Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:30 AM Jun 2014

End of life care: What do religions say?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/0/27618826

By Flavia Di Consiglio
BBC Religion and Ethics



With figures showing that many people around the world die painfully due to scarce access to morphine, the World Health Organization is calling for improvements to end of life care.

But even when pain medication is available, the end of someone's life is often an immensely difficult moment for all concerned. So for those who believe, what guidance can religions offer in a person's last moments?

At first glance the words 'good' and 'death' might not seem compatible, yet most of us will have reflected on how we would like to depart this world, if given the opportunity to choose.

While the proverbial scenario 'at home, asleep' might unfortunately not be attainable for everyone, it does give a sense of what the 'ideal' death might look like: peaceful, pain-free and dignified.

more at link
30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
End of life care: What do religions say? (Original Post) cbayer Jun 2014 OP
Trick question. The religions don't say anything. trotsky Jun 2014 #1
The RCC/subcomponents of it, spent millions lobbying, advertising and lying against physician assist AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #2
Here is a link to the positions of various religions and denominations on assisted suicide. cbayer Jun 2014 #4
The rabbi in your top post started out encouraging, but then stated it's proscribed entirely. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #6
A better question: why should we care what they say? Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #3
Because they have an audience that can vote cbayer Jun 2014 #5
And you think this is most ideal way to approach that audience? Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #7
It is important to take religious beliefs into account, particularly when end-of-life cbayer Jun 2014 #8
What's to take into account? Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #9
Perhaps I am not being clear. cbayer Jun 2014 #11
Where do I see a group of religious people trying to dictate end-of-life decisions? Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #12
Are you against any religious groups lobbying for anything? cbayer Jun 2014 #15
Interesting standard. trotsky Jun 2014 #18
No, I'm against listening to nonsensical arguments. Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #23
I can't assume that an argument is nonsensical unless I listen to it first. cbayer Jun 2014 #27
"Where do you see a group of religious people trying to dictate EOL decisions for everyone else" AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #13
You know, I am many things, but hyper-disingenuous is really not one of them. cbayer Jun 2014 #16
Let me refresh your memory then. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #19
I think it's just a matter of terminology. cbayer Jun 2014 #26
I view 'that one is off the table' as dictating decisions. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #28
I've seen personal religious points of view ease the end of life process for some. pinto Jun 2014 #10
Unfortunately, we have religious entities that work to lobby restrictions on options you or I might AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #14
I've never seen religious lobbying block an end of life decision, fwi. They have no standing. pinto Jun 2014 #20
Here. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #21
I get your point about the legal situation. How did the proposition fare in Washington? pinto Jun 2014 #24
We passed it in WA. It failed by 1% in MA. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #25
While religion plays a major role in many people's stand on this, there is also cbayer Jun 2014 #29
Here is another graph and a link to the entire report. cbayer Jun 2014 #30
Hospital ethics committees are often really fascinating when it comes cbayer Jun 2014 #17
I bet they are. It's such a basic human, ethical and professional issue. pinto Jun 2014 #22

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
1. Trick question. The religions don't say anything.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:39 AM
Jun 2014

It's what individuals who subscribe to the religions interpret their texts and teachings to say.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
2. The RCC/subcomponents of it, spent millions lobbying, advertising and lying against physician assist
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:43 AM
Jun 2014

ed suicide in my state, as my father labored on for another 6 months past the point he wanted it over, from the pain. His options were:

1. Suffer.
2. Dope up on morphine and lose his mental faculties.


Vile.

Good to see the UK having this conversation. Looks like they have the same problem we do, placing religious doctrine over human compassion.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
4. Here is a link to the positions of various religions and denominations on assisted suicide.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:56 AM
Jun 2014
http://www.deathwithdignity.org/historyfacts/religion

As you can see, they are all over the place, with compassionate care playing a huge role in the debate.

There are both religious and non-religious groups that support and don't support assisted suicide.

It's not about placing religious doctrine over human compassion. It's about writing good laws and developing good protocols.

The Oregon case was very complex, and, frankly Dr Kervorkian probably did more harm to the cause than he did help.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
6. The rabbi in your top post started out encouraging, but then stated it's proscribed entirely.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:02 AM
Jun 2014

He puts his religious doctrine (which, to be fair, has become cultural doctrine as well, for him) above compassion. That's the bottom line.


"Anglican: Rowan Williams, the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, has stated that although "There is a very strong compassionate case" for physician-assisted dying, the Anglican church remains opposed to the practice."

