I: The Good Death:
Texts:
- Brockopp,(See passages below) the-good-death-in-islamic-law-1
- Ann Neumann, The Good Death,
- Ann Neumann Interview Youtube
- Allow me to Die: Euthanasia in Belgium.
- End Credits. Documentary.
- The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens: The Queen vs Stephen Dudley
* Jakob’s translation of article in Danish newspaper. Thank you, Jakob. translation-kan-et-barn-selv-vaelge-livet-fra-belgien-bryder-endnu-et-tabu-om-aktiv-dodshjaelp-1
* “The Good Death in Islamic Law.”
- “in modern hospital environment, focus on these concerns can result in a utilitarian approach to saving and taking life, one that leaves little room for the primary considerations of Islamic theology: the respect owed a human person, body, and soul, as a ‘trust’ (amana) from god…. God’s essential role as giver and taker of life.” p. 177
- “… killing a patient who has no hope of recovery is not an allowable decision according to Islamic law: not for the sake of the doctor, not for the ease of the patient, nor for the patients themselves.” ….” Human life is a trust which human beings are required to preserve, along with preservation of their bodies so as not to case themselves into perdition…. Human beings are forbidden from suicide in the strongest terms…”
- “Whereas western secular ethicists have defended a ‘right to die’ out of an argument for human dignity, Islamic theology tends to see human dignity as residing in the believer’s relationship to god”…” Human life is not inherently valuable, rather it is valuable because it is a trust from god.” The moment of death therefore gains its meaning from this larger scheme….
- AS with the pre-Islamic ideas of fate, the hour of death is fixed and can not be resisted.”
Optional Readings
- New Yorker, The Death Treatment, June 2015. “De Wachter believes that the country’s approach to suicide reflects a crisis of nihilism created by the rapid secularization of Flemish culture in the past thirty years. Euthanasia became a humanist solution to a humanist dilemma. “What is life worth when there is no God?” he said. “What is life worth when I am not successful?” He said that he has repeatedly been confronted by patients who tell him, “I am an autonomous decision-maker. I can decide how long I live. When I think my life is not worth living anymore, I must decide.” He recently approved the euthanasia of a twenty-five-year-old woman with borderline personality disorder who did not “suffer from depression in the psychiatric sense of the word,” he said. “It was more existential; it was impossible for her to have a goal in this life.” He said that her parents “came to my office, got on their knees, and begged me, ‘Please, help our daughter to die.’ ”… …. “Herman De Dijn, a Spinoza scholar, responded. He cautioned Tom that the Belgian media would not be receptive to his opinion. De Dijn, an emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Leuven, said that Godelieva’s story sounded like “utopia realized: everything is neat and clean and terrible.” He was troubled by the way that his colleagues’ theories about autonomy seemed to have stiffened into ideology, a mentality that the euthanasia law both reflected and encouraged. “Once the law is there, you have people asking themselves new questions,” he told me. “Do I really have quality of life? Am I not a burden on others?” He believed that “human dignity should include not only respect for personal choices but also for connectedness to loved ones and society.” He worried that the concept had been “reduced to the ability to have certain experiences.”….“I am afraid that the notion of ‘free will’ has become dogma, behind which it is easy to hide,” he wrote. “Wouldn’t it be better to invest in mental health and palliative care?”
- Dignity Co. and
- FT on the company.
- lifes-dominion-review.
- John Wallach, “Dignity: The Last Bastion of Liberalism” review article in Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism and Development , Vol 4, no 2, Summer 2013, pp. 313-328.
- “Human Dignity and Bioethics” (President’s Council on Bioethics, 2008);“Stupidity of Dignity” (New Republic, May 2008).
- Stefanie Hennette-Vauchez, “A Human Dignitas? Remnants of the ancient Legal Concept in Contemporary Dignity Jurisprudence,” International Journal of Constitutional Law vol 9, Issue 1, pp. 32-57.
- http://icon.oxfordjournals.org/content/9/1/32.full
- Habermas, “The Concept of Dignity and the Realistic Utopia of Human Rights,” inMetaphilosophy, Vol. 41. NO. 4 (July 2010), pp. 464-480.
- brain-death-and-islamic-traditions
- The Problem of Human Dignity: A phenomenological Approach.
