euthanasia Archives

April 13, 2026April 11, 2026

Purpose in Life and Euthanasia

One of the greatest challenges in life is to know why we exist. For Christians, our existence has a clear purpose. The book of Job offers a clear picture of the war between good and evil, and Jesus Christ taught His followers that they would be active soldiers in that war. Ephesians 6:12 tells Christians, “We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 3:10 tells us that championing this struggle is the Church’s purpose. As a Christian, I can tell you that I have a purpose in life, and that makes my life full of meaning.

So, how do atheists explain their purpose for existing? For the young college student who is at the top of their game, the answer may be to enjoy the “survival of the fittest.” What is the answer for those who are not the “fittest”?

Noelia Castillo was a 25-year-old woman who ended her life against the wishes of her family, the Catholic Church, and the Spanish government. She spent her teenage years in a state-run foster care facility. She was sexually assaulted multiple times, including a gang rape, after which she jumped from a 5th-floor window, leaving her a paraplegic. She ended her life under a Spanish law that was intended for the elderly. Intellectuals are now debating what purpose in life she could have had.

Philosophers and psychologists can argue all they want, but the fact is, as a Christian, Noelia COULD have had a great purpose in life. How many young women in Spain have been raped or gang raped, and need to know that they can recover from that horror by someone who has been there? What influence could she have had on the Catholic Church?

In America, the debate is centered on “death with dignity.” Unless we present a purpose for living in the debate, we will never reach a real consensus. Your author is 88 years old and has his share of pain. To end my life prematurely would destroy a time in my life when I can uniquely speak to younger people about why their lives can be full of meaning. The key is to use the tools God has given all humans to make this world a better place in which to live.

Reference: The Week magazine, April 10, 2026, page 15.

March 9, 2026March 8, 2026

Euthanasia Is Not the Answer

One of the difficult questions facing all of us who are getting older is how we will die. CBN published an article on December 5, 2025, reporting that in Canada, 16,499 people have died through medical assistance. Canada’s Minister of Health, Marjorie Michel, released the Sixth Annual Report on Medical Assistance in Dying, claiming it “protected those who are vulnerable, while supporting freedom of choice and personal autonomy.” Especially interesting are the reasons the report lists for why people received a government-provided terminal injection. These include loneliness, isolation, and feeling like a burden to family, friends, or caregivers. Euthanasia is not the answer, in Canada or anywhere else.

The Bible is very clear that God considers the body sacred. First Corinthians 3:16-17 states: “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.” One of the Church’s responsibilities is to address the causes that lead people to want to end their lives. In Matthew 25:35-40, Jesus taught that His followers should care for those who are hungry, thirsty, without clothes, sick, or in prison. Acts 2:42-47 shows that the first-century Church met regularly and attended to one another’s needs.

I write this as a man who would be a candidate for euthanasia if I lived in Canada. I am 88 years old, have diabetes, severe arthritis that makes walking difficult, am in constant pain, and all my blood relatives, including my two younger brothers, have passed away. My wife of 49 years has also died, and I have remarried. Now I worry about being a burden to my second wife. I wear a “Do Not Resuscitate” necklace because I do not want to be revived if God is willing to take me home. I find joy in the ministry I have dedicated myself to for 60 years. I try to minimize the burden I place on my wife and friends, and I seek to ease their burden when I can, but euthanasia is not the answer.

The medical establishment can eliminate pain, and the Church can address everything else, allowing all of us to die with dignity. Those who reject God often have no purpose in life, and they seek answers to their mental, physical, and spiritual pain by destroying themselves. Euthanasia is not the answer. A much better solution would be to look at the evidence for God, become a Christian, and look forward to what He has prepared for us beyond this life.

