Suicide

Suicide is the act of deliberately taking one's own life. People who attempt suicide are often trying to get away from a life situation that seems impossible to deal with. Many who make a suicide attempt are seeking relief from loneliness, rejection, guilt and burden to others etc. Suicidal behaviors may be triggered by a situation or event that the person views as overwhelming such as aging, emotional trauma, substance dependency, serious clinical and mental illness.

Most people who seriously consider suicide do not really want to die, they are calling out for help to no avail. Hence, they see suicide as a solution to a problem and a way to end their pain. People who seriously consider suicide feel hopeless, helpless, and worthless. A person who feels hopeless believes that no one can help with a particular event or problem. A person who feels helpless is immobilized and unable to take steps to solve problems. A person who feels worthless is overwhelmed with a sense of personal failure.

The urge to end one’s life comes to the godliest of us. Both Jeremiah and Job wished they had never been born (Jeremiah 20:14-18; Job 3:1-23). Jonah, Elijah, and Moses not only wished they were dead, they asked God – some even pleaded with him – to kill them (Jonah 4:3,8,9; 1 Kings 19:4; Numbers 11:14). So did Job (Job 6:8-9; 14:13). Jesus feels for everyone suffering this devastating oppression. The exalted Son of God knows and understands. Thus, the question is will God forgive someone for committing suicide? I believe so if He is truly a God of love, mercy and compassion.

Relatives of people who seriously attempt or complete suicide often blame themselves or become extremely angry, seeing the attempt or act as selfish. However, when people are suicidal, they often mistakenly believe that they are doing their friends and relatives a favor by taking themselves out of the world. These irrational beliefs often drive their behavior.

What really matters most in life? Human life or human rights

What really matters most or rather more in life? Everyone knows that human life is precious. So, is it more valuable than anything else? What matters more… human life or human rights? Is life more valuable than the standard upon which a democracy is founded? Compromising human rights for human life and vice verse… Is protecting democracy more important than protecting human life? Why do some people give up their lives fighting for democracy?

Matters of life and death are often the conflicting points of view in dealing with what matters most. Our stances may change significantly when issues such as abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, animal experiment, human torture becomes our accountability. The atypical thing is that most of these controversies are concerned mainly with the visible consequences.

Much of these disputes such as abortion are about whether or not it is consider murder, whether a fetus is a human being, when it is viable, and if the woman should have the choice to end her pregnancy. Those supporting capital punishment argue that society is justified in taking the life of a murderer. Hence if a woman aborts her child, is she not a murderer and the gynecologist not the accomplice? The opponents believe that justice should not involve revenge or capital punishment. Then again, what is justice to the victims?

In deciding euthanasia in both its active and passive forms, should extreme measures be taken to keep a vegetating body alive? Should an intensely suffering human being be allowed to end his life if he wishes to do so? Can doctors make such a decision? Can doctors decide that certain human beings are of less value such as the handicap, infirmity, elderly etc and therefore it was not unethical to experiment on and to “kill” them? Incidentally, most serial killers in the world happened to be doctors. Even the Hippocratic Oath, formulated in the Declaration of Geneva in 1948 is no longer part of the teaching and of the graduating ceremony of the Medical Schools in most universities.

Philosophy defines ethics as what is good for the individual and society and establishes the nature of duties that people owe themselves and one another. Though law often embodies ethical principals, law and ethics are far from co-extensive. Many acts that would be widely condemned as unethical are not prohibited by law such as lying or betraying. While the Hippocratic code was founded to ensure that medicine would remain true to its purpose of healing and promoting health but not death, nonetheless it has undermined the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the anti-life laws in many countries. How about the lives of animals? Do we have the right to make animals suffer to prove a hypothesis?

Perhaps abortion is not just a matter of killing bodies from the fear of unwanted pregnancies; is it not denying oneself and the unborn self the opportunity of working out ties that have been made in the past? Could we actually be increasing our burdens by assuming that we will never undergo the consequences of previous and present thoughts and actions? Again, what guarantee do we have that ending the life of a criminal's body will end the life of the other aspects of his being? The criminal tendencies of his thought-life may very well continue to influence others who are sensitive to them.

In the case of euthanasia, our hearts may go out to the needless pain and suffering of a person who is beyond recovery. The key point is who knows what an entity needs? Suppose we are here to learn and grow, materially and spiritually. By having a person leave his body before his time, we may be taking something he needs away from him. On the other hand, by keeping the body perfunctorily "alive," are we trying to give him something he does not need? If we were to approach all these issues with the law of cause and effect in mind, we might realize that in many cases both abortion and euthanasia are only postponing certain effects and not eliminating the problem. Is this really in the best interests of the people concerned?

