Not surprisingly I have been asked by a number of people what I think about the Supreme Court ruling regarding the ‘Right to Die’ legislation. This is a topic I have thought about often, but I confess not deeply, for many years. I remember asking at a National meeting, this was years ago, if the United Church could not come out with a statement regarding end of life decisions. The response, which I appreciated then and still do was, “In the United Church we believe in individual moral culpability. It is up to the individual to make these difficult choices. The church will not tell them what to do but will support people in their choices.”
In September, 2012 the United Church Observer, our national magazine had a cover article on Gloria Taylor a United Church member who was an ALS patient and who was described in the article as a “right-to-die rebel”. Gloria died of natural causes soon after the article came out and long before the legislation change came about on Friday.
My main response to the decision is that we need to develop good parameters and be clear about how the process will unfold. Also, we need to be supportive of our medical professionals who commit themselves to keeping people alive and well and who now will have to engage in serious ethical reflection as to how to move forward.
This conversation brings up theological reflection too. We value life, we treasure life as a gift from God. At what point do we make a decision that ends life? How do we reconcile that choice with our beliefs? It is can be a very layered decision.
Navigating the discussion going forward will require leadership. I am reminded of a comment by Henri Houwen, “In it’s highest sense leadership is integrity – integrity recognizes external obligations but it needs the quiet voice within, not just the clamour without.” As the leaders and decision-makers in our country move forward I will pray that they exercise leadership, a leadership that recognizes both the external obligations and the internal voice.
