SAFEGUARD FOR LIFE-ENDING DECISIONS

  RELIGIOUS OR OTHER MORAL PRINCIPLES
  APPLIED TO THIS LIFE-ENDING DECISION

     If the patient and/or the proxies have meaningful connections with a religious organization,
they might decide to seek an official statement from some group of religious leaders.
Such a statement might be a general statement about all such cases.
Or it might be a statement drawn up in response to the specific case at hand.

    Many religious organizations have already created policy statements
with regard to life-ending decisions.
When these seem relevant to the death-planning process,
they can be copied and included in the documents being collected.
Such general position statements might be relevant
for the decision-making process of the patient and/or the proxies.

    What does your chosen moral system say about patients in persistent vegetative state?
As PVS becomes a more common end-of-life situation,
more religious bodies will be making official statements.

    For example, if the patient and/or the proxies are Roman Catholic,
they might want to determine how Roman Catholic ethics applies to their situation.
Does the present level of life-support constitute extraordinary or heroic care?
Or does this level of life-support constitute ordinary support
that should be provided to every patient who is dying?
Roman Catholic moral thinking is perhaps the most developed
system of religiously-based medical ethics.
These thinkers go into such matters as benefits and burdens,
ordinary and extraordinary forms of care,
what is required and what is optional,
what is proportionate to the benefit and what is disproportionate.
Some even address the costs of terminal medical care.

    If your religious doctrine calls for a natural death,
not a death caused by any human action,
how does this apply to the withdrawal of food and water?
Some moral principles say that there are circumstances
in which ending life-supports is a moral option.

    If your religious faith holds that
certain medical procedures are against the will of God,
are there any ways to re-interpret those beliefs
so that something similar can be provided to the patient
without jeopardizing the eternal destiny of the soul of the patient?
For example, Jehovah's Witnesses
can accept transfusions of water or artificial blood
even tho real blood or blood-products are forbidden.

    In some cases, religious bodies will not be able to settle
the question of whether or not any proposed end-of-life decision is ethical.
In such cases, the patient and/or the proxies
will have to select their sub-group of religious authorities
who do in fact interpret religious doctrine to allow the course of action proposed.
This might be described as buffet religion:
You select the doctrines that you like and you leave the rest on the table.
But at least the ethical positions you like
are affirmed by some of the religious authorities you trust.

    As said before, this is an optional safeguard.
But the patient and/or family that wants to make a very strong case
that this chosen death was a wise and compassionate decision,
taken with careful consideration of religious beliefs,
then a written statement from a religious body or authority
will be evidence of a thoro examination of the ethical and religious questions
surrounding end-of-life decisions.
The public and the media need not know the exact content of any such statements,
but it might reassure strangers
that a religious body has supported the life-ending decision.

    And, of course, if the patient and/or the proxies
have no reason to consult religious authorities,
whether in person by consulting an ethicist
who comes from a particular religious tradition
or by means of reading the written statements of moral principles
created by any person in authority or group of religious leaders,
they can affirm any other moral system they prefer
in fulfilling this safeguard for life-ending decisions.

    If the patient and/or proxies wish to identify
any particular set of moral principles,
they can do so in fulfilling this safeguard.
What system of moral principles have you consulted
in the process of exploring options for this life-ending decision?

HOW RELIGIOUS OR OTHER MORAL PRINCIPLES
WILL DISCOURAGE IRRATIONAL SUICIDE
AND OTHER FORMS OF PREMATURE DEATH

    Probably without exception, main-stream religious groups
do not approve or condone irrational suicide.
When the self-killing is harmful, irrational, capricious, & regrettable,
the ethical principles or doctrines of most religious groups do not approve.
And when the patient who is considering an irrational suicide
consults his or her religious authority,
that body of leaders and that set of doctrines will tell the suicidal person:
"Don't kill yourself!"

    Likewise, if some set of relatives wants to withdraw life-supports prematurely,
when they consult the religious or other moral authorities,
they will discover that a premature death is not approved:
If the death will be harmful to the patient,
based on a misapprehension of the medical facts,
taken without exploring all the options for further treatment,
and finally tragic and regrettable,
then this was a violation of morality—a mercy killing, not a merciful death.

      If the patient and/or the proxies have deep religious roots,
then that faith will probably help them to prevent any premature deaths.
Their religious connections might help them to re-examine
all of their reasons for considering a voluntary death or a merciful death.
And if and when the religious authorities have been satisfied,
the patient and/or the proxies can proceed with the blessing of that religious faith.

    Non-religious ethical principles can serve the same function:
For example, main-stream, secular medical ethics
can also help the patient and/or the proxies to separate
medical choices that would result in premature death
from medical choices that would result in death at the best time.

    In theocratic societies,
the established religious authorities must be consulted.
The religious authorities (individuals or groups or religious leaders)
will approve or disapprove of the life-ending decision.

    In secular societies, the patient and/or the proxies choose
which religious morality to follow
or which other system of moral principles (if any)
to use in making life-ending decisions.

    Whatever system of morality is applied,
it will probably help to prevent some premature deaths.
Created January 2007; revised 2-13-2007; 3-15-2008; 5-28-2008

Go to the Catalog of Safeguards for Life-Ending Decisions

Go to the list of 26 recommended safeguards.

Go to the index page for the Safeguards Website.


Go to the Right-to-Die Portal.


Go to the opening page for this website:
An Existential Philosopher's Museum






The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the page author.
The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by the University of Minnesota.