What Ilyich faces in the final moment is grace. He is graced with the realization that he needs to offer care. Knowing that the real is compassion is not his accomplishment but is the gift of his son’s presence. We, who would so quickly assist him out of this life, would do so because we can bear with neither grace nor compassion. They ask too much of us for another. 

Because death is not taken from him by “assistance” that offers no real help, Ilyich is graced with realization that death is no more. “Instead of death there was light.” He sees this light and realizes that “death is over . . . there is no more death.” Ilyich’s realization echoes Revelation 21:4 that “death will be no more.” Only a culture that can see death and care for those who are dying can be a culture open to the One who bore all our burdens. Christ’s dying offers us abundant life even in our deaths if we are willing to face them. In his Good Death, death itself dies. Euthanasia denies us a good death because it is the denial of care, the denial of facing death authentically, and the denial of the goodness of life. It is thus the denial of the Author of Life—or of any possible spiritual breakthrough at all.

Each fall for many more years, my students and I will read a novella about a dying, loveless lawyer from Tsarist Russia. We will ask what the real life is and wonder if we are living it. We will consider what love and care look like and whether we live in a culture in which we bear each other’s burdens. To bear those burdens is to face our deaths together. The direction of our culture is increasingly toward “death pods” where we will die alone, because we, like Ivan, have refused to really live together. Resisting such a culture of solitary and uncared for assisted dying will take legislation, but it will also require that we spend some time with Ilyich and try to recover the goodness of a good life and of a good death. Someday I will face death. Someday my students will face it as well. Will we do so in a world detached from reality or attached to it? A culture that dispatches the burdensome or bears their burdens? A culture that offers care or that offers death? The euthanasia of Ilyich would have made impossible his eu thanatos. Our society’s growing practice of euthanasia may well prove to be the denial not only of our good deaths but also of the only real thing, a good life.

Read it all.

Resisting the march of euthanasia will require numerous approaches. I hope this reflection on the good death of Ivan Ilyich contributes in some small way. https://t.co/wOO6VTKdnF

— Terence Sweeney (@TerenceJSweeney) February 19, 2025

While few modern proponents of doctor-assisted death would argue that sick people should “make way” when their lives become a draw on others’ resources, they don’t appear to believe this—inevitable—outcome should prevent the practice from being legalized. This troubling attitude goes against the U.K.’s historically Christian approach to dying people, including the belief that every person has intrinsic value, and every life ought to be equally cherished and protected.

Every single one of us has been or will be a “burden” on others. When we are young, we depend upon the care and provision of our parents. When we grow ill, or elderly, we require support from our family and friends. This is not a bad thing; to be human is to be dependent. When it comes to helping those with terminal illness, properly resourced palliative care is highly effective at mitigating suffering and ensures that every patient hears a loving message: “It’s good that you’re alive.”

U.K. politicians must ask themselves what kind of society they want to create: One where an individualistic “right to die” sees vulnerable and marginalized Britons confronted with the option of suicide and pressured to pursue it; or a society where suicide is never viewed as a fitting response to suffering, where every citizen is recognized to have intrinsic and equal value, safeguarded from harm, and offered compassionate, life-affirming support.

As the Canadian ethicist Ewan Goligher noted: “A nation’s laws are a teacher.” Legalizing assisted suicide teaches society to doubt human value and to see it as merely extrinsic and conditional. Prohibiting it reflects the true depth of human dignity.

Read it all.

It’s Good That You’re Alive https://t.co/n78pfTOVXG “As the Canadian ethicist Ewan Goligher noted: ‘A nation’s laws are a teacher.’ Legalizing assisted suicide teaches society to doubt human value and to see it as merely extrinsic and conditional”

— David Mulroney (@David_Mulroney) January 17, 2025

Referring to the prevalence of suicide and how “huge efforts” are being made “to try to prevent people feeling despair and feeling that they have no other choice but to take their own lives”, Archbishop Martin said, “I find a profound contradiction between that and the idea of assisting somebody to take their own life at any stage during their life.”

He noted that fears and concerns regarding the introduction of assisted suicide were voiced to some extent during the lead up period to the Westminster vote.

“In Ireland we need a very careful reflection on this.” He expressed disappointment that the Dáil “seemed to be rushing to adopt what we [the Irish bishops] believe was a flawed report of the Oireachtas Committee just before it broke up for the election.”

“It gave me some consolation to see that none of the parties appeared to be making the introduction of assisted dying in Ireland a manifesto issue and therefore I feel that none of the parties have actually a mandate now to proceed on this issue.”

“I really do feel that our concerns about the slippery slope, how this issue invariably gets expanded and increased as time goes on, which we see from other countries, is something we should reflect long and hard about.”