- Human Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw
- Alone in Chinatown. Atlantic documentary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJRx4QkoI1Q
- Jordan Paust, “The Human Right to Die with Dignity: A Policy Oriented Essay” in Human Rights Quarterly 91995), Vol.17, NO.3, pp.463-487
- Ronald Dworkin, Life’s Dominion: An Argument Abortion, Euthanasia, and Individual Freedom (New York: Vintage, 1994) Chapter 7, pp.179-217.
dignityindignity 
I really enjoyed discussing the topic of Euthanasia and how it differed in different cultural and religious contexts, specifically the Islamic traditions against the liberties in Belgium. It was interesting to learn about ‘Imanat.’ and how perhaps our own life is not ours to take. How our lives have been entrusted to us and thereby it is our responsibility to take care of. It brings about a larger discussion on the idea that the body is not in the property of the individual, but a gift entrusted by god, wherein we must return it in better or the same condition we received it in.
LikeLike
While I understand the complexity of euthanasia and the opposing arguments it raises, I personally support the idea of institutionalizing it. Putting the extreme cases aside (terminal illness, physical incapacity, etc.), I believe that any person should be able to choose to safely end their life, if they trust there to be no alternative. However, I do believe there should be a thorough process enforced for such a decision, in order to minimize the amount of deaths due to plausible impulsive decision-making, when major impairment of physical or mental health is not in question, and prevent exploitation of the act. Additionally, I support the idea of child euthanasia, however, I believe it should be limited to untreatable disease/disability-related cases and only to those in possession of capacity of discernment.
I consider the idea of euthanasia closely tied with self-dignity: if we are truly in possession of our own lives, we should be able to make an informed decision of ending it as well, on our terms and without the risk and stigma generally associated with suicide.
LikeLike
In Islam, suicide and assisted suicide are prohibited because your life is given to you by god to take care of as long as you live. You cannot end it on your own terms as it isn’t yours to take. When it comes to euthanasia laws in Belgium, I don’t think it is ‘liberal’ to teach kids at a young age that they have it as an option. Giving people the option, when it’s not discussed in the sense of terminal illness, especially kids, makes them consider it with every small inconvenience, even when it could be solved in much easier ways.
LikeLike
From how I grew up and in many other cultural settings, the meaning of life is derived in a transcendental sense that it is either the gift or trust of god or something beyond our control. So the thought of one ending their own life at their discretion is scrutinized, and, the discussion around it is tabooed. The perception of ‘hope till the last breath’ held keeps the thought of the right of ending life willingly away. With the legislation of euthanasia, people and societies break this barrier and acknowledge the end of life in a dignified way for people who are in dire necessity of unbearable suffering. With terminally ill people in incurable states, the alleviation of suffering can be made accessible but the problem of interpretation of suffering seems to overstretch the terms of euthanasia making people victims of their emotions, at times. Widespread suicide in a society is in a sense the failure of the society, as people are widely alienated in that society.
I don’t feel it is legible to put psychological distress in the same box as physical suffering. People’s distress could often overshadow their outlook making them drawn closer and closer towards the thought of ending life, but the state they are in could still be curable. When euthanasia is made increasingly accessible in cases of psychological distress, it seems to make it easier for people to derive the conclusion that ending life is the way to go before considering the choice of cure. It feels empowered as a self to have the choice of ending our lives with dignity. If I really own my life the thought that I have to be allowed to dispose of it seems logical in hindsight but, we also can’t disregard the ramifications of these individual actions in society.
LikeLike
The concept of euthanasia can be very complex and I don’t think there needs to be a firm yes or not, but it should be situational. Individual suffering with terminal illnesses, incurable diseases, other physical ailments, should be allowed euthanasia on the simple basis of avoiding pain. However, I still believe in the sanctity of human life and I don’t think its “liberal” to teach children about euthanasia. The implications of establishing euthanasia as an “option” is very nihilistic and I believe, detrimental to society. If we define being “liberal” as freeing or autonomous, then euthanasia is not “liberal.” My personal philosophy aligns more with Albert Camus who argues that suicide is actually the rejection of freedom. Being allowed to kill yourself is not a right, you can do it, but I do not think the state has to protect it or even enforce it. I think the consequence of possible exploitation in legalized euthanasia is more pressing than the consequences of not having it. We do not live in a society where we can feasibly prevent euthanasia or suicide, it will happen anyways; there is no real benefit to institutionalizing it, and I think it will harm the greater society. We should instead focus on creating a community that supports each other and can actually help with the “will to live” especially for marginalized groups like the elderly or people with mental/phyical health issues.
LikeLike
In Islam euthanasia, as an act of suicide is considered to be a sinful act. It is believed that we do not possess our own life, cannot actually participate in its creation and consequently, life does not have any inherent value. Its dignity comes from the belief, that life is a trust from God, that we have to protect during our lives on Earth. We have no jurisdiction to end it since this decision is in the hands of God. By artificially breaking this bond, we break our connection with God. Another very interesting point made, is the question of life support machines. While the stance is not that unanimous when it comes to extended end-of-life care, many believe keeping a person alive artificially by machines when they are beyond recovery can be thought of as an infringement of the trust received by God too. In a sense, decisions about our life are externally decided by entities that do not share the same experiences.
