited and ridiculed anti-Catholic book Roman Catholicism.If the Truth were known about the Catholic Church not 100 people would despise her.I’m paraphrasing someone but whose name escapes me.Dominous Vobiscum.
Funeral Masses have been refused for Mafiosi as they died unrepentant and as Catholics they must avail themselves of the Sacrament of Reconciliation or perform a perfect act of Contrition which is fairly difficult to do with 6 .38 rounds in one’s head.It causes scandal to the Church and the Faithful just as much as the tiny minority of miscreant priests and the Bishops who covered it up.Thank God this is coming into the open so we can bleach and purge the Body of Christ.It will take 3-400 years for the Church to recover but there will always be a faithful remnant.
If someone wants to end their lives be my guest.Google painless ways to go.Just don’t expect to go it on my dime.By the way you really should research the situation in Belgium and Holland where Euthanasia is legal and look up the number of involuntary euthanasias that have occured.Hmmmm I think I hear the Horst Wessel song and did someone say something about,”useless eaters”?
“A Dutch survey, reviewed in the Journal of Medical Ethics, looked at the figures for 1995 and found that as well as 3,600 authorized cases there were 900 others in which doctors had acted without explicit consent. A follow-up survey found that the main reason for not consulting patients was that they had dementia or were otherwise not competent.
But in 15 percent of cases the doctors avoided any discussion because they thought they were acting in the patient’s best interests.
Michael Howitt Wilson, of the Alert campaign against euthanasia, said: “A lot of people in Holland are frightened to go into hospital because of this situation.”"
http://www.euthanasia.com/holland99.html
See what happens when you open Pandora’s Culture of Death box?
Elitist’s reply,”but it will be different here!”
SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRE it will.
Why do you guys keep arguing against assisted suicide with arguments relating to euthenasia?
Steve, maybe because one leads to the other.
But, back to assisted suicide. “Assisted” means it involves another person. I don’t think anyone has the right to put the onus on someone else to help kill him–even if the assistant is willing.
Moe,
I agree with you. Well stated.
Why do you guys keep arguing against assisted suicide with arguments relating to euthenasia
Two words Belgium and Holland.Read about the involuntary euthhanasia there that grew directly out of assisted suicide,before commenting further and looking even more foolish and ill-informed.
I watched the movie about Dr Jack the other night starring Al Pacino. It was brilliant and made me change my mind about assisted suicide. I now agree with it 100%. Thanks to Hollywood Ive “seen the light”.
Posted by Gordon Campbell – “Two words Belgium and Holland.Read about the involuntary euthhanasia there that grew directly out of assisted suicide,before commenting further and looking even more foolish and ill-informed.”
The very fact that you believe there has been a slippery slope to involuntary euthanasia makes it quite clear where you’ve been doing your reading. Those of us who have actually read about it, rather than perused the cherry-picked “facts” posted on “moral majority” websites, are far from foolish and ill-informed and known this to be far from true.
Moving on… If the faith-based arguments in support of death being left “in god’s hands” truly have merit, they must be consistently applied. It is not consistent to claim an inevitable – and inevitably painful – death as the sole domain of God whilst allowing it, in all it’s other forms and appearances and encroachments, to be left in the hands of man. There is something peculiarly perverse in this, or should I say, typically hypocritical.