Read it all.

Archbishop ‘very disappointed’ over assisted dying vote https://t.co/2kBwTtpM9A

— Eamon Martin (@ArchbishopEamon) December 23, 2024

A single cell.

A global business worth billions.

A trade that can bring rewards—or human costs that cannot be measured.

The human egg is a precious resource, exchanged in markets open, gray or black. To tell its story, we follow a teenage girl in India, lured into selling her eggs; a model in Argentina whose genetic makeup is prized; a mother in Greece, told by police that her eggs were stolen; and two “egg girls” from Taiwan who have put themselves at risk to earn money in the US.

Read it all.

Women around the world are increasingly part of a very human global supply chain.

In @BW investigation, we learned how they’re paid—and sometimes exploited—in the multibillion-dollar fertility industry. I made this key takeaways free to read:https://t.co/ax7Nco65xc

— Marika Katanuma (@marikakatanuma) December 13, 2024

Christians are not alone in valuing life; many Jews, Muslims, and other people of goodwill also affirm the intrinsic goodness of human life. But there is a distinctly Christian conviction at work here, and it is bedrock to our faith: Every human being, from conception to death, is created by God, loved by him, and stands under his protection. 

The claim that innocent human life is inviolable is not primarily a claim about us humans, then, but about our Creator. To murder (or torture or enslave, as the church father Gregory of Nyssa saw as early as the fourth century) is to trespass without authority, to assert rights where one has none. It is to unsay God’s “very good” spoken over a fellow creature, to reject and despise a man or woman whom the Lord has brought into being and for whom Christ died. Inviolability is the upshot of our creation in the divine image. 

Unlike many topics in theology and ethics, this is not an issue on which the church has ever been ambiguous. There were no early church councils to debate the taking of innocent life. It didn’t take centuries of conflict to adjudicate. On the contrary, Christians were known from the start for their adamant rejection of pagan disrespect for those unwanted by their families or deemed socially useless—the unborn and newborn, disabled and elderly. 

Read it all.

Why do Christians oppose euthanasia?

Brad East’s answer:https://t.co/cviFstiPVB

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) December 11, 2024

As a supporter of assisted suicide, Lord Sumption’s argument is commendably honest. He recognises that the Leadbeater bill creates a new kind of society. Although it sprinkles us all with the same fairy dust of autonomy, our new-found entitlement does not land on us all equally. Rather, because of pre-existing social inequalities, it creates two distinct groups. In one, we find “strong-minded, articulate individuals.”

They have a high sense of self-worth and good support networks. To them, assisted suicide represents an idealised form of dying on their own terms. It is an empowering possibility for a future dark day, an option (perhaps that such a person will never actually use) rather than an obligation. In the other group, Lord Sumption writes, we find “the genuinely vulnerable”. For many reasons (illness, old age, hard life circumstances) people in this group often feel dictated to by life. They cannot hold prime ministers to personal account, and are not of much interest to the media. In many cases, their support networks are threadbare.

Lord Sumption admits that such people have good reason to fear the Pandora’s Box opened by Leadbeater’s bill. For them, in time, it will be less an empowering hypothetical option for a future day and more a dark cloud that will hang over every day, a silent obligation to be resisted rather than a liberating insurance plan. Although he supports assisted suicide, it is for the sake of the vulnerable that he is unable to “rejoice” in the first wave of an incoming tide.

Read it all (subscription).

Excellent piece!

“When elevated to life’s highest value, autonomy is an uncompromising and rapacious master. Given time, the strength of its logic bursts through our arbitrary restrictions on it.” –@DrJamesEglinton https://t.co/BbAOKmEeWl

— Keith Plummer (@XianMind) December 7, 2024

Bishop Mullally, who is the C of E’s lead bishop for health care and a former Chief Nursing Officer for England, said: “The Church of England believes that the compassionate response at the end of life lies in the provision of high quality palliative care services to all who need them.

“Today’s vote still leaves the question of how this could be implemented in an overstretched and under-funded NHS, social care, and legal system. Safeguarding the most vulnerable must be at the heart of the coming parliamentary process; today’s vote is not the end of the debate.”

The Archbishop of York was reported in the Guardian as saying: “I regret this decision. It changes the relationship between the state and its citizens, between doctors and their patients, and within families between children and their terminally ill relatives. Once begun it will be hard to undo and control.”

Read it all.

Church figures have expressed concern after the first steps towards making assisted dying legal in England and Wales were taken on Friday. https://t.co/O4jCF3HaEI

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 2, 2024

MPs have backed proposals to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales in a historic vote which paves the way for a change in the law.

