Is refusing the treatment the same as assisted dying?

[HaggisShuu]

A bill to allow assisted dying is currently under debate in the UK so the Europe North area presidency recently released a statement condemning it. (I expect to see more membership councils in the UK as a result but this is a different discussion).

It got me thinking as the Church's hardline opposition to assisted dying, doesn't appear to be mirrored in cases of refusing treatment for terminal illnesses (which I expect would be the context where assisted dying is to be considered). Rather adopting a "pray about it" approach. 
 

The outcome here is identical, and I see both approaches here to be disrespecting the sanctity of life and as I result this comes across to me as a contradiction in doctrine. 
 

If anybody has some wisdom they could spare me, or a personal experience you'd be comfortable sharing on the matter, I'd appreciate it as this is rather confusing to me. 
 

 

 

[LDSGator]

Sure, I’ll fire a shot.
 

The two are different. 

Refusing the treatment to prolong your agony as you die of AIDS is vastly different than a perfectly healthy individual choosing to end their life by jumping in a death pod and calling it a day.  

[HaggisShuu]

8 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Sure, I’ll fire a shot.
 

The two are different. 

Refusing the treatment to prolong your agony as you die of AIDS is vastly different than a perfectly healthy individual choosing to end their life by jumping in a death pod and calling it a day.  

Perfectly valid point. But the bill being introduced is intended for terminally ill adults in a state of unbearable suffering. 
 

If said AIDS patient you mentioned was offering assisted dying, the Church would appose it. If the patient just chose to refuse treatment to bring about a speedier death, the Church would just go "meh". 
 

The outcome and intentions are virtually the same. 

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

erfectly valid point. But the bill being introduced is intended for terminally ill adults in a state of unbearable suffering. 

Ahh, okay. Thanks. 
 

Those laws are always a little gray. If I have extreme depression that’s absolutely unbearable suffering-but I might be physically fit. That psychopath who crashed a plane into a French mountain was deeply sick mentally but also ran marathons. 
 

I’m very conflicted on these laws. Personally I have no issue with someone like we talked about with Aids refusing treatment or even taking active means to end their suffering. However, I’m also very sympathetic to the slippery slope argument. 

[NeuroTypical]

From the handbook: 

Quote

Discontinuing or forgoing extreme life support measures for a person at the end of life is not considered euthanasia (see 38.7.11).

Quote

38.7.11

Prolonging Life (Including Life Support)

When facing severe illness, members should exercise faith in the Lord and seek competent medical assistance. However, when dying becomes inevitable, it should be seen as a blessing and a purposeful part of eternal existence (see 2 Nephi 9:6; Alma 42:8).

Members should not feel obligated to extend mortal life by extreme means. These decisions are best made by the person, if possible, or by family members. They should seek competent medical advice and divine guidance through prayer.

Leaders offer support to those who are deciding whether or not to remove life support for a family member.

 

[NeuroTypical]

29 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

or a personal experience you'd be comfortable sharing

We once delivered this information to a family we were home teaching.  They had a relative that needed a full blood replacement ever 3-4 weeks or so.  (Not blood transfusion, but a full blood replacement.)  It was an expensive and painful thing that brought some severe quality of life issues.   It wasn't exactly a relief to them to hear "shouldn't feel obligated to extend life by extreme means", but it did help them ground themselves.

The lady stopped the blood treatments and was dead within a month.  The family told us everyone was at peace with the decision, especially the lady, in part because of this counsel from the church. 

[estradling75]

A member of my ward is dying of metastasized kidney cancer.  They have chosen to stop prolonging treatments and just focus on comfort care.  He spoke in church on Sunday.  A short but powerful testimony.

 

 

[Carborendum]

40 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

Is refusing the treatment the same as assisted dying?

No, one is allowing natural processes to continue.  The other is purposefully killing someone.  

It is perfectly acceptable to focus on "keeping someone comfortable" and ease pain.  But kill them on purpose?

24 minutes ago, HaggisShuu said:

The outcome and intentions are virtually the same. 

... as murder?

Yes, death is the outcome of all three options. 

What is the difference between assisted dying vs murder?  They're virtually the same.

Edited November 26, 2024 by Carborendum

[Ironhold]

1 hour ago, HaggisShuu said:

Perfectly valid point. But the bill being introduced is intended for terminally ill adults in a state of unbearable suffering. 

