Euthanasia debate: Autonomy at all costs?

The founder of the International Association for the Philosophy of Death and Dying has recently written on what he calls a new and different approach in the case for assisted dying. ^[1]

He says: “I believe that a type of freedom we can call freedom over death – that is, a freedom in which we shape the timing and circumstances of how we die – should be central to this conversation.”

He is pointing to what is indeed a more recent direction in the arguments for euthanasia laws. It used to be all about compassion – having compassion on those who are suffering in the painful process of dying from a terrible disease such as cancer.

It’s a hard case to argue against, especially for Christians, and especially for those who have seen a loved one suffer. I have spoken to many Christians who are moved by the argument from compassion. (There are still reasons to oppose euthanasia laws, but it’s a strong argument.)

Personal autonomy

Now, however, the arguments are far more about personal autonomy. That is what has led many of the legal debates, and it is probably what actually convinced people to pass the laws.

Doesn’t that just characterise our age? Compassion did not actually move people enough to change the law. But the idea of autonomy, that I have the right to decide everything for myself, that is what made the difference.

Selfishness works.

Choice

And it probably moves you, too. You might think: "I don’t want to end up dependent and entirely passive. I don’t want to be in a hospital bed, unable to get up, unable to toilet myself or perhaps even feed myself." This is something that moves modern people.

Most of us probably think: "I have no fear of death, but I do fear the process of dying – so I would like to have the choice. After all, I am in control of so much else in my life. If I’m educated and middle class [the people who are driving the debate] then I have choice over a huge amount. I can choose my career and my job. I can choose where I live. I choose my friends. I can choose not to suffer."

Even those of us who restrict ourselves to a Christian ethical code have, and exercise, a massive amount of choice in life.

And those who follow a "progressive" agenda exercise even more choice, to the point of asserting the absolute right to self-definition. It is not surprising that a bill that appears to be based on that right – to choice and autonomy – has been carried in so many parts of the Western world.

Concluding thoughts

It is the triumph of the Enlightenment, of Kant and Nietszche and their intellectual descendents. It is the triumph of pure individualism, where nothing – even death – is allowed to be sovereign over my decisions. It is a delight in independence and the power to decide.

It is those who are dependent, vulnerable and weak who will pay the price of the independence of the strong; the great numbers around the world where euthanasia laws have been carried who are being killed without consent, or feel pressured into agreeing, or see that those around them no longer think their lives are worth living.

And do not be fooled; no matter how powerful and independent you feel now, that could easily be you one day.

For in the end, we are all dependent on each other. It is impossible to be entirely independent, and it’s a particularly negative way to live if you try to be.

And the effort to impose it upon more and more areas of life is leading to a nihilistic world; it is a world of loneliness and lack of connection with others.

It is not surprising that it is becoming a world of anxiety and depression and fear. It is making it – more and more – the world of those who dwell in darkness and the shadow of death.

But a light has shone on that world, and the world desperately needs it. That will be the only answer to nihilism. There is hope, and those who live with a hope are going to become more and more different. So let us pray that people will ask us for its reason.

1. Aeon.co