In the first Commons vote on the issue in nearly a decade, MPs supported a bill which would allow terminally ill adults expected to die within six months to seek help to end their own life by 330 to 275, a majority of 55.

It followed an emotional debate in the chamber, where MPs from both sides shared personal stories which had informed their decisions.

The bill will now face many more months of debate and scrutiny by MPs and peers, who could choose to amend it, with the approval of both Houses of Parliament required before it becomes law.

Read it all.

MPs back proposals to legalise assisted dying https://t.co/fPRg05cakA

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) November 29, 2024

Some time ago, I found myself sitting at a dinner opposite a Labour peer. We chatted over various things as the evening proceeded. Just before we were getting up to leave a new topic came up. “I am a convinced campaigner for assisted dying,” she said. “As a bishop, I suspect you’re not. Why don’t you think we should do it?” Put on the spot, struggling to know what to say, and knowing I probably had one line to deliver as we stood up to leave, I said something like this: “Life is a gift from God. It’s not up to us to decide when it ends.” She looked across at me with a pitying look and walked away, clearly unconvinced.

I’ve often wondered what I should have said. Lord Falconer suggests that only secular people like him are ‘objective’ and religious people like me or Shabana Mahmood are biased and therefore our views are to be discounted. The idea that his secular perspective is not colouring his views, but that our religious ones are, or that he is not imposing his beliefs on others whereas we are, is of course, as Isabel Hardman has argued, philosophical nonsense.

Our religious beliefs shape our views, as his secular views shape his. The question is which perspective gives us a better, healthier and more coherent way of living together. I spoke recently to a key figure in the Church of England’s response to Assisted Dying who told me in no uncertain terms that religious arguments simply don’t wash in this debate. We have to use pragmatic and political ones that appeal to a wide audience. And so, the main arguments we have heard from church leaders and others against assisted suicide refer to the slippery slope argument: that legislation will inevitably in time become looser to include more candidates; care for the vulnerable, such as the elderly or the disabled who will feel pressurised into taking their own life, or, as the Health Secretary Wes Streeting has argued, the fact that palliative care is not yet robust enough in our health system to enable a proper choice.

Read it all.

My thoughts on why religion matters in the assisted dying debate https://t.co/SJBK4fUI3B

— Graham Tomlin (@gtomlin) November 27, 2024

Don’t turn our doctors into killers, says the Star. Like several of the opposing factions to the bill, it cites Canada as exemplifying the slippery slope, with one in twenty deaths there being by assisted dying.

This argument that the bill will open up unforeseen consequences for the disabled, and indeed for the unfortunate residents of bad care homes, is common, Archbishop Welby, facing down former Archbishop Carey, said that assisted dying was in effect a sword of Damocles over the disabled and aged. We should add that many Canadians choosing state sponsored suicide cite feeling a burden on family and caregivers as their motive. Canada surely vindicates Welby.

This argument really is cogent and necessary, but is it sufficient for a Christian view which sees humanity made in the image and likeness of God, leading to the doctrine of the sanctity of life? As Frost says this a doctrine that has permeated and grounded western civilization. Is it not simply wrong to kill people even those begging to die? Hospices and care giving was the Christian answer, but Christianity is fading fast with its practical altruistic legacy of looking after the sick and dying.

Lord Frost has pointed to our society’s reliance on Judaeo Christian ethics for all its institutions and to the perilous situation of breaking with this tradition of the sanctity of life for a callous utilitarianism. So far his is the deepest theological apologia for the classical Christian ethic of life  on offer, we trust Christian leaders will step up to the challenge soon.

Read it all.

Ask MPs to oppose assisted suicide

Some helpful tips here https://t.co/wr1LYSQylr

— Better Way (@betterwayUK) October 24, 2024

“It’s very important that we discuss it here in the Senedd today because although the private member’s bill is going forwards in Westminster, if it were passed the implication would be very important in Wales because we have responsibility for health and social care.”

Ms Morgan said it is important to have safeguards to ensure people meet specific criteria, with medical people present when the decision is made….

Carys Moseley, a public policy researcher and analyst for Christian Concern based in Cardiff, said the group was “concerned” about the motion.

She said: “We’ve got a visual display of the actual cases that have been happening in different jurisdictions in the western world.

“These are tragic cases – diabetes being treated as a long-term illness in Oregon, assisted suicide the fifth leading cause of death in Canada – these are very grave issues.”

She said the public question the issue more when they hear about other countries.

“Once you introduce this choice – dying – there is a pressure then which eventually becomes a duty to die,” she said.

“There isn’t such a thing as (going on) ‘your own terms’, because it affects all the doctors that become responsible for killing patients or assisted killing rather than preserving life.

