The Poet, the Pope and the Breathing Tube
The death of continues to overshadow Pope Benedict's Christmas. A breathing tube had kept the 60-year-old alive for nine years. Mr Welby died a week ago, after his doctor agreed to sedate him and remove the tube. Some commentators describe this action as "euthanasia" -- in fact, Dr Mario Riccio says he merely complied with his patient's legal right to refuse treatment. But the Vatican has argued that Mr Welby's action was tantamount to suicide and has refused his family the use of a church for a Christian burial.
On Sunday, hundreds stood in a public square outside the Welby's family church for the "lay funeral" -- not only to stand alongside the family in their time of grief, but also to stand against what many commentators in Italy regard as a cruel decision by the church. For its part, the Vatican says a church funeral could be interpreted as giving approval to Mr Welby's decision to refuse treatment. The courts legal status of Dr Riccio's intervention.
Had he lived, Piergiorgio Welby would have marked his 61st birthday today.
Comments
What a shamedul and cruel action by the church. Awful. Thoughts and prayers to the Welby family after their double tragedy.
Poor Piergiorgio. Now that the Catholic Church has shut down purgatory, he went straight to hell and unless he get's a reprieve from the big man upstairs, he's going to spend all of eternity stoking the furnaces. Hey, come to think of it, how come with so many newcomers in hell century after century, they don't don't have global warming there yet? This must be proof the earth is only 6000 years old. If man was around for a million years the way the evolutionists say, they'd really be cooking with gas down there. Why by now.... it would be....hotter than Hades :>)
Let us not criticize the Roman Catholic church’s position on this issue or make jokes about it – it is what it is – I don’t accept its’ position on this or its’ definition of when life begins so I am not surprised by its action.
End of life issues are very difficult for both doctors and caregivers, independent of the religious questions involved. I speak from the U.S. perspective when I say that one does not want the government to step in and make more bad laws. One needs to retain the freedom within one’s religious beliefs to control one’s own destiny in this matter.
My personal view is that life has ended its ‘natural’ term once permanent ‘life support’ is applied. It then becomes the patient’s responsibility to determine when and how the 'unnatural' term of one’s life is brought to its close. This might be after a period of days or after a period of many years.
Each one of us needs to decide under what circumstances one wants the ‘unnatural’ term of one’s life to end and to take steps to ensure that this decision will be carried out. It is an agonizing decision if left to doctors and caregivers.
Doctors will tend for legal reasons to do everything to prolong a patient’s life even to the extent of breaking ribs in trying to resuscitate a terminally ill patient.
Caregivers are racked with apprehension about whether they are practicing euthanasia if they ask doctors to suspend treatment.
Even in the case where a patient has a living will some doctors will ignore the instructions and caregivers will assume that the doctor (or their religious advisor) knows best.
The lesson to be learned from this unfortunate case is that each of us needs to think through the scenarios of our own death while we are able to do so. That means having a living will, having a discussion about the living will with every physician who is involved in one’s present care, and designating someone who you know has the inner strength to follow through on one’s wishes without a sense of guilt or blame for one’s death.
Even in the presence of a living will your health care proxy will be asked to sign a DNR document before the hospital board will concur with a physician’s decision to terminate treatment. One needs therefore to have an in-depth discussion with one's health care proxy to make sure (s)he understands that your death will probably occur within 48 hours of a DNR document being signed.
In the discussion with your physicians you should ask him/her to read the document in your presence, ask questions about it, and make notes on the document about what you said etc. Do this when you are well and your life is not in immediate danger.
I do not support euthanasia because I know that if one takes the proper steps each patient can have a ‘good death’ either at home or in a hospital setting. Physicians will supply sedation and a morphine pump which will bring life to its end peacefully and gracefully.
The doctor in the Italian case acted properly and morally and I'm inclined to believe that Piergiorgio Welby's God is unconcerned about Pope Benedict's belief's concerning his burial.
Sincerely,
Michael
MARK - your comments are extremely cruel. I'm sure you meant them as theological humour. You took aim, but you missed. Some subjects are not there to be the butt of your humour. Unpleasant and unhuman.
Jenny Reese #4; let me see if I've got this straight. After 9 years of enduring the pain of having to live with a breathing tube to survive, Piergiorgio Welby deceided his agony was so unendurable that he no longer wanted medical treatment so that he could be allowed to die. The Catholic Church called this suicide, a sin which they say condemns him to enternity in hell. That gave him someting to think about in his last days and hours of his life. Then the Church denied his family the use of the Church for a Christian burial which might have brought them some comfort. And you say I am the one who is cruel? The logic of that escapes me, please explain yourself.
Michael Hull #3; are you suggesting that the Roman Catholic Church is beyond criticism in this issue? Fine, let's discuss a different issue, the issue of how high officials in the Catholic Church in the US not only concealed and protected Priests they knew to be predatory pedophiles but continually moved them from one diocese to another to escape discovery and prosecution abetting them by inflicting them on group after group of unknowing children and their parents for decades. Had US laws been properly enforced instead of ignored by corrupt prosecutors, these criminals would all be spending most of the rest of their lives in prison where they belong.
Don't expect reverence for any religion from me, I was never programmed for it.
Mark
Quite right, and you didn't mention the thousands suffering and dying in Africa of AIDS partly due to the teachings of the RC church on condom use. For a reality check on the dangers of even 'moderate' religious belief check out Sam Harris
Mark wrote:
"Michael Hull #3; are you suggesting that the Roman Catholic Church is beyond criticism in this issue?"
No. It deserves strong condemnation. My point is that you can do better with your criticism than using the humor of a common comedian. I don't agree with the RC church on many of its positions but to have any hope of changing that one must offer sober, rational, and dignified criticism for reflection by those who hold the beliefs of the RC church in high esteem. That's the group you need to influence.
As I have said before I think you are an extremely well-read and thoughtful person but all of your thought processes seem directed to a form of attack that I believe is counter productive.
Mark then wrote: "Fine, let's discuss a different issue, the issue of how high officials in the Catholic Church in the US not only concealed and protected priests they knew to be predatory pedophiles ... "
This particular blog, IMHO, is about the larger issue of how individuals might deal with end-of-life issues and avoid the imposed beliefs of either their churches or their governments. We should not divert into a discussion about pedophile priests. I doubt that we differ on our views about this criminal behavior anyway.
Regards,
Michael
The Roman Catholic Church's position on end of life seems to be quite clear. The priest who gives you absolution and last rites is the last person you should ever see or you may spend all of eternity in hell. And from this report, not only is committing suicide a mortal sin which will send you to hell, so is refusing medical treatment which might prolong your life no matter how unbearable the pain of living or medically hopeless it has become. Is that their position or did I get it wrong? Contrast that with the position of a religious sect which call themselves "Christian Scientists." By their way of thinking, any medical intervention is a sin for which they'd go to hell. It is sometimes necessary for doctors to get a court order to save one of their childrens' life if they need a transfusion. They feel if their child is meant to die, it is God's will.
If you are going to shop for a religion, it might be best to pick one which doesn't beleive there is a hell. Doesn't Hinduism believe in reincarnation again and again until you perfect your soul so that you can graduate to the next level of existance? Now there's a religion, the punishment for spiritual inadequacy is another chance at life, not eternity in hell.