Our Duty to Serve Human Dignity

Euthanasia is an action or omission that of itself or by intention causes death in order to alleviate suffering. Catholic health care institutions may never condone or participate in euthanasia or assisted suicide in any way. Dying patients who request euthanasia should receive loving care, psychological and spiritual support, and appropriate remedies for pain and other symptoms so that they can live with dignity until the time of natural death.

– Ethical and Religious Directives of Catholic Health Care, no. 60 

Usually, when medically assisted suicide has been on a state ballot initiative, it’s to legalize the practice. But this year on November 5, West Virginians approved Amendment 1. This amendment established a constitutional ban on physician-assisted suicides in the state, making it clear that “no person, physician, or health care provider in the State of West Virginia shall participate in the practice of medically assisted suicide, euthanasia, or mercy killing of a person.” 

Assisted suicide is already illegal in West Virginia. But approval of the constitutional amendment now makes it substantially harder for proponents to launch an effort to legalize it. If state lawmakers in the future want to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, they will have to go through the process of amending the state constitution again, requiring two-thirds of both the West Virginia House and Senate to agree to put it forward before voters. Simply put, this constitutional amendment effectively prevents euthanasia and assisted suicide legislation from coming into the state, protecting the sacredness of human life.  

This is a pro-life victory that many didn’t hear about in the national news, because it goes against a growing anti-life narrative. Not only did West Virginia reject the mindset of euthanasia and assisted suicide, but it also became the first state to proactively protect all its citizens from this dangerous and life-threatening trend.

False Compassion

Pope St. John Paul II lamented that euthanasia was becoming more widespread, “disguised and surreptitious, or practiced openly and even legally“ (Evangelium vitae, 17). The sainted pope said that the rationale for the illicit practice was “for reasons of a misguided pity at the sight of the patient’s suffering” and “sometimes justified by the utilitarian motive of avoiding costs which bring no return, and which weigh heavily on society.”  

St. Paul reminds us that the first requirement of Christian morality is that “love does no evil to the neighbor” (Rom 13:10). This means a good end does not justify an evil means. Moreover, we should always reverence human good, like the incomparable value of human life, and refuse under any circumstance to willingly destroy or attack certain goods for the sake of other goods. Euthanasia and assisted suicide violate this understanding, calling good what is in and of itself intrinsically evil.  

According to Pope St. John Paul II, this anti-life ideology, which violates human dignity, aims “to eliminate malformed babies, the severely handicapped, the disabled, the elderly, especially when they are not self-sufficient, and the terminally ill” (Evangelium vitae, no. 64). Under this framework, the sainted pope continues to say, 

The temptation grows to have recourse to euthanasia, that is, to take control of death and bring it about before its time, ‘gently’ ending one’s own life or the life of others… what might seem logical and humane, when looked at more closely is seen to be senseless and inhumane. 

Whereas “love of neighbor” (Lk 10:2) enables us to recognize the dignity of every person, whether it be in moments of illness, suffering, old age, or imminent death. This framework teaches us that the intrinsic dignity of the person is not diminished under these conditions but remains constant. By contrast, the utilitarian mindset of euthanasia and assisted suicide give shape to an ethic that arbitrarily determines who should live and who should die. Even if one is motivated by sentiments of compassion or of a desire to “preserve” dignity, these acts eliminate the person, who should always be served and respected. 

Serving Truth

The most basic definition of objective truth is best summarized as the conformity of the intellect with what the object perceived actually is – the accurate perception of reality. In other words, truth has to do with the intelligibility of the world and human capacity to understand it and to perceive it logically.  

However, many in our culture make such truth relative; “You have your truth, and I have mine.” But such is not truth; it is the essence of relativism. When an object is perceived correctly, then it is said to be “truly” known. If a child, for example, sees a pigeon in the park where she is playing and tells her mother she has seen a squirrel, the child’s mother will correct her daughter and say, “No, that is a pigeon, not a squirrel.” The child’s initial calling of the bird a squirrel was erroneous. No matter how convinced she was about what she perceived or how she felt about it, she didn’t perceive the object correctly; she didn’t identify the truth about what it was. 

When speaking about human beings, we understand a fundamental truth: human beings possess an intrinsic worth. “Human persons are willed by God; they are imprinted with God’s image. Their dignity does not come from the work they do, but from the persons they are” (Centesimus annus, no. 11). And because we are dealing with human persons, the inviolable dignity of every human person “is to be respected in all circumstances, not because that dignity is something we have invented or imagined,” says Pope Francis (Fratelli Tutti, no. 213).  

This truth shapes our view on human life, respecting its sacredness in every circumstance. Therefore, every person, without exception, should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else. This equally applies to oneself. Moreover, it means by virtue of being human, the human person has inherent value which doesn’t depend on anything or anyone else. We exist, so we have value. And “no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being” (Donum vitae, no 5).  

As beings made in “God’s image” (Gen 1:26-31), we are, in some meaningful sense, “God-like.” What, precisely, does this mean? In brief: unlike the rest of material creation, human beings are self-conscious, thinking beings invested with the capacity for free choice, and possess immortal, spiritual souls capable of union with God through the direct contemplation of His essence in eternal beatitude in Heaven. Already created with a spark of the divine, human beings are truly capable of being “divinized” by receiving God’s life through grace.