Read it all.

The Welsh Senedd, which has a progressive majority, has overwhelmingly voted down a motion to legalise assisted suicide. The more people learn about assisted suicide the less they like it. pic.twitter.com/fww05M1fLi

— Yuan Yi Zhu (@yuanyi_z) October 23, 2024

The Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, wrote on X/Twitter: “By all means let’s have the debate. Consideration should also be given to proper investment in pal­liative and social care. And let’s call it what it is: assisted suicide. It’s a slip­pery slope and an absolute de­­grada­tion of the value of human life.”

The Bill was also condemned by leaders of the Church in Wales, who said in a statement on Tuesday that the Christian faith had always been rooted “in the reality of pain and mortality”, as well as “the incalculable value of each human person, irrespective of social standing, access to resources, or physical or mental ability. . . In that spirit, shown to us in the person of Jesus, we give our heartfelt support to the extension of the best possible palliative care to all who require it, so that no limits are put on the compassion which we show as individuals and as a society.”

“This is an extremely difficult issue over which different people, including Christians, will have arrived at differing views with the best of intentions,” said the statement from the Archbishop of Wales, the Rt Revd Andrew John, with the Bishops of Bardsey, Llandaff, Monmouth, St Davids, St Asaph, and Swansea & Brecon.

Read it all.

Bishops warn of ‘duty’ to die if Leadbeater Bill is carried https://t.co/owjUo4W5Xz

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 16, 2024

… legalising assisted suicide would disproportionately impact many millions of vulnerable people, who might perceive themselves as a burden on those around them and the health service. My concern is that once you can ask for assisted suicide, it soon becomes something that you feel that you ought to do. Permission slips into being duty. This does not represent true choice for all, and I worry that no amount of safeguards will ensure everyone’s safety at the most vulnerable point of their lives.

A good death and compassionate care should be available to everyone, but the Bill being introduced today will not achieve that.”

Read it all.

Not half.

Assisted Dying Legislation is 'Dangerous' says Archbishop Welby – BBC News https://t.co/NhK26S8S9c

— Erica Wooff (@ericauk) October 16, 2024

As this debate unfolds there are three points I would like to put before you. I hope that you will take part in the debate, whenever and wherever you can, and that you will write to your Member of Parliament.

The first point is this: Be careful what you wish for.

No doubt the bill put before Parliament will be carefully framed, providing clear and very limited circumstances in which it would become lawful to assist, directly and deliberately, in the ending of a person’s life. But please remember, the evidence from every single country in which such a law has been passed is clear: that the circumstances in which the taking of a life is permitted are widened and widened, making assisted suicide and medical killing, or euthanasia, more and more available and accepted. In this country, assurances will be given that the proposed safeguards are firm and reliable. Rarely has this been the case. This proposed change in the law may be a source of relief to some. But it will bring great fear and trepidation to many, especially those who have vulnerabilities and those living with disabilities. What is now proposed will not be the end of the story. It is a story better not begun.

The second point is this: a right to die can become a duty to die.

A law which prohibits an action is a clear deterrent. A law which permits an action changes attitudes: that which is permitted is often and easily encouraged. Once assisted suicide is approved by the law, a key protection of human life falls away. Pressure mounts on those who are nearing death, from others or even from themselves, to end their life in order to take away a perceived burden of care from their family, for the avoidance of pain, or for the sake of an inheritance.

Read it all.

This Wednesday a bill will be introduced to Parliament proposing a change in the law to permit assisted suicide. As this debate unfolds, I ask you to play your part in it. Write to your MP. Have discussions with family, friends and colleagues. And pray.https://t.co/mgjUOwehms

— Cardinal Nichols (@CardinalNichols) October 10, 2024

The Bishop of London, Sarah Mullally, the joint lead bishop on health care for the Church of England, echoed Bishop Smith’s concern.

She said: “No amount of safeguards could ensure the safety of the most vulnerable in society, should there be a change in the law allowing for assisted suicide”

Bishop Mullally, a former chief nursing officer for England, said: “I worked for many years as a nurse in the NHS, including as a cancer specialist, and I understand first-hand the crucial importance of compassionate care and dignity for all patients, including those who are most vulnerable and reaching the end of their lives.

“In the Church of England, we are backing urgent calls for adequate funding and resourcing of palliative care services, to ensure the highest possible standards of care for all. This should include action to ensure that our hospices receive the level of state funding that they are so badly lacking at present.”

Read it all (registration or subscription).

