By Dave Andrusko
We’ve run a half-dozen well-received analyses of the ominous decision by Justice Lynn Smith of the British Columbia Supreme Court that legalizes assisted suicide—or, to be more precise, “purports to create constitutional immunity for those who provide assistance to those seeking to kill themselves,” in the words of Will Johnston. I’d like to direct you to some additional commentary from a piece that ran over the weekend in the Calgary Herald newspaper which raises issues we haven’t talked enough about over the last week.
Licia Corbella’s column is filled with so many outstanding insights I feel I’m almost doing her an injustice to summarize. Let me name just two and then direct you to her column, headlined, “The Slippery Slope of Euthanasia.”
First and foremost the woman who won the case (which doubtless will eventually wind up before the Supreme Court of Canada) talked how she wanted the right to die peacefully at a time of her own choosing. Corbella keenly responds
“What’s ironic about [Gloria] Taylor’s statement is if she gets her legal right to die at the time of her own choosing, evidence shows that the right of many others to continue living will be jeopardized. That is the unintended consequence and irony behind euthanasia and PAS [physician assisted suicide]: Some people get the right to choose how and when to die and others don’t have the right to choose anything — ever again — because they will be involuntarily killed by their physicians.”
Corbella then does a brilliant job providing an overview of how this “right” has worked out in places like the Netherlands and Belgium. What almost makes your jaw drop is that Justice Smith apparently had all the studies at her disposal that demonstrated conclusively “that thousands of people have been killed without their consent by physicians,” Corbella writes,
“and yet she accepts the conclusion of pro-euthanasia experts that there is little evidence of a ‘slippery slope’ or danger to society by turning the tables on the age-old rule against the premeditated killing of another human being.”
None are so blind as those who refuse to see.
Second, Gloria Taylor suffers from Lou Gehrig’s disease. “Smith ruled that Taylor’s right to equality is violated since her disability would make it impossible for her to kill herself, which is the right of every other able bodied Canadian.” You don’t have to think very long, you don’t have to be an alarmist to figure out where that line of logic takes you.
There are countless people who have a “disability” that makes it impossible for them to kill themselves—for example, those who are in a persistent vegetative state or those who merely have Alzheimer’s or those who are paralyzed. Their “right” to assisted suicide must be honored, too. We have seen that repeatedly not just in the Netherlands (where babies who are born imperfect can now be killed with impunity) but in the United States as well.
Taylor alludes to the pain she would suffer, which none of us want anyone to go through. But as Margaret Somerville asks, “Why are we debating assisted suicide/euthanasia now when there is so much more we can do to relieve pain than was possible in the past?” Let me end with her conclusion:
“Would legalizing assisted suicide/euthanasia harm medicine and society? The answer is a clear yes. In a secular society, medicine and law are the principal institutions that carry the value of respect for life. They could no longer do so in an unambiguous way.
“If we legalized assisted suicide/euthanasia would it become the norm? Abortion gives a clue in this regard. How do we want our great-great-grandchildren to die? This is probably the most important question of all.
“So what do dying people need to make death bearable? Researchers are helping us to gain knowledge in that regard. It includes having access to good palliative care, including fully adequate pain management. But it also includes matters such as helping dying people to feel that they are respected, that they still have something to give to the rest of us, and that even when we are dying we can have a sense of hope and avoid the slough of despair.”
You can read Corbella’s column in its entirety atwww.calgaryherald.com/opinion/Corbella+slippery+slope+euthanasia/6828013/story.html
You can also read Somerville’s observations atwww.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2012/06/canadian-decision-will-inevitably-lead-to-legalizing-euthanasia/#more-15103
