SAFEGUARD P FOR LIFE-ENDING DECISIONS

  RELIGIOUS OR OTHER MORAL PRINCIPLES
  APPLIED TO THIS LIFE-ENDING DECISION

     If the patient and/or the proxies have meaningful religious connections,
they might seek an official statement from some group of religious leaders.
Such a statement might be a general statement about all such cases.
Or it might be a statement about the situation of a particular patient.

    Many religious organizations have already created policy statements
with regard to life-ending decisions.
When these seem relevant to the patient's end-of-life situation,
they can be copied and included in the documents being collected.
Such general position-statements might be relevant
for the decision-making process of the patient and/or the proxies.

    Does this moral system deal with patients in persistent vegetative state?
As PVS becomes a more common end-of-life situation,
more religious bodies will be making official statements.
Does a permanently unconscious patient still have a soul?
If the patient was in PVS for years, what is the correct date of death?
When can PVS patients be disconnected from life-supports?

    If the patient and/or the proxies are Roman Catholic,
they might want to know how Catholic ethics applies to their situation.
Does the present level of life-support constitute extraordinary or heroic care?
Or does this level of life-support constitute ordinary support
that should be provided to every patient who is dying?
Roman Catholic moral thinking is perhaps the most developed system
of religiously-based medical ethics.
These thinkers go into such matters as benefits and burdens,
ordinary and extraordinary forms of care,
what is required and what is optional,
what burdens are proportionate to the benefits
and what treatments are disproportionate for the benefits they provide.
Some thinkers even address the costs of terminal medical care.

    If your religious doctrine calls for a natural death
—not a death caused by any human action—
how does this apply to the withdrawal of food and water?
Some moral principles consider the circumstances
in which ending life-supports is a ethical option.

    Perhaps your system of beliefs holds that
certain medical procedures are against the will of God.
If some medical treatments are prohibited,
can something similar be provided to the patient
without jeopardizing his or her eternal destiny?
For example, Jehovah's Witnesses
can accept transfusions of water or artificial blood
even tho real blood or blood-products are forbidden.

    In some cases, religious bodies will not be able to settle
the question of whether or not any proposed end-of-life decision is ethical.
In such cases, the patient and/or the proxies
will have to select their sub-group of religious authorities
who interpret religious doctrine to allow the proposed course of action.
This might be described as buffet religion:
You select the doctrines that you like and you leave the rest on the table.
But at least the ethical positions you choose
are affirmed by some of the religious authorities you trust.

    As said before, this is an optional safeguard.
But the patient and/or family that wants to make a strong case
that this chosen death was a wise and compassionate decision
—taken with careful consideration of religious beliefs—
then a written statement from a religious body or authority
will be evidence of a thoro examination of the ethical and religious questions
relevant to the end of this patient's life.
The exact content of any such religious statements need not be made public.
But it might reassure strangers
that some religious or moral principles supported the life-ending decision.

    In difficult and complicated situations,
it might be wise to seek the opinions of several moral thinkers.
Your first moral consultant might recommend seeking additional opinions.
And he or she might be able to suggest particular authorities to consult.
Do they know of any individuals or groups who review medical questions?

    And, of course, if the patient and/or the proxies
have no reason to consult religious and/or moral authorities
—whether in person by consulting an ethicist
from a particular religious tradition
or by means of reading the written statements of moral principles
created by any person in authority or group of religious leaders—
they can affirm any other moral system they prefer
in fulfilling this safeguard for life-ending decisions.

    If the patient and/or proxies wish to identify
any particular set of moral principles,
they can do so in fulfilling this safeguard.
What system of moral principles have they consulted
in the process of exploring options for this end-of-life situation?
And what statements of moral principles do they wish to include
in the complete death-planning record?



HOW RELIGIOUS OR OTHER MORAL PRINCIPLES
WILL DISCOURAGE IRRATIONAL SUICIDE
AND OTHER PREMATURE DEATHS

    Probably without exception, main-stream religious groups
do not approve or condone irrational suicide.
When the self-killing is harmful, irrational, capricious, & regrettable,
the ethical principles or doctrines of most religious groups do not approve.
And when the patient who is considering an irrational suicide
consults his or her religious authority,
that body of leaders and that set of doctrines will tell the suicidal person:
"Do not kill yourself!"

    Likewise, if some relatives want to withdraw life-supports prematurely,
when they consult their religious or other moral authorities,
they will discover that a premature death is not approved:
If the death will be harmful to the patient,
based on a misunderstanding of the medical facts,
taken without exploring all the options for further treatment,
and finally tragic and regrettable,
then this was a violation of morality—a mercy-killing, not a merciful death.

      If the patient and/or the proxies have deep religious roots,
then that faith will probably help them to prevent any premature deaths.
Their religious connections might help them to re-examine
all of their reasons for considering a chosen death.
And if and when the religious authorities have been satisfied,
the patient and/or the proxies can carry forward their end-of-life plans
with the blessing of that religious faith.

    Non-religious ethical principles can serve the same function:
For example, main-stream, secular medical ethics
can also help the patient and/or the proxies to separate
medical choices that would result in premature death
from medical choices that would result in death at the best time.

    In theocratic societies, the religious authorities must be consulted.
The religious authorities (individuals or groups of religious leaders)
will approve or disapprove of the life-ending decision.

    In secular societies, the patient and/or the proxies choose
which religious morality (if any) to follow
or which system of moral principles to use in making end-of-life decisions.

    Almost any system of morality will prevent some premature deaths.

    And even beyond morality,
there are usually laws against killing other people.
How do moral and legal principles apply to this proposed death?


Created January 2007; revised 2-13-2007; 3-15-2008; 5-28-2008; 2-6-2010; 5-19-2010;
5-21-2011; 12-16-2011; 1-29-2012;
2-11-2012; 2-22-2012; 3-23-2012; 8-2-2012; 8-22-2012; 12-6-2012;
5-23-2013; 6-27-2013; 7-4-2014; 5-8-2015; 11-7-2018; 1-11-2020;

When chosen by the patient and/or the proxies,
some religious or moral principles might be brought to bear
on the end-of-life choices to be made. 
This discussion of applying moral thinking to medical decisions
is Safeguard P in How to Die: Safeguards for Life-Ending Decisions:
"Religious or other Moral Principles Applied to this Life-Ending Decision".
See a related chapter:
God Will Decide When Life Will End:
We Should Not 'Play God'

Go to the Catalog of Safeguards for Life-Ending Decisions

Go to the list of 26 recommended safeguards.

Go to the index page for the Safeguards Website.


Go to the Right-to-Die Portal.


Go to the beginning of this website
James Leonard Park—Free Library