by Susan Brinkmann, OCDS
Staff Writer
(May 9, 2008) A British town is providing people of all ages with a “right to die” card instructing doctors not to treat them if they become incapacitated due to accident or illness. Pro-life groups are protesting the cards, calling them a move toward legal suicide.
A first of its kind in the UK, residents of the town of Salford can now visit their local library to pick up an Advanced Decision to Refuse Treatment (ADRT) card. Anyone wanting a card must fill out a detailed statement saying what treatments they don’t want to receive in the event of a disaster. The statement is then kept by a family member of GP.
David Entwistle, Salford Council’s head of social work, said the cards are a way of allowing people to make an “informed decision” on their treatment.
“The idea is that people will make an informed decision – when they have the capacity to make such a decision – about serious medical treatment,” Mr. Entwistle told the BBC. “Once this statement has been made it is legally binding until the person makes another decision when they have capacity.”
The concept has received sharp condemnation from pro-life groups. “It’s moving toward your legal right to suicide which is something that used to be completely illegal,” said Josephine Quintavalle, a founding member of the Pro-Life Alliance, told the Salford Advertiser.
“It’s quite sinister that people are being encouraged to make these decisions now and carry these cards choosing the right to die,” she said.
The problem with the cards is the same as that of Living Wills which require a person to check off the kind of health care services they wish to refuse in the event of a catastrophic illness. These forms are often filled out without the benefit of discussing treatment options with medical professionals. As a result, the person cannot fully analyze the consequences of checking a block on the form.
For instance, some forms refer to a “terminal” illness without specifying what the illness actually is. The person filling out the form may interpret “terminal” illness to mean something like a permanent vegetative state and decide they don’t want to receive antibiotics or feeding tubes. However, in medical language, a “terminal” illness refers to a wide range of conditions such as heart disease and diabetes that people can live with for years with proper treatment.
An even more sinister consideration is the fact that the whole concept behind advanced directives such as living wills and the new “right to die” card was invented by pro-euthanasia groups.
“The ‘living will’ was originally invented in 1967 by two groups, the Euthanasia Society of America and the Euthanasia Education Council, and was touted as a first step in gaining public acceptance of euthanasia,” writes Nancy Valko, R.N., spokesperson for the National Association of Pro-life Nurses and a past co-chair of the St. Louis Archdiocesan Pro-Life Committee.
“These groups have been struggling for years to get ‘mercy killing’ bills — which would allow doctors to give disabled or dying patients lethal overdoses — passed in various state legislatures. The ‘living will’ opened up the new strategy of an incremental death.”
Making cards available to young, healthy people who are not aware of the many pitfalls to be found in these kinds of advanced directives is not only controversial, it could end up costing lives.
Many believe the city’s money would be better spent saving lives, rather than endangering them.
“It’s quite sad to think that you can now carry cards stating your right to die,” said Quintavalle. “You have to wonder why public money is being spent on things like this.”
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly/Women of Grace. http://www.womenofgrace.com
Listen to the experts explain what you need to know about end-of-life care in “End of Life Care: What You Don’t Know Can Kill You” available for only $5 in our store.
Women of Grace Study Questions
1) Under what conditions does the Church permit the withholding of life-sustaining medical treatments? (See No. 2278 in The Catechism of the Catholic Church.)
2) Cases such as Terri Schindler Schiavo drew public attention to the fact people who are not dying can be legally put to death by denying them food and water simply because this sustenance is delivered by a feeding tube and therefore considered a “medical treatment.” What does the Church have to say about this? (See the 2004 statement by Pope John Paul II on Life Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative States avaialable here: http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2LIFSS.HTM )