Letby and Shipman murders show NHS workers cannot be trusted on assisted dying https://t.co/51pSDKdIzO

— Anna Gaudreault (@ladevita12) October 5, 2024

In the context of our responsibilities as a wider society, we are grateful to the medical, nursing and care staff who support our loved ones in their last weeks, days and hours. Sadly, however, palliative care is underfunded and limited in Scotland, and our Parliament should focus its energies on improving palliative care rather than on contemplating assisted suicide or euthanasia.

The private member’s bill to introduce assisted suicide for those aged sixteen and over, recently published in the Scottish Parliament, amounts to a rejection of the common responsibility we owe to each other and to those who are ill and dying.

Campaigners call it ‘assisted dying’ when what is really meant is assisted suicide. Palliative care and the process by which families and communities accompany and support those in the final moments of their lives is what we all usually mean by assisted dying. What is now being proposed is that doctors hand a lethal concoction of drugs to a patient to kill themselves. It is a direct, intentional action to end the patient’s life and truly crosses a Rubicon in Scotland.

Read it carefully and read it all.

We heard the Scottish Catholic bishops letter against the assisted suicide bill in Scotland read out at Mass at Castlebay, Barra this morning. A very well-argued document which deserves wide dissemination.

— john milbank (@johnmilbank3) April 28, 2024

We must transfer our collective faculty for care and compassion from thwarted or struggling adults to those children who need us. This need not be a matter of cruelty or stigma, but rather of reordering our priorities to what we know to be true. This is urgent: If we can’t even mount a normophilic defense of a baby’s need for his or her mother, we will have few resources left to defend our own organismic fundamentals in the face of the seemingly endless ambitions of biotech. Some are already preselecting IVF embryos based on genome analysis. Others propose the accelerated “evolution” of humans by means of in vitro gametogenesis. Others again propose gene-editing embryos. Just recently a breakthrough was announced in the synthetic creation of human embryos: in theory, children wholly without ancestors.

No one is coming to save us. We cannot wait for the “silent majority” to rise up and demand a return to common sense, or mumble about postponing action until we’ve re-Christianized the West, or until we’ve devised a fully worked-out post-Christian metaphysics of human nature. We may lament the Christianity-shaped hole in our discourse, but just because much of modern culture is post-Christian doesn’t mean we no longer have a nature. All we’ve lost is our common framework for naming that nature. We must speak the truth anyway. And wherever possible, we must redirect law and policy from the abolition of human nature to its flourishing.

Should this project be accused of oppressing or stigmatizing “the vulnerable,” we must recall that in reasserting the necessity of norms we are not attacking the most vulnerable. We are defending them. Normophobia imposed on babies and children an obligation to sacrifice their needs for the sake of our wayward desires. We must lift this burden from their little shoulders.

Read it all (registration or subscription).

Of Note: "Children’s needs have not changed just because adult desires have grown more unruly." https://t.co/awSIeT6jFW @moveincircles

— Inst. Family Studies (@FamStudies) March 13, 2024

In a statement, the Roman Catholic lead bishop for life issues, the Rt Revd John Sherrington, an auxiliary bishop in the archdiocese of Westminster, welcomed the committee’s decision “not to recommend the legalisation of assisted suicide”.

He continued: “As highlighted in the Committee’s report, experts have noted that there have been major problems in safeguarding the vulnerable and those without full mental capacity when assisted suicide and/or euthanasia has been introduced in other jurisdictions.

“Recognising the distress and suffering of those who are sick and vulnerable, I welcome the Committee’s recommendation that the accessibility and provision of palliative and end of life care needs to be improved — something the Catholic Church has consistently called for.”

Read it all (registration or subscription).

The Bishop of London @bishopSarahM has welcomed a report by MPs which calls for palliative and end-of-life care to be made more widely available https://t.co/5liE9iClCh

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 1, 2024

Sir Stephen has been Labour MP for East Ham in London since 1994, having first come to the area as part of a Christian mission to the East End while a university student…

He is on record as opposing legislation to introduce assisted dying, saying in a Westminster Hall debate in July 2022: “If we were to legalise assisted dying, we would impose an awful moral dilemma on every conscientious frail person nearing the end of their life. . . If ending their life early were legally permissible, many who do not want to end their life would feel under great, probably irresistible, pressure to do so. There is no way to stop that happening.”

On the Labour List site, he writes that “the radical individualism of some Conservatives” can prompt support for the legalisation of assisted suicide, “even at the risk of dire societal outcomes for the vulnerable. But in my view that should not be the position of those of us on the left.”

Read it all.

