February 16, 2015.

A Matter of Life and Death

A supremely disappointing ruling has an appallingly hollow ring.  Ten days ago, on February 6, 2015:  “The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously overturns a legal ban on doctor-assisted suicide, ruling the law should be amended to allow doctors to help in specific situations.”

At the risk of being pedantic, there is a myopic semantics at play here.  “Physician-assisted suicide” is an oxymoron.  Suicide is the tragic act of taking one’s own life.  If someone ‘helps’ you to die, it is no longer suicide.  What, therefore, should it be called; the popular euphemisms: “Dying with dignity,” or “the right to die?” I would call it “Death at the hands of a countryman.”   There is nothing honourable in that choice.  The “specific situations” alluded to above would mean that adults in grievous and unending pain would have a right to end their life with a doctor’s help.  Canadians are now in the business of having the right to ask other people, doctors no less, to help us to die, `…putting our culture on a constant death watch.`(A. Mohler July 16, 2009: Dr. Death on prime time: The slippery slope toward murder).

All of us want to be treated with dignity.  Why, we may ask, is this so?  There is intrinsic value and worth in a human life; that is why.  How strange, therefore, that our criminal code actually counts it an offense to do an indignity to a dead body; never mind going to the lengths of now being able to end a life, legally.  If we are mere animals, just a few millennia above the apes, then there is no particular dignity in the fact of being human.  But if we are made in the image of God, there is ultimate value and worth for each life. Hear some of the wording of the Supreme Court`s ruling:

 "We, (judges), do not agree that the existential formulation of the right to life requires an absolute prohibition on assistance in dying, or that individuals cannot `waive` their right to life.  

This would create a `duty to live.`

So, there we have it; a “right to die,” and thereby eliminating a “duty to live.” 

O Canada! 

There are grave concerns from the disabled community, as they are fearful of a slippery slope that renders their lives undesirable.  There are grave concerns from those involved in palliative care; concerns about less funding for end-of-life care and defining who, exactly, is competent to make an irreversible decision about their life being taken.  `Assisted suicide` trivializes the harrowing and frightful thoughts of someone contemplating suicide.  It can only push them closer to a death without dignity.  Thoughts of “being a burden,” bring me to tears as people consider they are no longer of any value.  The deep valleys of depression and the heart-rending cries of those travelling through a dark tunnel of despair are not served well by the taking of life.  Two cases bear mentioning here.  In Belgium, where assisted-suicide has been law since 2002, a law was passed on February 13, 2014- one year ago- that would allow a child going through unbearable and irreversible suffering to ask their doctor to take their life. Put in another way, they are seeking to put their parents put of their misery.   In Oregon, a woman who needed palliative care measures was sent a letter by her insurance company stating that her insurance would not cover palliative care costs, but it would cover the cost of her assisted suicide.  These so-called extreme cases tend to become normative very quickly.

Having been at the bedside of several whose loved ones had to make an agonizing decision about removing life support, I can attest to the fact that death is never easy.  We can all recognize that there is much suffering in this world and it would seem a charitable act to alleviate the suffering by taking life away, and the suffering is over.  It is not so black-and-white.  Were it so, there would not be this national angst over even discussing the issue.  As A. Mohler also states:

"The shift from “assisted suicide” to active euthanasia is inevitable — and almost imperceptible. Kevorkian, (known as Dr. Death), has the audacity to claim that any “enlightened” society would champion his cause. But by his standards of morality, only Nazi Germany was sufficiently enlightened to accept euthanasia as national policy." (A. Mohler. July 16, 2009: Dr. Death on prime time: The slippery slope toward murder).