Reference: cbn.com

February 17, 2026February 11, 2026

Organ Harvesting of Assisted Suicide Victims

Today, in the Netherlands and Belgium, medically assisted euthanasia is legal, and anyone opting for assisted suicide may be contacted by an organ procurement organization. The same is happening in Canada, and some groups want to bring it to the United States. When medically assisted suicide becomes legal, it seems inevitable that it will lead to organ harvesting of assisted suicide victims.

Assisted suicide advocates suggest that if someone wants to die, their organs could be used to help others. Since they are going to die anyway, why not use their parts? When a country or state allows medically assisted suicide, it’s likely that organ harvesters will follow. When lethal injections are legalized, what stops someone from exploiting the mentally ill or disturbed, especially if there are benefits involved? What prevents abuse of the poor or vulnerable? “We will pay for medical technicians to end your life if you agree to sign your organs over to us. You won’t need them, and you won’t have any final expenses.”

So far, the trend of linking assisted suicide to organ harvesting has not gained wide acceptance in the United States, but it’s not certain that it won’t. Bioethics scholar Thaddeus Mason Pope has advocated for organ procurement organizations (OPOs) to be more aggressive in obtaining organs from patients seeking medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The thought is that people who are seeking MAiD but are not terminally ill might have better organs. Instead of letting people commit suicide on their own, do it in a hospital where the organs could be harvested immediately.

The Christian belief is that every life is sacred, and we do everything possible to save lives. When society begins to treat some human lives as worthless and human bodies as commodities to be traded, where does it end? Organ harvesting from assisted suicide victims is adding grease to a slippery slope with no bottom. The consequences are disastrous for a civilized society. Do we want to live in that kind of world?

Reference: medicalfutility.blogspot.com

August 27, 2024August 26, 2024

Medical Aid in Dying and Hospice Care

One of the many issues involved in the advancement of modern medicine is what to do when a person is slowly dying and has no quality of life. Should a lethal injection be given to end their struggle? “Medical aid in dying,” or MAiD, has been accepted in Europe, Canada, and other places. As expected, there have been abuses, and for that reason, the European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that access to assisted suicide is not a human right.

Contrastingly, the Human Population Group has promoted assisted suicide and has had success in getting various American states to accept it. Now, the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association (HPNA) has announced a policy change that allows hospice nurses to participate in assisted suicide under the MAiD euphemism. The statement reads: “Nursing care for patients considering MAiD and their families is crucial to ensure that patients and families are not overtly or inadvertently disenfranchised or stigmatized as they proceed with MAiD and that they experience a safe and comfortable death, free from complications.”

This is a highly complex issue. Keeping someone alive when there is no hope of survival and no quality of life can be very expensive. Do you wipe out your loved one’s financial resources by continuing life in these situations? When a person has Alzheimer’s and doesn’t know anyone but is otherwise healthy, do you administer assisted suicide if they had requested it when they were rational? These issues touch many of us and will increase as our population ages.

Proponents of medical aid in dying argue that since we euthanize animals when they are suffering, we should extend that same option to humans. One prominent supporter of medically assisted suicide is Peter Singer, who is the DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University. Singer would not only support medical aid in dying but would require the euthanization of prisoners who have life sentences and mentally ill patients who are beyond help.

For Christians, there are grave concerns with medically assisted suicide. In 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, we read, “Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God has His home in you? If any man ruins the temple of God, God shall ruin him, for the temple of God is sacred, and that is what you are.” When hospice nurses are allowed to administer “medical aid in dying,” how long will it be before they are required to do so regardless of their religious and ethical objections?

There are no easy answers for any of us in this issue, but it seems that with modern medicine and technology, there should be an option other than giving a human a lethal injection to end their lives.

— John N. Clayton © 2024
Reference: The Life Legal Defense Foundation publication Lifeline for Summer 2024, pages 6-7.

February 21, 2024February 19, 2024

Extending Life Without Quality of Life

One of the challenges produced by the progress in medicine is the question of the role of doctors when a patient nears the time of death. In the old days, doctors had a code that said they would “do no harm,” which resulted in extending life without quality of life.