The reforms around euthanasia in Belgium were prompted specifically by this idea, in order to regain some independence and allow freedom of choice so as to create our own dignity on our own. In a time when a country was trying to slowly reject their religious roots, they came to the conclusion: How could a God that is so distant know what is best for us? And if God could not assess our situation, why should we still uphold patriarchy by strictly relying on the opinion of the male-dominated medical scene? Therefore, they adopted the most liberal euthanasia law, which allows assisted suicide in a wide range of situations. Let it be a terminal illness, constant psychological distress or any other chronic illness, people of any age can request euthanasia given they would otherwise have to endure unstoppable suffering.
Naturally, the law was proven to be very controversial, and because of legislative shortcomings, its ambiguity is often criticized. In addition, the process by which the applications are approved (retrospectively, by an ethics committee that includes physicians actively practising euthanasia cases) caused backlash as well, not to mention the complete disinvolvement of families by citing privacy issues. In general, the whole law raises several questions about the freedom and right to dignity of the individual, and the obligations and liberties of the individual to their society and vice versa.
LikeLike
The laws on euthanasia in Belgium are more liberal than anywhere in the world with the Netherlands being close. As discussed in the New Yorker article the victory of Humanist movement in the last 30 years considers the right to die a great achievement against the Catholic church.
Personally, the law seems too relaxed in its definition of suffering and eligibility to euthanasia. Especially, with the new legislation allowing children to be euthanized. Does a general practitioner have a right to be an agent in assisted suicide and is their judgement indisputable?
Let us look at the case of Adelin who had dementia and prior to its development had expressed his wish to leave this world. The decision by the ethics committee was, in the end, to stop his treatment and let Adelin pass on his own. This seems to align well with the concept of passive euthanasia in islamic law, in which it is allowed due to it being god’s plan. They could not be certain of Adelin’s intentions yet they persisted to push the idea of dying to him. This feels morally wrong to me.
If Belgians believe it is a right to be knowledgeable of euthanasia there should be, to the same extent, done some work on demonstrating the alternative. If they consider the person to be euthanized in full control of their decision they should not be suggestive nor judgmental at the same time. From the documentaries and the article it seems as if the practitioners are encouraging patients to have euthanasia. This a dangerous ground to abuse of the law. Even though, the officials say there have been no cases of law abuse, some activists like Tom, have demonstrated the flaws of the Ethics board.
Euthanasia is being reviewed after it has been administered despite the relatively low number of cases. Those on the committee are also practicing it, and some of them have and active social movement for euthanasia. They seem to be biased to be judging on the legality of the matter.
LikeLike
This week’s discussions centered around the topic of euthanasia and how it’s viewed in different cultures/religions. In’ The good death is islamic law’ we see how life is seen as an Amaanah (property) from God and only God has the right to take it away and since in Islam, one’s dignity lies in their relationship with God, preserving one’s own life is of great importance.
In contrast to this, the documentaries present a contradictory view. With seemingly more liberal laws, countries like Belgium believe in the right to a “dignified” death. Individuals have the free choice to decide whether they want to continue living or free themselves from the sufferings in this world. The documentaries mainly focused on individuals with health concerns but liberal views prevalent in countries like Belgium allow any individual to end their life.
I see myself leaning more towards the Islamic perspective on euthanasia as I believe the gift of life is a precious one and if every individual has the choice to take away their own life, life would lose all it’s meaning since pain and suffering are all a part of it.
LikeLike
I think one of the interesting things to consider when talking about assisted suicide is how do we know that it makes things better for the individual committing it. As in who ever came back from the dead and said, “you know, dying is better”. Another thing which crossed my mind was it is one thing that someone asks to die, but what place do the doctors who perform these procedures have in the entire chain of events? What gives them a right, or a responsibility for that matter to take away someone’s life. I am only asking this partly because I am worried, as I saw in the documentary, that doctors may start prescribing suicide as an option and normalising it. At that point it stops being the idea of the patient but rather the recommendation of the expert. And how can we tell the two apart.