The Labour MP Sir Stephen Timms @stephenctimms has urged members of his party to give “careful thought” to the issue of assisted dying, arguing against that idea that it might be a party-political matterhttps://t.co/nXXt4xalNi

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) January 25, 2024

It is unsurprising that euthanasia consistently breaks its boundaries, always presented as an expansion of choice as the route to kindness. This is rooted in liberalism’s fundamental presuppositions, for as George Grant wrote, “it is the very signature of modern man to deny reality to any conception of good that imposes limits on human freedom … man’s essence is his freedom. Nothing must stand in the way of our absolute freedom to create the world as we want it. There must be no conceptions of good that put limitations on human action.” If there is no ultimate value towards which our lives point, then “the vaunted freedom of the individual to choose becomes either the necessity of finding one’s role in the public engineering or the necessity of retreating into the privacy of pleasure”. We are reduced to utilitarian measures of the good, achieved through harm reduction and happiness maximisation, materialistically defined.

The result of the liberal conception of the human person is expressive individualism, where “persons are conceived merely as atomized individual wills whose highest flourishing consists in interrogating the interior depths of the self in order to express and freely follow the original truths discovered therein toward one’s self-invented destiny”. This conception of the human person privileges cognition, will, rationality and autonomy in defining full personhood. Our nature as embodied souls is largely ignored: if one cannot employ one’s body to achieve the desires of one’s autonomous, rational, willed cognition, then one cannot achieve full personhood.

As a result, the constraints of our existential finitude made so explicit by disability are seen as immoral barriers to maximal autonomy attained through rational will. The unchosen bonds of interdependence, obligation, reciprocity and mutual loyalty that comprise the texture and meaning of life are denigrated. Liberalism discards the weak just as the Greco-Roman world once did, now done for reasons of supposed benevolence. From Locke onwards, liberalism has always seen some more capable of, and suited to, forming political society than others. Mill took this furthest in his proposal of colonisation and slavery for those less capable of freedom.

It is not such a stretch from liberalism’s definition of the individual’s capacity for personhood to advocating the killing of disabled infants deemed incapable of fulfilling this. As Leon Kass has written, it is no surprise that those Germans who coined the phrase “life unworthy of life” were two liberals: a jurist and an academic. Better to curb the depersonalised source of the suffering with all haste. James Burnham viewed liberalism as the ideological legitimator and enabler of Western suicide. I’m not sure he meant for the title of his book to be taken so literally, across so many countries.

Read it all from 2022.

As assisted suicide is in the news again, re-upping my piece for @TheCriticMag from last year, in which I argue that assisted suicide is not only wrong in itself, but that it’s the logical endpoint of the liberal view of the human person https://t.co/ZMK8sy5Pyh

— Henry George (@intothefuture45) December 22, 2023

Assisted suicide is banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years. While there is no specific offence of assisted suicide in Scotland, euthanasia is illegal and can be prosecuted as murder or culpable homicide.
Rantzen says she’s joined assisted dying clinic

Mr Stride, one of 27 Conservative MPs who voted for the 2015 bill, said he thought some MPs could be wondering “whether this should be something we look at again”.

“The government has not decided to bring forward legislation,” he told the Today programme on Wednesday, “but if Parliament in some form or another decided that it wanted to have a fresh look at this, given it was some years ago that we last did so, that’s not something that I would be resistant to.”

Read it all.

Glad this article calls this for what it is: assisted suicide. I have argued against this in all my episcopal roles and will continue to do so. Investment in palliative care is essential. It will so often be the vulnerable who would suffer most in this. https://t.co/g94iLf0yQZ

— Bishop of Newcastle (@BishopNewcastle) December 20, 2023

Five years ago, Tiffany Gardner learned she had another father. She already had two.

One had colon cancer and died when Gardner was 4 years old. Her adoptive father taught her to drive and walked her down the aisle at her wedding. At 35 years old, when Gardner received news of a third, “I remember the room spinning,” she said.

Gardner had been in her mother’s kitchen. During the conversation, her mother let go of a long-held secret about the man Gardner had long believed to be her father. He was in an accident, her mother said. He had to relearn how to walk and talk. I couldn’t get pregnant. The doctors said the accident had likely left him infertile. We used a sperm donor.

“I felt I was falling backwards trying to process the moment,” recalled Gardner, a lawyer in the Atlanta area and the mother of three boys. Among her feelings was a desire to meet her newly uncovered biological father. It didn’t take long to find him online.

Read it all.

“There’s nothing comparable to your genetic parent breaking up with you." Amazing journey from @AmyDMarcus on how we're defining family in the age of assisted fertility technologies and DNA testing. https://t.co/bLm7bgMuzo via @WSJ

— Stefanie Ilgenfritz (@stefaniei) June 16, 2023

There is no near-term prospect of the synthetic embryos being used clinically. It would be illegal to implant them into a patient’s womb, and it is not yet clear whether these structures have the potential to continue maturing beyond the earliest stages of development.