I had a personal experience with this issue when my disabled son Timothy was in the hospital after contracting COVID from a care worker. Doctors told me that Tim would never recover, but they had to give him a standard COVID treatment. Tim did survive but was not allowed to have any contact with family. He could not talk, was blind, could not stand or sit up, and could not feed himself. Eventually he was placed in a nursing home where I was allowed to visit him, and I did weekly. Although he could hear me, he was unable to respond. I read to him, tried to feed him, and ensured his stuffed animals were around him. After more than a year in the nursing home, he died.

The question in a case like Timothy’s becomes whether a doctor should be allowed to assist in dying when the apparent result was extending life without quality of life. Laws in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Canada allow doctors to administer euthanasia. The next step in these countries is to allow physicians to provide medical assistance in dying for the mentally ill. Canada has delayed the implementation of that option for physicians until 2027 to allow doctors and facilities time to adjust to this new law. Peter Singer, the DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, has advocated for euthanasia for virtually any cause.

For Christians, the issue is especially relevant. The New Testament in 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 says that God’s Spirit lives in our bodies and that the body is sacred for that reason. I Corinthians 6:15-17 uses that view to explain why prostitution is a sin. As modern medical science has advanced to the point of extending human life, it has also found ways to eliminate pain, but my son never showed evidence of suffering from pain. The problem remains of extending life without quality of life.

Euthanasia involves the same issues as abortion. Singer would empty prisons, nursing homes, and mental facilities by applying euthanasia to the people there. The fact is that much of the money spent on medical treatment is spent during the last year of life. Think of the savings if we were to eliminate everyone deemed to be within a year of dying. Do we really want to live in a culture that uses death as a means of removing a person who is inconvenient or difficult to sustain? But isn’t that what abortion is all about?

— John N. Clayton 2024

Reference: “Canada again delays assisted dying for the mentally ill” on BBC News for February 1, 2024.

May 3, 2023April 28, 2023

How to Deal with Death

One of the most significant challenges of our time is how to deal with death, and as medical science advances, the issue becomes more critical. Some project that by the year 2050, the U.S. government will spend a trillion dollars a year on millions of institutionalized Americans with Alzheimer’s and advanced stages of dementia. That is 50% more than all federal, state, and local agencies spend today on K-2 public education.

On a more personal level, Americans often spend the largest amount on medical care during the last year of life, depleting family resources and frequently leaving surviving family members destitute. I personally know of widows in our area who are living on a day-to-day basis because they spent all their savings caring for a dying husband.

Medically assisted suicide is the current trend in how to deal with death. Ending one’s life at a time and in a place of their choosing is now legal in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, and Switzerland, where it has been legal since 1942. Organizations worldwide and in the United States assist people in arranging legal medically assisted suicide.

At the moment, there are ten states and the District of Columbia that have medically assisted right-to-die programs. This trend began on November 22, 1998, when 60 Minutes broadcast a video of Michigan physician Jack Kevorkian administering voluntary euthanasia to Thomas Youk, a 52-year-old man with advanced Lou Gehrig’s disease. Oregon passed the nation’s first “death with dignity” law four years later, and other states followed after 2016.

In Canada, a person can end life as young as 18 and need not have any life-threatening illness. In 2021 over 10,000 Canadians ended their lives through state-approved euthanasia. This statistic highlights a significant “slippery slope” problem with euthanasia or assisted suicide laws. They can expand to include people who have minor mental or social struggles.

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, “It is altogether unlawful to kill oneself because life is God’s gift to man and subject to His power, Who kills and makes to live. Hence whoever takes his own life sins against God.” In 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, Paul wrote, “Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.” There is no easy answer to this question of how to deal with death. However, many of us will face the hard choices the end of life can bring.