LikeLike
Life in many cultures is not considered something that is yours, but rather a gift from god and that has lead to a lot of controversy regarding things like abortion or euthanasia. As a Catholic, the church is often seen as regulating when life begins because of this view, but also in a religion such as Islam life is a trust that has been given to you by god in order to not only respect but to be grateful for, and in order for you to be grateful for this you must maintain and do everything in your power to live a healthy life. Therefore, the Quran does not allow one to pursue a path of self destruction without consequences such as not being able to attend an afterlife like a martyr would. This is the contrasting what is occurring in Belgian where anyone can contact a physician and not only specific physicians but any ordinary one in order to have an assisted suicide. Belgium had implemented this because they believe that no one should have to live a life in pain. Therefore, most people who pursue euthanasia are doing so because they are experiencing intense pains such as migraines as seen experienced by the father in the film. These cluster headaches can be so bad that he would rather not live at all then continue to be tormented by them. I was quite suprised how easy it is to get an assisted suicide, but it seems to be done in order to prevent government interference over the bodies of people, but this directly contrasts with most of the world’s governments and religions such as Islam that I mentioned before. So does one need the ability to end one’s life in order to have dignity. Is even the destruction of one’s body and mind dignant as long as one knowingly does it through their own free will. I think that the ability to act on one’s own will is inherently related to living a life of dignity, and I think that would include the ability to end one’s own life. It’s just quite interesting that self-harm has always been a place of debate where society has tried to regulate it in relation to what they think is inherently more dignified. This debate can also be grounded in the beliefs of famous philosophers such as Kant and Hobbes. I believe that Kant would be against it solely because he saw the immense value in human life, which contrasts Hobbes who does not believe that human life has inherent value but is solely defined by one’s ability to complete or contribute something valuable to a particular society. Therefore, Hobbes would probably be in favor of euthanasia of people as long as they were a “drain” on society. These people might include addicts, the mentally ill, and the disabled who he would view as having no tangible value and thus better off gone so precious resources are not spent on their existence. I believe Hobbes would have a Eugenics based view on Euthanasia and would probaly even advocate for state-mandated euthanasia for these types of individuals. I really enjoyed reading about a extremely relevant topic that has deeply historical ties to not only religion but also the ideas of philosophers that we have been reading.
LikeLike
Suicide is a grave sin that Islam forbids. This is because God created all human life, and His divine authority to grant and take life cannot be questioned. As a result, you must take care of your body since it is a gift from God and you have no control over whether or not you die. Through these behaviors, one shows their shaky confidence in God and God’s purpose. One’s trust in God is tested during times of adversity, and in Islam, one’s dignity stems from his relationship with God.
LikeLike
In this week’s session, we talked about Euthanasia through various examples mentioned in both of the documentaries.
It is interesting to see that different people and different groups have entirely different and contradictory points of view regarding this topic. On one hand, some see Euthanasia as the “Mercy Death” and this death is always dignified because people gain their dignity through their ability to choose what they want and not be subject to the usual.
On the other hand, others consider Euthanasia as a criminal act and indignation to oneself because their dignity lies in caring for something and having a purpose in life. Moreover, life is a divine gift from God and it is considered an “Amanat” that God has trusted us with. It is therefore not our possession and Only God has the top authority of taking it away.
On a more moral level, Euthanasia can’t be approved because, as Kant mentioned, life can’t be used as a means to serve another end. Hobbes however argues that a human being’s worth and dignity are measured by his usefulness. Therefore people with incurable and painful diseases can’t be as useful to the community.
LikeLike
This week’s material was very, very, very painful for me to read/watch. Life has a funny way of orchestrating events. This morning, my grandmother was admitted to a hospital due to her condition worsening considerably. The doctors asked about euthanasia, however, since she also has dementia, she did not have the capacity to give her opinion on whether or not she wanted to. I’m not going to say more, as I don’t feel comfortable to do so, but please keep your prayers with her if you see this.
LikeLike
This week in class we have talked about the subject of euthanasia. Many people have different opinions on whether euthanasia should or should not be legal. People relate this to the dignity of death and whether death actually does have dignity and that a person cannot kill themselves because then it would be considered that the dignity of death would be gone and that there would be no more dignity in death. Some people believe that when a person kills themselves and is a subject of euthanasia all the dignity that they worked for in their lives would not be considered anymore and they would have lived a life without dignity. Brockopp believes that when there is euthanasia involved in a person’s death then they would not be dignified anymore since he believes that it would be considered as disrespectful to God since God created us and is the only one that can decide when he takes that life away. He explains that euthanasia should be illegal and not taught to younger people since he believes that life is a gift from God and that God is the only one that can give and take away the life of a human. For example, in Islam suicide is not allowed since life is considered a gift from God and is a sign of dignity from God and that our mere existence is a gift from God and that is why it is not permitted and would be disrespectful to God. On the other hand, the documentaries that we have watched disagree with Brockopp and believe that euthanasia should be legalized and they use the example of Belgium and how death and euthanasia are considered as normal thing that can be discussed. I was in a lot of shocks when I saw these documentaries since all the people in these documentaries were mentally challenged and had many diseases. Belgium legally allows people to choose between life and death. Kant believes that euthanasia should not be allowed since it opposes his views completely because he believes that each human being should be an end to himself and that it is the most important thing ever. On the other hand, Hobbes believes that the importance of a human is according to how useful they are and if a person is not useful to the community then they do not matter so he believes that euthanasia should be allowed.