You might want to take a look at what's going on up in Canada, where assisted self-termination is already legal. 

Canada's health care system is overloaded even on a good day, and there are numerous allegations of individual doctors taking advantage of assisted self-termination by "prescribing" it for people who don't actually meet the criteria but who the doctor wants to be rid of to reduce their patient load. 

[zil2]

11 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

You might want to take a look at what's going on up in Canada, where assisted self-termination is already legal. 

That.  If you want to know where this will go, look to Canada.  If you want to know where uncontrolled immigration will go, look to California (pff - or the UK, for that matter).

A huge problem with legalizing (or normalizing) "assisted death" is the "slippery slope" that everyone likes to dismiss as "oh that would never happen".  And look at attitudes toward abortion - these days, folks want post-birth abortion (as if that weren't a logical impossibility).  The closer one gets to accepting the taking of a life, for any reason, the easier it will be to add "acceptable reasons" to the list.

I find it ironic that the same countries that are in a hurry to help folks end their lives are so opposed to the death penalty.

To my knowledge, the only reasons God has ever accepted for taking the life of another person are self-defense and corporal punishment, and even those come with some pretty strict rules around them.

[LDSGator]

8 minutes ago, zil2 said:

huge problem with legalizing (or normalizing) "assisted death" is the "slippery slope" that everyone likes to dismiss as "oh that would never happen". 

Maybe it’s just the caliber of people we talk to with opposing views, but to be fair, the vast majority of people I’ve met who are in favor of assisted suicide absolutely talk about their concerns with the “slippery slope.” In fact, for some it’s their sole reason why they hesitate to legalize it. 

[LDSGator]

I wouldn’t say the same kind of thing about those who are against euthanasia. I don’t question their compassion, nor do I think they enjoy watching people suffer.

 

I’m not at that life stage where I assume bad intentions of those I disagree with. Maybe one day. 

Edited November 26, 2024 by LDSGator

[CV75]

2 hours ago, HaggisShuu said:

A bill to allow assisted dying is currently under debate in the UK so the Europe North area presidency recently released a statement condemning it. (I expect to see more membership councils in the UK as a result but this is a different discussion).

It got me thinking as the Church's hardline opposition to assisted dying, doesn't appear to be mirrored in cases of refusing treatment for terminal illnesses (which I expect would be the context where assisted dying is to be considered). Rather adopting a "pray about it" approach. 
 

The outcome here is identical, and I see both approaches here to be disrespecting the sanctity of life and as I result this comes across to me as a contradiction in doctrine. 
 

If anybody has some wisdom they could spare me, or a personal experience you'd be comfortable sharing on the matter, I'd appreciate it as this is rather confusing to me. 
 

 

 

"Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em." -- Ignatius of Antioch

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, CV75 said:

"Know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em." -- Ignatius of Antioch

Gallows humor is the best kind of humor. 

[LDSGator]

The other aspect of euthanasia that I find troubling is “suicide tourism”. If you want your state/country to be known as where people go to voluntarily kill themselves, fine. But I find that sick. 
 

It’s an issue I’ve spent a ton of time thinking about. I’m stuck between the “it’s my life, I’ll freely do what I want thanks” and my personal beliefs that it’s giving up and not fighting. I’m so conflicted about it. 

Edited November 26, 2024 by LDSGator

[Traveler]

My views on this subject have changed a great deal.  Most of my change of mind and heart have come because of numerous times I have been will someone as they have died.  One of the most profound experiences was the death of my father.  For 6 months I had reserved a day to leave work early to take care of my father.  It amounted to washing, feeding, ministering prescriptions, visiting and putting him to bed.  It was difficult to get him to eat a proper diet and take his prescriptions.  My advice to anyone else taking end of life care is do not worry about what they want to or do not want to eat and if they do not want to take any medications – do not force it upon them.

My father died a very peaceful death, and it was a profound spiritual experience to be with him at his passing.   I have also been giving aid to someone critically injured in an accident.  I have deliberately lied, telling them that everything would be okay.  That everything was under control (bleeding is stopped) and that paramedics would be there soon and that I would stay with them.