Reference: “Putting an End to It” by Terrence Keeley in Notre Dame Magazine for Spring 2023, pages 47-50

March 14, 2023March 13, 2023

MAID Law Experiment in Canada

One of the most challenging issues today is the question of how to die. Thanks to medical advancements, a person with a terminal illness can be kept alive for a very long time with no quality of life. This has resulted in a worldwide push for the adoption of euthanasia. In 2015 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that criminalizing euthanasia violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In 2016, the Canadian Parliament passed Bill C-14, the Medical Assistance In Dying or MAID law.

In 2021, the Canadian Parliament passed a more expansive MAID law called C-7, allowing mental disorders to be sufficient grounds for euthanasia. That year, euthanasia became Canada’s sixth leading cause of death, with 10,064 deaths reported. The expanded MAID law allows people who are nowhere near death to be euthanized. Anyone experiencing dependence or feeling that their life lacks dignity is a fit candidate for euthanasia under C-7. Having to wear diapers or drooling could potentially qualify a person. In addition, persons with disabilities who can’t afford housing that would meet their needs are being euthanized.

One of the main problems with legalizing euthanasia is the “slippery slope” it creates. That is already becoming evident in Canada. The Quebec College of Physicians recently called for parents to be allowed to euthanize infants younger than one year. Nevertheless, various churches in Canada have not opposed MAID. The United Church, Canada’s largest Protestant denomination, released a statement saying, “we are not opposed in principle to the legislation allowing assistance in dying.” The Anglican Church of Canada and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada have supported MAID.

Evangelical, Pentecostal, Anabaptist, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox Church leaders, along with Jews and Muslims, have opposed MAID. Also, various disability organizations, such as the Canadian Council on Disabilities, have been vocal against the euthanasia issue.

The Canadian experiment with the MAID law should alert us that euthanasia is not the answer to what to do with the disabled or those in extreme pain. Instead, in our day of medical advances, the emphasis should be on combatting pain and allowing people with disabilities to live productive, dignified lives. Just as Jesus ministered to the poor and disadvantaged, so should we.

Reference: “Where Are the Churches in Canada’s Euthanasia Experiment?” by Benjamin Crosby, Plough magazine for Spring 2023

October 26, 2022October 25, 2022

Should We Treat an Aborted Fetus as a Deceased Person?

In 2016, when Mike Pence was governor, the state of Indiana passed a law requiring “the burial or cremation of any fetus.” The question at hand is should we treat an aborted fetus as a deceased person? Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit against the state, which went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Finally, in 2019, the court ruled that Indiana law had a legitimate interest in disposing of fetal remains.

In 2020, a group of women who had abortions in Indiana, along with abortion providers and an abortion clinic, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. They said that the requirements caused abortion and miscarriage patients “shame, stigma, anguish, and anger” because they “send the unmistakable message that someone who has had an abortion or miscarriage is responsible for the death of a person.”

In September of 2022, U.S. District Judge Richard L. Young ruled that the law violated the U.S. Constitution because it infringes upon the religious and free speech rights of people who don’t believe that aborted fetuses have any rights.

Whether we should treat an aborted fetus as a deceased person highlights the real issue in the abortion question. That is, whether or not a baby is a human before birth. Those who argue for abortion do not have scientific support for their position. The unborn child is not “an extension of the mother’s body.” Every medical attempt to define when a baby is a human fails because of the criteria used. Using brain waves, the ability to live outside the womb, the heartbeat, or when the fetus responds to outside stimuli are all arbitrary and change as technology advances.

In today’s world, having an abortion is safer than natural childbirth. The number of women who die in childbirth worldwide is vast, and even in the United States, there is a risk in giving birth. When you look at the arguments for abortion, consider how they can be applied to euthanasia for a person with age or mental issues. Some people want to use similar arguments to eliminate the cost and personal inconvenience of people at the other end of life’s journey. Ethics proponents like Dr. Peter Singer use them to justify euthanizing the mentally ill and the severely physically disabled.

