Evangéliumi Hírnök, 1978 (70. évfolyam, 1-24. szám)
1978-04-15 / 8. szám
4. oldal EVANGÉLIUMI HÍRNÖK 1978. április 15. ABOUT EUTHANASIA (Death With Dignity) By Henlee H. Barnette Euthanasia is a term derived from the Greek words “eu,” good, and “thanatos,” death, and means literally “good death.” Simply put, it usually refers to a “deliberate easing into death” of a person afflicted with a painful and incurable disease or injury. Euthanasia has long troubled the consciences of the physician and the public. It has become a critical ethical issue with the development of new technologies for prolonging life. Does a patient have the right to reject mechanical means such as the respirator which may prolong life a few more painful weeks or months? Does such a patient have the moral right to choose the time and manner of death? These and other questions confront the Christian conscience in relation to euthanasia. Euthanasia or the “good death” may be achieved by direct or indirect means. Direct euthanasia is a deliberate action to shorten or to end the life of the terminally ill person —for example, injecting air into the veins of a patient with cancer. Indirect euthanasia may be accomplished: (1) by stopping treatments that prolong the patient’s life such as “pulling the plug” that keeps a life-supporting system operating; (2) by withholding all treatment; and (3) by giving the patient increasing doses of pain-relieving drugs until enough toxicity is built up to cause death. Thousands of Americans have written to the Euthanasia Educational Fund in New York for copies of “A Living Will.” The Living Will is a brief testament by the patient addressed to family, physician, lawyer, clergyman, any medical facility in whose care the patient may happen to be, and to any individual who may become responsible for the patient’s health, welfare or affairs during an illness in which there is no reasonable expectation of recovery. Arguments are presented for and against euthanasia. Some of the points debated pro and con are as follows: Con: Euthanasia is murder. Pro: But murder is unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Con: It violates the injunction, “Thou shalt not kill.” Pro: But the commandment means “no murder.” Those who justify an unjustifiable war and capital punishment cannot condemn euthanasia on this ground. Con: God must decide who shall live and who shall die. Pro: If this is true then it is also wrong to seek to prolong life. Con: Suffering is a part of the divine plan and the terminally ill person should live through the pain until the end. Pro: The Bible teaches “Be merciful” and ending the life of an incurably suffering patient is an act of mercy. Con: The sanctity of life forbids euthanasia. Pro: The notion that life is absolutely sacred is not Christian. Some things are more valuable than life itself. Christian martyrs knew this. Life is not the highest good; the quality of life is more important than mere physical existence. Con: One should do everything to save a life no matter the cost. Pro: It is not right to bankrupt a family with hospital and medical costs when there is no hope of the recovery of the patient. And so the debate goes on. My own position is that neither indirect nor direct euthanasia should be absolutized. However, I feel more comfortable with the indirect method. The patient’s wish that treatment be withdrawn should be honored. It is true that the conscious patient may make the decision impulsively or under extreme pain. But a safeguard can be established by requiring a time lag between the patient’s decision and the withdrawal of treatment for a change of mind. If the patient is unconscious or in a coma, the decision could be made by the family in consultation with a team of doctors, nurses, and a clergyman. Indirect euthanasia for the terminally ill person is morally defensible because it is in harmony with the Christian ethic of love. It allows the patient to die with a measure of dignity. Also it may save the family from bankruptcy due to the enormous cost involved in keeping the patient alive with a quality of life which is intolerable. (BP) * * * (Henlee H. Barnette, Ph.D., Clinical Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Louisville School of Medicine.) —HÍREK“5 Beregszász — A kárpátaljai hivők arról tájékoztatták levélben a nyugaton élő hívőket, hogy TWR magyar adásai eredményeként megtérések vannak. Szintén hasonló a helyzet Munkácson. (M) * * * Budapest — A hatóságok közlése szerint 250.000 cigány él Magyarországon. Mivel a lakosság faji előítélet miatt nem akarja őket befogadni, ezért a Magyar Televízió képsorozatot készített róluk, hogy helyzetüket ismertesse. Az a remény, hogy a televízió ismertető adása után a magyar közönség megértőbb lesz a cigányok iránt. A filmet egy nemzetközi televízió fesztiválon is bemutatják. (M) A “HISZEK URAM című 248 oldalas könyv a szabad országokban lakó magyar baptisták élniakarásának, életerejének és áldozatkészségének a bizonyítéka. Ebben a műben van teológiai oktatás, bibliamagyarázat és lelkitáplálék. Vegyük és terjesszük ezt a könyvet. Irány ár: 4.75 dollár. Ez a könyvkiadás misszió, nem üzlet. Megrendelhető a következő címen: Dr. Béla Udvarnoki 609 Woodridge Drive Murfreesboro, N. C. 27855
