Jongin+On+Kevorkian+and+Euthanasia

Life is precious and irreplaceable. However, as much as life is cherished, one’s individuality over his or her body must be sacred. The word “euthanasia,” translated as “easy death,” should not be looked down as a violation of “fundamental rights” — as the Catholic Church and disabled rights activists believe —, but rather it must be interpreted as a merciful end to unimaginable sufferings. In the end, it is each individual’s life on the table, not anyone else’s. The ultimate decision between dignified death and painful life should left to the individuals.

The case of Daniel James, who chose to end his life at age of 23, has brought the complicated issue of euthanasia to the forefront. Paralyzed by a rugby injury, James sought the assisted suicide from the Dignitas, in order to relieve himself from “the ‘prison’ he felt his body had become” (Foggo). While some believe that James’s death through euthanasia was rather a “welcome relief” from his pain, opponents of the physician assisted suicide argue that precious life should not be taken away under any circumstances. The Catholic Church, on the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, firmly asserts that “nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying… for it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life, and an attack on humanity”. According to the church, it is one’s duty to endure the pain or “bear the cross.”

Allison Davis, another activist on behalf of the handicapped, argues that the rights of the disabled should not be infringed due to their supposedly “no worthwhile quality of life.” On the Right to life of Handicapped, she shares her fear that the doctors’ notion of “’non-personhood’ for babies with congenital defects…could well also lead to the // de facto // decriminalization of the act of killing a handicapped person of any age, just as it did in Hitler’s Germany.” On the other hand, the proponents of the “mercy killing” claim that it is their inalienable right to choose how to die. Chris Hill, on his suicide note, advocates that the euthanasia should be offered as an option to patients. Due to his hang-gliding accident, he was paralyzed from the chest down, and found his life unbearable to live. He remarks, “Unbearable abominations that made me feel less than human. For me, it was no way to live…People kill animals to put them out of their misery if they’re suffering even a tiny part of what I had to put up with, but I was never given the choice of a dignified death and I was very bitter about that.”

Hill isn’t alone in his view on the euthanasia. Pieter Admiraal claims, in Listening and Helping to Die, that “active voluntary euthanasia is but one more way of delivering humane medical care.” As euthanasia is offered as a viable option to patients, they can no longer be patronized by doctors, but self-determine what to do with their own body. Admiraal further describes that “there is after all these years no evidence of a slippery slope, or of a disturbed relationship between doctors and patients.”

I believe that as free human beings, people must have the autonomy to decide or control their own body. Why can’t people have the full right over their body, if everyone has only one chance to live their life? Why should they be forced to live with unspeakable pain? Why does any human being have to live such a life, filled with pain, discomfort, indignity, misery, and fear? No one should be deprived of their just right to decide what to do with their body. Doctor Kevorkian is not a Neo-Nazi. He wasn’t mindlessly murdering patients, but helping to end the suffering of patients. His patients accepted an offer of physician assisted suicide, and he merely carried out what he promised.

As Hill, Admiraal, and Dr. Kevorkian have proposed, I believe that everyone, as free human beings, should have the full right to choose how to both live their life and put an end to it.