Should we treat an aborted fetus as a deceased person? As our civilization embraces atheism, naturalism, and humanism, will it embrace a 100% materialistic view of human value? The recent ruling in Indiana seems to indicate that is the case.

Reference: Indianapolis Star and USA Today Network for September 30, 2022.

October 6, 2022October 4, 2022

Knowing How to Die

One of the significant challenges of living in the present age is knowing how to die. That may sound crazy, but it really is a problem. Thanks to medical advancements, people who would have died quickly and perhaps even died in their sleep are now kept alive by machines, drugs, and demands for their organs. Unfortunately, in some cases, this has caused enormous pain.

Knowing how to die has also created a whole industry ranging from medical practitioners to organizations that major in helping people die. Compassion and Choices, Zero Population Growth, and various hospice programs are involved in this issue and have publications promoting their services. Switzerland and Holland have made assisted suicide legal, and France is struggling with the problem. Some states in the U.S. have legalized doctor-assisted suicide, and other state legislatures are wrestling with the concept.

There are many challenging issues in this question. In 1 Corinthians 3:16, Paul wrote, “Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If any man defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy and you are the temple of God.” Also, in that book, in chapter 6, verses 15-20, Paul condemns prostitution for the same reason.

The human body as a special creation of God is described beautifully in Psalms 139:14. Genesis 1:26-27 tells us that we are created in the image of God, referring to our spiritual makeup and not our physical bodies. However, the vehicle God created and in which His Spirit dwells is a wonderful creation we must protect. This principle prohibits suicide when the body can continue functioning if left alone. But if the body is dying and only medical intervention keeps it alive, that is certainly not the same as natural death.

When people know they are about to die, they have many things to do. Taking care of their possessions, repairing relationships, and making provisions for the next stage of existence are all essential. What we neglect to a great degree is the one thing we all fear the most–pain. In this day of medical advancement, we should be able to control pain in the physical body. Restricting the use of drugs to relieve pain in a dying person is cruel and flies in the face of what God has told us.

Proverbs 31:4-7 makes it clear that the “strong drink” of that day was not for Kings because it would pervert their judgment. Instead, it should be “for him that is ready to perish … let him drink and remember his misery no more.” God determines when a person dies, but we can address the pain involved and leave the difficult question of knowing how to die to the Lord.

December 17, 2021December 17, 2021

Life Issues from Beginning to End

The media have recently reported on several life issues from beginning to end. Here are some examples:

The German Euthanasia Association has announced that those seeking euthanasia must produce proof of COVID vaccination to legally end their lives. This is apparently to protect healthcare workers.

In Poland, the government has passed a law requiring doctors to report all pregnancies and miscarriages to a government database. The apparent reason for this is to make sure that all pregnancies end with a birth. Unfortunately, Poland has a shortage of workers, and this seems to be the government’s solution to the issue.

Research has shown that women who use marijuana during pregnancy are more than twice as likely to have aggressive, hyperactive children with heart rate and immunity issues.

Babies have a fragrance that comes from an organic compound called hexadecanal. It is found in human skin but is abundant in a baby’s scalp. Research shows that females exposed to the fragrance become more aggressive and strong defenders of their babies. On the other hand, men exposed to it become more gentle and speak with softer voices. Evolutionists claim that this is an evolutionary survival mechanism. We would suggest this is part of God’s design of the human reproductive system.

Research on adopted children shows that some traits are common to adopted children that do not commonly appear in children who are not adopted. In the nine months of pregnancy, there is a “primal bonding that happens by biological design.” Those of us with adopted children can attest to some behavior issues that may be related to the adoption process.

God gave us the ideal arrangement for family–one man and one woman in love with each other produce children they love and care for. Unfortunately, that arrangement is not always possible. Understanding the stress and feelings involved can go a long way toward making adoption a good experience.

As we examine life issues from beginning to end, we know that every child needs a loving family, and every senior adult needs someone who loves them.

The above information is from a series of articles in The Week for December 10 and 17, 2021.