It would seem that, until now, Canada’s laws had been of a paradoxical nature in matters of birth and death.  On the one hand, we have been working to have greater compassionate, end-of-life care.  On the other hand, we allow children to be aborted right up to the end of their ninth month, in their mother’s womb, and yet this child has had a heartbeat since her third week.  Trying to hold these two extremes in tension could not have lasted much longer.  And it shows.  Add to these indignities the fact that a child who is murdered while in their mother’s womb is not considered a victim of homicide.  I quote Jeff Durham, the father of Molly, who was murdered nine weeks before her birth-date.  He was shocked to hear that his daughter’s death will know no justice, and some of the following horrifying reasons were given:

“It is rationalized that this is a domestic violence issue and should be responded to by having more support for woman victims of violence.  It’s been rationalized that this would interfere with abortion rights issues.”  (The Windsor Square, ‘Open Letter to Jeff Watson,’ February 16, 2015.  Jeff Durham). 

And, from Lifenews.com :

"Yet her, (Cassandra Kaake’s), daughter, though recognized as a child, is not recognized as a “human being” under Canadian criminal law because she had not yet exited her mother’s womb. And because of that legal deficiency, no murder charge will ever be laid against the person who took Molly’s life." (MIKE SCHOUTEN FEB. 11, 2015).

This is beyond tragic.  What I had first seen as a paradox is now quickly becoming a callous consistency: take a voiceless child’s life, at three weeks or nine months; help to take an adult’s life at 18 or 100.   End-of-life care now has the option of actually ending life.  The remaining paradox is the idea that death is some kind of welcoming end. 

The gospel gives us a better way to deal with the seemingly implacable foes of suffering and death.  Without the light of the gospel, suffering is a freighted word that is full of despair.  There is no purpose, no hope, and certainly no joy to be had, when facing suffering without a God who completely knows what it is all about.

God willingly chose to completely identify with us, in Jesus’ birth and death. He took on human flesh.  He didn’t become an animal; he became a human being; he didn’t start as an adult, he was conceived in the womb of Mary.  Jesus’ death was a death that was anything but dignified; the complete opposite of what the “dying with dignity” movement is all about.  Jesus didn’t shrink from the anguish and suffering that took place on a cross.  He drank it to the last dregs.  He demonstrated the great value that God has placed on our lives, by conquering death, that last and greatest enemy of humanity. (1 Corinthians 15:26).  His resurrection brings with it promise, purpose and everlasting life.  Jesus overcame the suffering, the dread, and the indignity of all that encompasses death itself.  By offering us eternal life, through belief in His finished work, we recognize just how valuable we really are.

The hollow ring of our Supreme Court`s decision carries a death knell that will be heard throughout the corridors of time.  Canada will be a fearful place in which to live, where the convenience of dying will trump the `duty to live.`  Parliament can decide to just “let it be” and this ruling will be enacted in one year.  Or parliament can bring this discussion into the homes of Canadians and into the governemnt chambers, where we pray that truth will triumph over such evil.

With eternity in the balance, the supremacy of God will be revealed on the last day and I can only pray that it will not be too late for some.  I cannot help but think of Nehemiah, who prayed for his nation and I would do well to follow his pattern by praying thus:   

``O Lord God of heaven, the great and awesome God who keeps covenant and steadfast love

with those who love him and keep his commandments.

Let your ear be attentive and your eyes be open,

 to hear the prayer of your servant

that I am now praying before you night and day for the people of Canada,

confessing the sins of the people of my nation,

 which we have sinned against you.  Have mercy on us.``

A Bridge

A wintry trail cuts through the forest near our home. Being transformed from rails to trails, it is a lovely place to go for a walk.  The path is often crisscrossed by rabbit tracks and even a bear’s paws can sometimes be seen imprinted in the snow.  Walking along, I come across a simple bridge that takes me across a partially-frozen creek.  Funny, though, how I had never really considered it before; until today. 

Today it beckoned to me, as if to say: “Keep tracking. Don’t give up.  I’m strong enough to carry you.  Trust me.  There is so much more to see, just around the bend.”

And I thought of the cross, the place where Jesus hung between earth and sky.  He is the bridge for my soul that takes me across the frozen tundra of my sin, hedging me into himself so I don’t lose my footing.  He will never let me go.  I can take him at his word:   “God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His son, Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 1:9). 

And there is so much more to see, just around the bend.