What is the dictionary definition of euthanasia?
The word “euthanasia” used in a medical context refers to an easy, painless, happy death, during which it was a “physician’s responsibility to alleviate the ‘physical sufferings’ of the body.”
The ethical problem with this definition, from a non-religious point of view, is found in the word “happy”.
– Who guarantees that the person will be happier dead than alive?
– Even the patient cannot know what lies on the other side of death. He or she can’t choose a “happiness” that is not guaranteed. It is unethical for one to desire that which conflicts with natural law. Nature has a time and a means for each of us to die. In choosing euthanasia we’re assuming greater authority over life and death than nature. If humans can have greater authority over life and death than nature, how do we explain that human beings can reproduce naturally or with medical assistance, but cannot create life out of nothing?
– Reproduction technology such as in vitro fertilization (IVF) replicates nature. Therefore, the laws that govern life are built into nature, not man or his technology.
How many forms of euthanasia are there?
We can identify 3 types of euthanasia.
- voluntary euthanasia (euthanasia performed with the patient’s consent).
We cannot govern when and how we are conceived; how can we determine when and how we are to die? Man is naturally oriented toward the greater good. If he or she chooses euthanasia, it’s because he or she has become convinced that death is a greater good than life. But why?
Mental health professionals will tell us that a person who commits suicide is unstable. Is the person who allows another to kill him, emotionally stable? What is the difference, between me holding the gun to my head and me handing to another person a lethal injection and passively allowing him to inject a deadly chemical into my blood stream?
People who are advanced in years, or very ill, may desire death. Usually, they don’t desire to be killed. There’s a big difference between yearning for the end of suffering and paying a medical professional to end his suffering by killing him. The emotional stability of those who give a medical professional the authority to kill them can, and should, be questioned. Is this not abdicating one’s right to experience the human condition? Is this truly choosing to end pain or feelings of neglect, or is it taking the quick way out, so a not to deal with pain or old age, especially if the senior feels abandoned by his loved ones?
If the older person feels that life is not worth living, there has be a process that led him or her to this conclusion. What is that process? Is this valid reasoning? There are many false conclusions derived from false premises. These constitute invalid reasoning.
3.
Franciscans of Life 
Thank you Br. JR. God bless you. Continued prayers for you, your family & Community.
Pax et Bonum