Charlie Gard





Alfie Evans





Terri Schiavo





Valentina Maureira





Brittany Maynard




Marc and Eddy Verbessem

"Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable."

CCC 2277

2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible. 

2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. 

Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded. 

2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected. 

2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.

By Deacon Chris

People of good intent may observe a person who is suffering in the late stages of life, and determine that to allow the suffering to continue is an act of inhumanity.  Those of us who have had family pets in their life understand that when things gets rough for Fido -- when he's suffering needlessly -- it's the humane option to put him to sleep.  It's humane because it recognizes that there is no profit whatsoever to terminal suffering in an animal, and it is therefore appropriate to end his misery.  

But human beings are different.  We can't simply transfer the attitude we have toward animals to human beings.  This is why euthanasia and assisted suicide are not ever acceptable in terms of Church doctrine.  There are many reasons for this:

1) Man is made in the image of God.  Therefore, there exists an infinite gap in dignity between a human being and an animal.  There isn't an apples-to-apples comparison in ethical terms.

2) God became man, in the person of Jesus Christ, and through His immense suffering, sanctified suffering and death.  Death "lost its sting", and became the path of redemption for mankind when Our Lord ascended the Cross.

3) Because of this, we cannot approach suffering as an intrinsic evil, as it may be to an animal.  When we make this mistake, our idea of what is humane strays from the reality that human suffering is meritorious, expiatory, and for perhaps numerous souls, a saving grace.  

4) Instead, progressive society, in its defecit of understanding spiritual truths, believes that any and all suffering must be extinguished -- at any cost.  Naturally, this leads to the idea that it's an act of love and kindness to facilitate others to either commit suicide, or allow the healthcare system to do it for them through euthanasia.  

5) Euthanasia is the illicit taking of a human life.  Although it is still relatively rare in the United States (some states permit individuals to elect clinical suicide), Europe is ground zero for the expansion of both euthanasia and assisted suicide.  Nations like Belgium allow individuals -- even teenagers -- to elect suicide for reasons that are not connected to terminal illness whatsoever.  Psychological suffering suffices.  The Netherlands has even approved euthanizing children under the age of 12 (!) with consent of their parents.  

6) The question of euthanasia has drifted into darker and darker corners of public policy.  Individuals such as Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel argues that one should not live past the age of 75.  Not for clinical reasons, but economic reasons.  The discussion has become a matter of economics and personal productivity.  If you are "useless" to society, you are stealing from society.  

7) It cannot be overstated how deeply this attitude has poisoned society's approach to human life.  Whereas abortion decisions more often than not have an economic component to it, the goalposts have been moved to include even infants who are delivered and may have congenital disease.  It is easy to see the next logical step of allowing parents to euthanize a newborn if he or she emerges with unexpected defects. 

8) Catholics should be horrified by the march of euthanasia and assisted suicide into mainstream acceptance.  It is a crime against God to take life so capriciously, wherein normal means are available to provide for the sick, the dying, the handicapped, and the otherwise "undesirables" labeled by progressive society. 

9)  The Church does not relish watching anyone suffer.  Our Blessed Mother did not relish watching her Son die on the Cross.  And extraordinary means of sustaining life can be waived if it appears terminality is certain.  But one can never withdraw food and water (basic nourishment) from a living soul that is capable of processing nourishment.  One does not need to be force-fed in the terminal stage -- when organs are shutting down and stop filtering.  The natural rejection of nourishment need not be overrided.  But to inflict starvation and dehydration, as in the case of Terri Schiavo, and in those who, even in old age, are incapacitated, but whose body continues the nutritive process, is a sin that cries out to heaven.  Difficult cases, such as those individuals who are on life-support machines that artificially replicate the action of the lungs and heart - may be considered extraordinary means, and the Church does not preclude the option of ending such measures if there is no reasonable hope of recovery.  

10) To consciously elect suicide is not "death with dignity", but quite literally suicide.  And the Church has determined that those who elect assisted suicide may not receive the final sacraments prior to the act.  


Watching a loved one suffer is an agony even for the one who is not dying.  But it's in the example of Christ's suffering that we are reminded that life is worth living to the very end - even when we cannot choose an easy passing - and proven beyond a doubt that dying is no longer an end with no more beginning, but a beginning with no more end. 

I invite everyone to maintain a consistent life ethic that defends human dignity at every stage, "from womb to the tomb".