January 12, 2009 - 10:43pm
Euthanasia
is discussed in churches, philosophy classes, pubs, street corners,
homes, medical societies, nursing classes, hospices, law journals, and
in legislative assemblies across the land. There is no shortage of
information and opinion. Just as we debate what counts as the beginning
of life, we also have changed the definition of the end of life over
the centuries. It used to be that death meant the termination of
breathing. Later physicians defined death as a total stoppage of the
circulation of blood. This definition served well until recent
technology made it possible to sustain respiration and heartbeat
indefinitely, even when there is no brain activity. The need for still
viable organs for transplantation has resulted in a refined definition
based on brain wave activity.
Here
is the question: is it possible for us as a society to recognize and
assert the fundamental importance of life while at the same time
recognizing and asserting the right of a terminally ill patient to die
with dignity?
Read the review.
Tags: In the Community
