Euthanasia, Voluntary and Otherwise

Hopefully, this won’t get me too much hate mail.

I don’t intend to defend or put down any particular position, simply to point out that nobody really owns a righteous corner on this one, and we need to ponder it at a very personal level.

My thinking here was triggered by a recent Atlantic Magazine article on assisted dying in Canada, a rather haughty and condescending piece of work, and as most such articles on dicey topics, over the top, preachy, and entirely without nuance. But such is journalism.

Interestingly enough, there appears to be one case of euthanasia where there seems to be little argument. Anyone who has ever watched a spy movie or read a story of “behind the lines” warfare knows well that most undercover operatives carry cyanide capsules which they will crush between their teeth in the event of inescapable capture. They do so for two perfectly supportable reasons: first, to allow the mercy of a quick death before torture, second, to allow the agent to exit without giving away secrets under terrible duress. In other words, the state has a vested interest in the spy euthanizing himself, and nobody except next of kin have any issue with it.

None of us feel good about the bad guys going at our spies with blowtorches, and few of us doubt that we would bite down on the cyanide in such circumstances. We look on these scenarios as casualties of war, or “giving your life for your country”. Both of those are true, but it’s also unarguably euthanasia.

Also interestingly enough, back in very conservative times, it was a custom in many militaries that if an officer was put in the brig in shameful circumstances such as having been charged with treason or murder, a fellow officer would make a visit and leave, having “forgotten” his side arm with a single bullet. The accused was expected to “do the right thing”.

In my experience, much of the noise against medical assistance in dying (“MAID”) comes from a side of the spectrum which mounts mostly personal religious arguments, yet which for exactly the same religious reasons has little or no difficulty with capital punishment. Many in this corner also oppose abortion as the taking of a life which has no say in the matter, yet won’t flinch to pull the hangman’s lever.

“Yes, but he’s a murderer!” is not an answer, just a “whatabout”. Taking a life in some circumstances is not open to you if you oppose taking any life. If you’re OK with extinguishing a life in some circumstances, then you can’t really argue with those who agree in essence but differ only in which kinds of lives. But then, logic rarely informs these heated debates.

Like every emotionally charged social issue, there are simply no right answers for everyone. As with the great morality and “natural law” questions debated by first year law students, there is no “correct answer” for everyone, just working choices which are the least bad for the most people in the long run.

All of us hope to die of very old age, gently in our beds, and surrounded by loved ones. Sadly, we rarely get much choice in our manner of exit, and it’s important to grapple with these issues, at a personal and family level, long before we are forced to make hard choices in hard circumstances.

If your personal principles are such that you’re willing to suffer interminably and agonizingly, then your loved ones need to know, but if you are prepared to reach for the light switch when things get too much, that too should not come as a surprise.