39% of the population of the UK identify as Anglican. Another 12.5% as RCC.

"Catholicism: The official position of the Catholic Church in Rome remains that killing of a human being, even by an act of omission to eliminate suffering, violates divine law and offends the dignity of the human person."


That's a majority, right there without even considering the rest.


We got issues here too, but we have legalized it in three states. I predict we will have more success than the UK in the coming decade, on this issue.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
3. A better question: why should we care what they say?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:54 AM
Jun 2014

Why should another person's religious beliefs affect the terms of my death? Or yours? Or anyone else's?



cbayer

(146,218 posts)
5. Because they have an audience that can vote
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 10:57 AM
Jun 2014

and can sway decisions.

You may not like that, but it's a fact.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
7. And you think this is most ideal way to approach that audience?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:02 AM
Jun 2014

Instead of telling them, for example, "We have no right to impose our beliefs on other people", or "The only book I read in college doesn't say shit about medicine, maybe we should listen to a fucking doctor"?

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
8. It is important to take religious beliefs into account, particularly when end-of-life
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 11:14 AM
Jun 2014

issues are on the table.

I do not think that other's religious beliefs should have any effect on your personal end-of-life decisions and have personally participated in individual, institutional and large organizational decisions on this topic. The issue of religion comes into play when a person with particular religious beliefs is the subject of the discussion. But it also comes into play when legislation is being considered.

And things become very, very complicated when you have a patient who can not effectively participate and a family who may hold very different POV's from each other.

Disregarding that would be a mistake, but as with abortion, the case you are making is the best case to make. It should ideally be an individual choice between a doctor and a patient.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
9. What's to take into account?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:27 PM
Jun 2014

If you have a law on the books that allows for a dignified death, no one is under any compunction whatsoever to make use of it. If a religious person wants to prolong their suffering because that's what they think God wants, no one is going to make them commit suicide. This is effectively ensured by the First Amendment.

What we have, however, is a group of religious people trying to dictate end-of-life decisions for everyone else, based on their own personal religious beliefs. The only people not taking into account the beliefs of others is them. It isn't fair, it isn't ethical, and it isn't in keeping with the principals upon which our society was founded.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
11. Perhaps I am not being clear.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:36 PM
Jun 2014

I generally support a individual's right to choose when it comes to end-of-life decisions.

Sometimes this is easy and uncomplicated. But often it is not.

The person's wishes may not be clear. There may be issues around whether someone is terminal or has an underlying condition that would change their wishes if it were treated. The family may have marked disagreements about the issues.

Where do you see a group of religious people trying to dictate end-of-life decisions for everyone else? There are religious and non-religious groups that lobby on both sides. The laws that have been enacted are complex and any law in this area needs to be crafted very carefully. As with other issues where religious beliefs may come into play, there is a lot of room for education that may change the views of individuals.

If anything, we are moving as a country towards accepting and adopting more end-of-life alternatives, including assisted suicide.

So let's support the religious and non-religious organizations that are with us on this and oppose that that aren't.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
12. Where do I see a group of religious people trying to dictate end-of-life decisions?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 02:52 PM
Jun 2014
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, for one.

The person's wishes may not be clear. There may be issues around whether someone is terminal or has an underlying condition that would change their wishes if it were treated. The family may have marked disagreements about the issues.


This is effectively no different than ambiguity over DNR, or inheritance, or any other decision made in the twilight years of one's life. And I'm not seeing a religious angle on this. Did Christ have anything to say about living wills or resuscitation orders?

The laws that have been enacted are complex and any law in this area needs to be crafted very carefully. As with other issues where religious beliefs may come into play, there is a lot of room for education that may change the views of individuals.


I don't think anyone is pushing for a slipshod right-to-die law. Obviously, it will need be comprehensive. Obviously, it will need to include provisions for ambiguity. It will have to include a laundry list of stipulations, prohibitions and protections. But this isn't why religious groups are opposed to right-die-laws; they're opposed because they believe suicide is a mortal sin and they couldn't give a fuck and half how the rest of us feel about it.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
15. Are you against any religious groups lobbying for anything?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:07 PM
Jun 2014

I think there is a place and a very positive history of religious groups being involved in lobbying efforts, but recognize that much negative has come of it as well.

I draw the line when they are lobbying for things that impinge on the rights of others who hold a different, personal POV.