The motivation for the work is for scientists to understand the “black box” period of development that is so called because scientists are only allowed to cultivate embryos in the lab up to a legal limit of 14 days. They then pick up the course of development much further along by looking at pregnancy scans and embryos donated for research.

Robin Lovell-Badge, the head of stem cell biology and developmental genetics at the Francis Crick Institute in London, said: “The idea is that if you really model normal human embryonic development using stem cells, you can gain an awful lot of information about how we begin development, what can go wrong, without having to use early embryos for research.”

Read it all.

This is a significant development that raises important questions about both the boundaries of human life and the future of the family. https://t.co/nLuWEdWJ6q

— Matthew Lee Anderson (@mattleeanderson) June 15, 2023

Hannah Daniel, the ERLC’s policy manager, told Baptist Press, “We believe all people are made in the image of God and possess immeasurable worth and value. Life is precious from the earliest moment of conception to natural death. Those who are struggling physically, mentally or emotionally should be met with the highest quality of care and compassion, not given assistance to end their life.”

The legislation “would have established Nevada as a destination for assisted suicide, and we joined arms with Nevada Baptists in urging Governor Lombardo to veto it,” she said in written comments.

The legislation would have allowed a doctor or advanced practice registered nurse to prescribe a lethal dose of a drug for an adult patient. The proposal gained narrow passage in both houses, 23-19 in the Assembly and 11-10 in the Senate. The majorities were far short of the two-thirds vote required to overturn a veto.

In a written veto message, Lombardo, a Republican, said the bill was unnecessary because of “expansions in palliative care services and continued improvements in advanced pain management.”

Read it all.

"Life is precious from the earliest moment of conception to natural death. Those who are struggling physically, mentally or emotionally should be met with the highest quality of care and compassion, not given assistance to end their life." – @hannahedaniel https://t.co/9Ngp5C5Lcd

— ERLC (@ERLC) June 9, 2023

It is not often in life when you have the choice to discover something about yourself, which could potentially rock your equilibrium and throw you into a completely unknown direction. Do you stay comfortable in the known, never really risking what it would take to understand a mystery, or do you trust in a faithful God, taking the chance that after the door has been opened, only one thing is certain: life will never be the same as it was before?

That was the position Father Chris Culpepper (52) found himself in 22 years ago, when as a 30 year-old youth minister at Saint Andrews parish in downtown Fort Worth, Texas, he received a call out of the blue from his parents asking him to come over to talk and go for a walk.

“That’s always how you know something happened in my family when you’re asked to go for a walk–usually it’s good, but sometimes you don’t know. And so, we went for the walk as we always did, and they asked me if I knew a lady named Sharon Kolb. And I mean, I was racking my brain from all facets of my life and just could not come to recognizing the name. And they said, ‘Well, she’s your birth mother.’”

Read it all.

Watch the heartwarming story of a rector who was adopted at birth and reunited with his birth mother later in life. https://t.co/ZOTlWzGYdf Read the full story or watch the full interview at https://t.co/M2J9O8ciEe #nationaladoptionmonth #adoptionstories #Adoption

— ACNA (@The_ACNA) November 8, 2022

How then can we as Christians respond to the matter of physician-assisted death? First, we can call upon reason and the light of nature to affirm absolutely the value of life. Assisted death and suicide is said to be a matter of respect.

But to value a person is to value their existence. A willingness to deliberately end someone’s existence therefore necessarily devalues the person. If people matter, we must not intentionally end them.

Second, our churches can be communities where assisted death is inconceivable because the weak, the aged, the disabled, and the dying are regarded as priceless members of the community. We can be a place where those who suffer enjoy the devoted companionship, love, and support that reminds them of their value and bears them up through pain. This is, after all, what all of us long for.

Third, we can advocate for access to the very best medical and palliative care for those who are suffering or dying. The palliative care movement was started by a Christian physician, Dame Cicely Saunders, and has transformed medical care at the end of life. Yet access to good palliative care in the US, Canada, and the rest of the world is still far too limited.

Read it all.

“Assisted death is no longer seen as a desperate option of last resort but rather as one ‘therapeutic option’ among many … offered to those whose lives are not regarded as worth living.”https://t.co/jqTcFTWzIP

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) October 18, 2022

Krista Carr, executive vice president of Inclusion Canada, is one such Canadian. “Most families of children born with disabilities are told from the start that their child will, in one way or another, not have a good quality of life,” she told the National Post. “Canada cannot begin killing babies when doctors predict there is no hope for them. Predictions are far too often based on discriminatory assumptions about life with a disability.”