Scripture (Book of Mormon) tells us that there is a time to live and a time to die.  I do not know of any way we can know for sure when the time is for anyone to die – unless the spirit reveals it so.  This is a time that we have advanced medical possibilities but also a time when the power of the priesthood is throughout the world and most available to the saints.  I have witnessed the preservation of life through the priesthood, and I have also witnessed a blessing of comfort in death.  It was an honor to bless my parents with my worthy brothers in the moments before his death. 

If I am to add anything to this thread – I would suggest that a priesthood anointing and blessing to honor the dying during their mortal conclusion is one of our church’s greatest blessings to its covenant saints.  There is no greater ministering honor that I have experienced.

 

The Traveler

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, Traveler said:

father.  It amounted to washing, feeding, ministering prescriptions, visiting and putting him to bed

You are angelic for doing this Trav. 
 

My biggest fear in life, aside from losing LG, is seeing my old man go down like that. 😞 

[zil2]

51 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

I wouldn’t say the same kind of thing about those who are against euthanasia. I don’t question their compassion, nor do I think they enjoy watching people suffer.

I’m not at that life stage where I assume bad intentions of those I disagree with. Maybe one day. 

Note that it doesn't have to be the general populace who slide down the slope, nor the people who are in favor because their love one is or has experienced intense suffering.  Look at the issue of the doctors in Canada, using it as an excuse.  There are rumors that they will assist anyone with suicide, without even trying to get them to undergo therapy.  Some people will always stay on the "limited and careful use" side, while others will push the boundaries for their own perverse reasons, and for whatever reason, people follow along without care.

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Ironhold said:

You might want to take a look at what's going on up in Canada, where assisted self-termination is already legal. 

Canada's health care system is overloaded even on a good day, and there are numerous allegations of individual doctors taking advantage of assisted self-termination by "prescribing" it for people who don't actually meet the criteria but who the doctor wants to be rid of to reduce their patient load. 

It's worse than that.  Because of the overload, they flat out tell people that they don't have enough money to treat them for long term illnesses.  But they can give the assisted suicide even if they are not terminally ill.

That is jacked up.

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, zil2 said:

  Look at the issue of the doctors in Canada, using it as an excuse.  There are rumors that they will assist anyone with suicide, without even trying to get them to undergo therapy.  Some people will always stay on the "limited and careful use" side, while others will push the boundaries for their own perverse reasons, and for whatever reason, people follow along without care.

Oh, I totally agree on the Canadian part. In fact, that’s reason number 887 I’m staunchly against nationalizing health care. Eventually the economic law of scarcity kicks in and someone will be chosen to euthanized involuntarily.   

[Carborendum]

27 minutes ago, Traveler said:

If I am to add anything to this thread – I would suggest that a priesthood anointing and blessing to honor the dying during their mortal conclusion is one of our church’s greatest blessings to its covenant saints.  There is no greater ministering honor that I have experienced.

Thank you for sharing that, Traveler.

I recall Elder Ballard giving an address where he spoke with a friend of his as he was suffering in his last days.  And it was agreed that he would "seal him unto death."  I'll paraphrase as best I can recall.

Quote

Heavenly Father, my friend has lived a very full life performing the work you had for him.  And now he is suffering a great deal.  It seems from this side of the veil that his work is done.  And he is ready to pass through the veil to meet you.  If it be thy will, please allow him to enter into thy peace.

He did pass very peacefully soon thereafter.

[NeuroTypical]

27 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Eventually the economic law of scarcity kicks in and someone will be chosen to euthanized involuntarily.   

Closely related topic:  The argument in favor of abortion which talks about its beneficial impact on lowering crime rates.

[LDSGator]

9 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Closely related topic:  The argument in favor of abortion which talks about its beneficial impact on lowering crime rates.

The dirty little secret about abortion is that white liberals want abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods, not their own elite neighborhoods for the reason you just described.  
 

They’ll admit it, after a drink or two.

Edited November 26, 2024 by LDSGator

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Closely related topic:  The argument in favor of abortion which talks about its beneficial impact on lowering crime rates.

So... kill the entire population and we end crime forever...?  That is jacked up. 

This is a death cult we're dealing with. We have to get back to sanity. 

[LDSGator]

44 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

So... kill the entire population and we end crime forever...?  That is jacked up

 It only applies to poor people. Read Margaret Sanger.