We are totally on the same page when it comes to this particular issue, I think. Change on this is going to come, but it's going to come slowly, imo.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
18. Interesting standard.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:19 PM
Jun 2014
I draw the line when they are lobbying for things that impinge on the rights of others who hold a different, personal POV.

That would be a valid justification for what the anti-choice movement does - drawing the line when people who support reproductive choice are impinging on the rights of others, such as the unborn.

Act_of_Reparation

(9,116 posts)
23. No, I'm against listening to nonsensical arguments.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:56 PM
Jun 2014

If a religious group has a good reason to support or oppose policy, then I have no problem listening to them. But on the Scale of Sensible Arguments, "Because God says so" doesn't even rate an honorable mention. Religious people can debate each other to their hearts' content about the implications of certain laws as they pertain to their respective faiths, but religious arguments do not deserve to be at the forefront of any political discussion, nor do they warrant consideration on the legislative floor.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
27. I can't assume that an argument is nonsensical unless I listen to it first.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 05:27 PM
Jun 2014

And i agree that "because god says so" is not much of an argument, but it's rarely just that, imo.

Legislators represent people and if those people base their decisions or positions on religious grounds, then I think the arguments do have a place when considering legislation. It's good to know what is driving their decisions so that you can make a better case against it (or for it).

When one just dismisses a position simply because it has religious underpinnings, it does little except drive those people further into those positions.

And sometimes it is used for good. Almost every day articles are posted here about groups of religious people and leaders who are actively lobbying for things that progressives and liberals embrace. It matters little to me if religion is driving them, they are on my side and I support them.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
13. "Where do you see a group of religious people trying to dictate EOL decisions for everyone else"
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:02 PM
Jun 2014

I've supplied you with that info before, here in the US political landscape, so that question comes off hyper-disingenuous.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
26. I think it's just a matter of terminology.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 05:19 PM
Jun 2014

I am very aware that there are groups that are lobbying against EOL legislation. The difference, I think, is that I don't consider lobbying for or against specific legislation as "dictating EOL decisions". When I read that phrase I was thinking about legislators that are trying to enact specific legislation, but I recognize that that is a murky distinction and concede the point.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
28. I view 'that one is off the table' as dictating decisions.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 05:31 PM
Jun 2014

Especially since people are then caught in the cruel choice of either forgoing the option entirely, or doing it unlawfully, which has consequences for the survivors. (Loss of insurance, death benefits, etc)

pinto

(106,886 posts)
10. I've seen personal religious points of view ease the end of life process for some.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:35 PM
Jun 2014

By their own account. I would never bring it up unless a person initiated the subject. For others it didn't play a role. Like life, each death is individual and unique.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
14. Unfortunately, we have religious entities that work to lobby restrictions on options you or I might
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:03 PM
Jun 2014

freely choose.

pinto

(106,886 posts)
20. I've never seen religious lobbying block an end of life decision, fwi. They have no standing.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:43 PM
Jun 2014

The legal standing is between the individual and designated representatives. I've seen many family disputes on the issue, yet I've never seen a clergyman walk into a hospital room or home and yell, "Stop!".

I get the conflicts around an unfortunately labeled concept - "assisted suicide" - and the legal arguments pro and con. In my experiences, most compassionate MDs get it and meet the patient and family where they are at. Usually it's an informed decision to cease specific treatment and move to a palliative, end of life approach

That said, I support a person's right to have an informed choice.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
21. Here.
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:50 PM
Jun 2014
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=102382

It is now legal in 3 states in the us. Elsewhere, their lobbying efforts continue to prevent this option from being available.

Here's Martin Sheen, lying his ass off.



I get that suicide is offensive to his religious beliefs. Fine. Don't commit suicide then. Don't lie, lobby, spend millions to deny this option to the terminally ill.

pinto

(106,886 posts)
24. I get your point about the legal situation. How did the proposition fare in Washington?
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 04:06 PM
Jun 2014

Didn't follow it.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
29. While religion plays a major role in many people's stand on this, there is also
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 05:33 PM
Jun 2014

a significant percentage of "unaffiliateds" who are against "right to die" legislation.

cbayer

(146,218 posts)
17. Hospital ethics committees are often really fascinating when it comes
Tue Jun 3, 2014, 03:10 PM
Jun 2014

to this issue.

Religion and religious beliefs are very often a part of the discussion and those knowledgeable in them are critical components.

As you say, every death is individual and, more often than not, very complex.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»End of life care: What do...