Euthanasia is Intrinsically Evil

We live in a world where many accept the false view that intrinsically evil acts do not exist and consider all options as true, even if they are contradictory. “We are building a dictatorship of relativism,” said Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 2005, “that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.” (Ratzinger, 2005).   

But there are acts that must never be chosen because they are always bad and always sinful; they are intrinsically evil. These acts are always and everywhere and for everyone and for every situation sinful and never acceptable, regardless of motivation or circumstances (for example, contraception, abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide). As Pope St. John Paul II reminds us, “reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature ‘incapable of being ordered’ to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in His image” (Veritatis splendor, no 80). 

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:  

The morality of human acts depends on: the object chosen; the end in view or the intention; the circumstances of the action. The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the ‘sources,’ or constitutive elements, of the morality of human acts (no. 1750). 

All three aspects – the objective act, subjective intention, and circumstances – must be good to result in a morally good act. This is why considering the consequences alone is not enough. They pertain to the proximate end we are pursuing – the ultimate consequence we want to bring about. They also pertain to the circumstances, which may involve unintended consequences.  

Clearly, euthanasia and assisted suicide fail to meet these criteria. Even if one is motivated by sentiments of compassion or of a desire to somehow “preserve” dignity, it is not correct to claim that the moral object in the case of euthanasia and assisted suicide are the relief of suffering, the proximate end. They are, instead, ordered toward deprivation of life. Such actions are “intrinsically disordered” and can never be chosen, because they are wrong by their very nature (inherently flawed). Though the proximate end is to alleviate suffering, the means to fulfill this end are intrinsically disordered and cannot be chosen.

What is True Compassion?

“True compassion,” says Pope St. John Paul II, “leads to sharing another’s pain; it does not kill the person whose suffering we cannot bear” (Evangelium vitae, no 66 and 67). Instead of serving the weak and vulnerable, taking personal responsibility for protecting and serving human life, the act of euthanasia seeks to silence the suffering and minimize all inconvenience.  

True care and compassion for the elderly, sick, and dying, who will soon meet God, means to respect their intrinsic dignity by assisting them in this decisive phase of life. Pope St. John Paul II stresses the need for us to recognize in the “pleas of the suffering and dying” a call for “companionship, sympathy, and support.”  

True compassion hears their cry for help, “to keep on hoping when all human hopes fail.” But sadly, there is an increasing tendency within our society to devalue human life, especially the lives of those who are most vulnerable. Unless compassion is rooted in respect for human dignity and combined with the desire to address suffering and ethically support those who are afflicted, it leads to an assault on life. 

Human dignity is not something we can bestow or take away; it must be protected with loving concern. Whether we are young or old, healthy or sick, fully aware or suffering with a cognitive disability, we do not lose human dignity; it is intrinsic to our existence. True mercy and compassion accompany and advocate for those suffering and dying, ensuring their proper care and respecting their incomparable worth as persons.  

False mercy, on the other hand, is a “perversion of mercy” since it removes “my” duty to accompany a brother or sister. Through euthanasia and assisted suicide, one simply “resolves” the situation because he does not wish to be “burdened.” His actions are an act of false mercy.  

The failure to recognize the human dignity of each person and our obligation to accompany and serve them opens the door to all kinds of violence and injustice. To counteract this false mindset, Pope Francis says,  

We must accompany people towards death, but not provoke death or facilitate assisted suicide… Indeed, life is a right, not death, which must be welcomed, not administered. And this ethical principle applies to everyone, not just Christians or believers.  

The Holy Father emphasizes that “the compassion of the Gospel is what accompanies us in times of need, that compassion of the Good Samaritan, who ‘sees,’ ‘has compassion,’ draws near and provides concrete help.” And when medical interventions are no longer an option or one’s life is naturally drawing to an end, this “cannot mean that care has come at an end,” says the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in its letter, Samaritanus bonus.  

Those who are suffering from a terminal illness, as well as babies born with a limited expectation of survival, have the right to be welcomed, cared for, and surrounded by affection. The Church does not countenance “over-zealous” or overly aggressive treatment; but nonetheless “reaffirms as definitive teaching that euthanasia is a crime against human life. 

True compassion encourages every reasonable effort towards the patient’s recovery. At the same time, it helps draw the line when no further treatment will serve this purpose. Euthanasia and assisted suicide not only compromise the respect owed to human persons, but they also erode authentic methods of palliative care, disincentivize the development of alternative treatments, and erode trust in the physician-patient relationship. The practice can also be predatory toward vulnerable populations.

Our response is to bear witness to the surpassing value of human life in the decisions we face and actions we take in caring for loved ones and those in need. “There is no human life more sacred than another, just as there is no human life qualitatively more significant than another,” says Pope Francis. “The credibility of a health care system is not measured solely by efficiency, but above all by the attention and love given to the person, whose life is always sacred and inviolable” (September 20, 2013). 

The good people of West Virginia, those who voted to further protect the vulnerable from the violence and mindset of euthanasia and assisted suicide (and mercy-killing), rejecting a false morality, have given the rest of the nation and world an example. Their action not only expresses a profound yes to the dignity of human life but also challenges society to seek moral means to serve the suffering and dying, not remove “us” from our obligation to serve and accompany our brothers and sisters.