LikeLike
This week we discussed an extremely controversial and contradictory topic of euthanasia? When we bring up the question of whether euthanasia should be legalized in our modern world, we come to a dead end and get stuck by the question of the dignity of death? Thus, is euthanasia an ethically-right way of facing death while remaining a dignified human being, or is it a process of dying against the will of God in the result of which the person loses his dignity?
According to Brockopp, euthanasia is believed to be completely unethical as it represents a destructive nature towards the God’s property. The fact that euthanasia should be prohibited is explained in the following way: life is a sacred gift from God, thus, God is the only one who has an authority to give and take it away. In Islam, human dignity is identified in the believer’s relationship with God, hence, human existence is viewed as dignity from God.
However, an opposing view on euthanasia is shown in the documentaries. Both of them illustrate the process of euthanasia that is legalized in Belgium. Belgium has liberal laws that allow people to make a choice between death and life. Although the cases depicted in the documentaries focus on the cases of mentally disturbed or people with a chronic condition, I was surprised how widespread the destructive nature of euthanasia within the Belgian society is, as well as, that the euthanasia rules do not imply the knowledge of the family member. I believe that legalization of euthanasia in Belgium led to the fact that death has become something normal, something that can be discussed with on a daily basis with your cueing therapist.
The moral question of euthanasia has two opposing sides. As Kant said that each human being should be treated as the end to itself, and that the price of human life is above all the prices. Thus, by making a choice of dying by the means of euthanasia and not as a result of natural death, person instrumentalizes himself and his own death, which is totally opposing to Kant’s ideas. While Hobbes argued that the worth of a human being is measured by how useful he is. Hence, people who are terminally ill, or unable to properly function in the society due to psychiatric reasons cannot be instrumentalized as they are not useful for the society.
LikeLike
I have read passages with contradicting ideas about euthanasia: religion prohibiting euthanasia in The “Good Death in Islamic Theology and Law” and the Belgian law recognizing mercy killing as dignified death in the “Death Treatment”. Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, Canada, Colombia, and Switzerland allowed assisted suicide, promoting the idea that dignified death is a human right. The people choose to euthanize themselves in order to get rid of the physical and/or mental illness and escape to a better world; to remain autonomous as people with a terminal illness can get worse over time and they choose to die independently from other people’s care as they might feel a burden; to go to another world escaping themselves. Godelieva De Troyer had a traumatic experience because of constant abuse from her parents and it passes to her attitude and behavior in raising her children, affecting all aspects of her life. She contacts the doctor ‘Death’ Distelmans and he euthanized her without telling the children. When Tom asked the reason for that, Distelmans responded that it was Godelieva’s “absolute wish” to die and not to tell the family. Moreover, Peter chooses euthanasia because of the constant headache, interfering with his life and Simmonneke decides to not live anymore to be with her daughter as her only wish in life. Some choose euthanasia due to mental illnesses, some due to physical pain, and in many cases, people simply don’t see the meaning of life anymore. Kant would’ve argued that euthanasia is wrong as the people are at the end by themselves, not as a means to the end, meaning that they cannot end their lives just because they don’t see the aim. Whatever the reason is, all of them can have a dignified death as it is a human will according to the law of the countries above.
However, Islam would argue that human beings, bodies and souls are the trust of God and only God can take it away. Religions see death as a separation of a body from the soul which can be witnessed by the angels and some individuals only, meaning that euthanasia is an intervention with God’s plan and resistance to God’s will. The case when resistance is allowed is passive resistance when the physicians are accepting God’s decree by letting the person slowly die or euthanizing the person with a dead brain. Religions don’t have the exact distinguishment of euthanasia from other types of death but Islam makes it clear that the intentions leading to the death matter the most. For instance, a martyr is sent directly to heaven, while a suicide is banished to hell because a martyr gave his life for the faith, while a suicidal person resisted God’s will by harming the trust of God. Aristotle would’ve said that suicide isn’t allowed as by hurting yourself, you are damaging society because a person is a part of a community.
LikeLike