Have read the responses that give a lot of insight, but each situation is different. The reminder to plan by putting our instructions for our care in a living will is certainly applicable, although the individual in the suffering situation in this topic was never able to do that. For the rest of us who are in control, we better watch out for the time when we are not in control to be sure our suffering is not either ruled justified by law or sanctioned by the Church that must be protective of those who are unable to protect themselves. The devil is relatively insidious and able to work the law and members of the Church if great diligence gives way to comfort or ignorance. You don't want to find out the hard way that a family member who you didn't really understand becomes doggedly mad, acting like an entitled tyrant, for example, who when you are out of control, runs their own version of a loving concentration camp with you being unable to say or do anything about it, or goes the other way to get rid of you for the money!
It is very interesting to hear the example of the woman who was able to communicate to the nurse and especially the nurse who was careful to watch and be aware. If we then apply this same level of concern for those who suffer, and then the doctor-like people who keep telling us they are ok, when they absolutely are not, then we have a problem. If you say that situation can't exist, then it will be interesting in the next life to talk to those who went through this to confirm if the suffering was justified or not. It actually comes down to doing to others as we would have them do unto us.
As usual it is a lot harder to do what is right than to just let nature take it's course. The whole advent of mankind has been to deal with hardship and overcome it. We have been warned that if we do not obey God's laws and qualify under the atonement that we will have to suffer as Jesus did. If Jesus went through suffering for us to not have to suffer, then what part of suffering do we not understand?
We are told not to judge? Well not to judge unrighteously does not mean we are released from making righteous judgment. For sure, based on the discussion here, we are not going to agree on when to intervene and use painless means of terminating physical life unless realities are made clear to those who might understand when confronted with fact. And could someone make a mistake in taking a life? Of course. And if so, does that mean that those who could be released from physical life have to stay because someone might make a mistake?
The problem is people who abuse. It is such a great problem that it is no wonder that there has to be law to deal with all that people can violate including abuse. There is evidently a problem with every application of law as it has been mentioned that it is possible for the letter of the law to kill while the spirit of the law giveth life. Therefore the taking of life is based on each situation and best handled by parents or family who prayerfully and through guidance by their Church leaders make the right decision in each case.
Will submit that the real solution to this and all other problems is that it is not necessary that we be commanded in all things. It took some 100 years to finally establish the Constitution of this nation. From that process we glean a very crucial way of dealing with human beings. A principle of reasonable agreement. Final acceptance was not attained until they had allowed for disagreement and listened to the reasons and, where necessary, changed, or added enlightenment, until all agreed for the right reasons. As long as there is disagreement, there may be a condition that does not come to light unless you are willing to be humble enough and listen to information, that if known, would likely change the way another understands. The ability to understand in this way is called empathy. Deliberate lack of empathy is typically displayed as narcism or abuse of power. And we all know about the amen involved with that.
It is a shame that the devils out there make it necessary for others to suffer how ever they are able to do it. At least in this world we have forensic files operations that deal with those devils. All life is sacred despite any who want to misconstrue what is written here to mean something else.
Do I agree with the position of the Church regarding life and death? Yes. Could there be exceptions? Only for the right reasons and with agreement of Church leaders.
Carborendum,
If the situation was hypothetical, then your response would be reasonable. Unfortunately that situation is real and the individual cannot speak for themselves and discuss it with the parents or the Lord, and if by any chance they can pray, intervention is evidently not happening or hasn't for years.
This situation is not like the one you mentioned. " That is why every situation has it's own solution. In the end, if the Lord says do something, do it. If He says don't do something, don't do it." Is it not also written that we should not be commanded in all things? We put animals to death when they suffer and call it humane and there doesn't seem to be any Church action against that. Can we then justify the suffering of a son or daughter of God when the medical world declares no improvement, by allowing them to suffer and waste away when we can use the blessings of modern technology to painlessly release them?
The Jehovah's Witnesses have been known to forbid blood transfusions when the life of another is threatened if a transfusion is not administered. They cite scripture that forbid Israel to eat blood. The Church indicates that in the case of incest or rape life can be taken. Will the Church then condone suffering in this specific case where the suffering while possibly not physical would definitely be spiritual? To get an idea of how that works, agree to be confined indefinitely and see how you react. Torture? Jail?