Nothing can happen to one without affecting all the others. Causes and effects influence us not only on the physical plane, but also on the astral, psyche, mental, intuitional and spiritual levels. The greatest mistake we can make is to think that we can do anything as it only concerns ourselves. In truth, we are connected in so many intricate ways that our actions have a domino effect across the board. By focusing our attention on only material causes and visible effects, we are missing a great deal and may very well make things worse. Most people would agree that physical causes have physical effects, especially since they can see the immediate consequences. Yet by the same reasoning, non-material causes should have effects on non-material levels, even though they are invisible. We have lots more to deal with the outcome of a diversity of the invisible as it affects much more than our visible selves. What matters is not only matter but it shapes our thoughts and acts accordingly.

There is a lot of suffering in this world at so many different levels but how can suffering be a catalyst for transforming our lives. Painful experiences can make us question the way we have been living. They are a wake-up call. There is a moment of clarity where you know what is important to you especially when you know your time on earth is limited for the view from the edge of life is a lot clearer than most of us have. They make people think more deeply about things and ask themselves “What is important? What really matters? How do I want to spend my days and What matters?" These questions can change our lives and the lives of people around us. Nobody is ever going to said, "If I die, I'm going to miss my BMW" What really matters is who you have touched on your way through life, who has touched you and cared deeply, and what you are leaving behind as your legacy in the hearts and lives of those around you. There is meaning in everything we do. Most of us live far more meaningful lives than we know. Only a sense of meaning can satisfy whatever emptiness in us. At the end of life, when people look back to see what matter, it will not be what they bought and what they owned. It is about what they reaching out and helping others. It is all about the love they gave and received… one heart at a time.

What matters most in life is different for each and every one of us. We all have our own unique and individual priorities, priorities that define us for who we are and what we stand for. What will matter is every act of integrity, compassion, courage or sacrifice that enriched, empowered or encouraged others to emulate your example. What will matter is not your memories, but the memories that live in those who loved you. What will matter is how long you will be remembered, by whom and for what. Life is not a matter of circumstance but of choice. Choose to live a life that matters.

Is brain death still life?

In 1968, Harvard Medical School changed the definition of death. It no longer based on cardiac and circulatory arrest but on a flat electroencephalogram. Electroencephalography is useful but not essential in determining brain death. It amounted to a radical change in the conception of death. The Catholic Church has also implicitly accepted this definition of death but with many reservations.

The scientific justification lies in the definition of the nervous system that casts doubt precisely on the fact that the brain causes the disintegration of the body. Since then, the organ indicative of death is the brain, no longer the heart. Before the invention of life-support systems, brain death always led quickly to death of the body. With new technology patients who were dead could still have a heartbeat and gave the false impression that they were very much alive while kept on a ventilator, giving hope to grieving families that the person may suddenly wake up. This false hope sometimes prevents their families from donating their organs but it may also be prompted by a specific interest i.e. the need for organs transplants.

Hence, ethical considerations are crucial to defining criteria for brain death, which in most countries must be met before efforts to extend life may be ended. Such criteria include deep coma with a known cause, absence of any brainstem functions and the exclusion of hypothermia, drugs, and poison as causes. Organ donors must therefore be declared brain-dead before their organs may be removed for transplant. These considerations obviously give rise to new bioethical problems for the Catholic Church. An interesting question is when can life support be legally end and who will play God? Although this is one of life's most painful experiences, it also can be a rich time of expressions of love and gratitude.

Euthanasia and Advanced Medical Directive

Euthanasia is the intentional termination of a person’s life, usually but not always at that person’s request, and typically in the context of terminal illness and grave suffering. Arguments in favour of euthanasia revolve around matters of the patient’s autonomy, the quality of life, unnecessary suffering, maintaining the patient’s dignity in the dying process, use of medical equipments to prolong needless suffering, the legal implication and regulating procedures to provide quality assurance for current practice and responding to changing public and professional attitudes about euthanasia. Arguments against euthanasia rotate around respect for human life, the likelihood of coercing a person to request euthanasia, the possibility that the patient is not fully competent or informed about his/her prognosis, conflicts of interest, proper and effective procedures used, the possibility of diagnostic errors or related medical incompetence, spiritual beliefs in the sacredness of life and danger of embarking upon a ‘slippery slope’ once euthanasia is accepted as a viable option. Alas, even the Church has an "extraordinary clause"!

The subtle choice available is the Advanced Medical Directive whereby a person signed in advance to indicate that he/she does not wish to have any extraordinary life sustaining treatment to prolong life in the event if he/she is terminally ill and is comatose. Under the Act, AMD can only be executed when a patient is certified with a terminal illness, needing life support and not capable of making rational judegment. With AMD, a patient with terminal illness will receive only palliative care and medication.

Do AMD and euthanasia have much in common? Is it just a different way to end life - one legally and the other illegally?