Roy’s statement is merely the latest episode in a series of euthanasia horror stories from Canada that are shocking even to dulled Western sensibilities. Canada’s Supreme Court overturned criminal prohibitions on assisted suicide in Carter v. Canada in 2015. Shortly afterward, parliament passed Bill C-14 in 2016, which legalized “medical aid in dying” (or MAiD) for adults with “enduring and intolerable suffering” and a “reasonably foreseeable death.” In 2021, Bill C-7 was passed, which legalized MAiD for those struggling with mental illness. Canada has become an international cautionary tale.

Impoverished people are turning to MAiD out of desperation because they cannot access the resources they need or the treatments they require in Canada’s broken healthcare system. The Toronto Star—the largest and most liberal newspaper in the country—called it “Hunger Games style social Darwinism.” The story detailed how one woman is considering assisted suicide because she cannot find an affordable place to live in her city with wheelchair access. Her tale is becoming a common one.

Sixty-three-year-old Alan Philips, who has lived with chronic pain for almost two decades, recently got approved for assisted suicide after trying for eighteen years to get spinal fusion surgery to relieve his agony. He cannot get the surgery and has been prescribed opioids instead. “I cannot get adequate healthcare,” he said.

Read it all.

Canada will soon offer doctor-assisted suicide to patients who suffer from something which (to quote the law) “cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable." A nightmarish dispatch from @JVanMaren https://t.co/qevH7bVE3L

— Samuel D. James (@samueld_james) October 19, 2022

Dr Simon Eyre (Chichester), a retired GP, moved a private member’s motion on the subject on Sunday afternoon. “Hospices are suffering from a lack of funding,” he said, and linked this to a pressure to change the law to allow assisted suicide. People might choose to end their lives prematurely rather than face suffering exacerbated by poor-quality palliative care, he said.

“Sanctity of life is central to our understanding as Christians,” he said, and cited Psalm 31: “Our times are in his hands”.

Terminally ill people with depression, and people with disabilities, including learning disabilities, would be put at risk if legislation was changed, Dr Eyre said.

The Suicide Act 1961 prohibits assisted suicide, although directions from the Crown Prosecution Service published in 2010 require that any prosecution be in the “public interest”.

Several attempts have been made in recent years to introduce legislation that would permit assisted suicide in some circumstances, most recently in the form of a Bill in the House of Lords, which failed to reach a Second Reading before Parliament was prorogued in April.

Dr Eyre conceded that palliative care “sometimes fails to deliver”, but said that “the response to this should be to improve palliative care rather than make changes to the Suicide Act.”

Read it all.

“Hospices are suffering from a lack of funding.” https://t.co/opyIeRrAcA

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) July 11, 2022

Following a debate, members backed a Private Member’s Motion (PMM) paying tribute to the ‘enormous and untiring’ efforts of health professionals working in palliative and end of life care.

They called on the Government to guarantee adequate funding and resourcing of palliative care services to ensure the highest possible standards of care for all. Members further affirmed that the law on Assisted Suicide should remain unchanged.

General Synod member Dr Simon Eyre, from the Diocese of Chichester, introducing the PMM, called for the Government to ensure adequate funding for hospices over the next decade.

He said palliative care was currently ‘insufficiently comprehensive’ with only one palliative care consultant per 100,000 of the population.

Read it all.

Synod rejects assisted dying by a large majority – via @ChurchTimes https://t.co/YXZ508Ss4b

— Religion Media Centre (@RelMedCentre) July 11, 2022

Yet even though she is grateful that Roe has been overturned, Prior cautioned Christians against being hasty with how they move forward, saying that Roe’s absence gives us a unique opportunity to create beneficial legislation.

“For example,” said Prior, “we need to learn the difference between between intervening in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, which is going to be fatal to both mother and child and an abortion.” Because Roe was the law of the land for so long, Christians haven’t had to think through how the answer to such questions will impact the laws we create—but now in some states we have new opportunities.

Said Prior, “We’re going to have to educate ourselves quickly and thoughtfully and not just rush to put legislation in place that would be disastrous or uninformed or medically irresponsible. Of course, we want all of these laws to protect all of the human lives involved, but that’s not something that happens quickly and overnight. We have to really understand what it means to be pro-life and how to apply that in principle.”

Read it all.

While the American church has much to be thankful for with the reversal of Roe v. Wade, says Karen Swallow Prior, it is important to move forward with caution, nuance and compassion. @KSPrior https://t.co/PD9l2eKvxs @ChurchLead #KarenSwallowPrior #abortion

— ChurchLeaders.com (@ChurchLead) June 30, 2022