Sensible adieu

[pavalamani pragasam]

Sensible adieu
Birth is an occasion for joy. Contrarily, death is attended with grief. But birth and death are like two sides of a coin. They are inseparable. Death, like a shadow stalks behind a person from the moment he is born. In other words death is inevitable.

Mortality is the most certain certainty on earth. Though we know we shall die, we are blessed to be ignorant of when or how we shall die. Death comes at any age and any place. The causes are innumerous. Disease, accident, natural calamity, starvation, suicide, murder or sheer old age can bring about death.

Desires may vary from person to person but there is one desire which is common to all. Everybody wants to die without pain or suffering. But how many people have their desire fulfilled? Everyday, every minute, every second there are thousands dying in agonized pain suffered due to one of the causes listed above. Very rarely and very few blessed mortals are clasped by death in a peaceful embrace.

When a person is terminally ill, has no chance of getting well and is suffering from severe pain his imminent death can be speeded up by voluntary, soothing aids. Such a practice is called euthanasia.

Generally this concept is shocking to a majority of people because it is a matter of human ethics , of the sense of right and wrong. They believe the Almighty alone shall decide how long a mortal can live. The end should come, they feel, naturally - and not forced.

The first argument against euthanasia is it is equivalent to plain murder. Hence a crime and a sin . The second argument is miracles, though rare, are nevertheless possible. The excruciating, indefinite wait for miracle while the patient lies without the hope of recovery crosses rational limits of human endurance. Too heavy an emotional and monetary burden to carry.

In such situations euthanasia is a very sensible solution. But in the present atmosphere the medical practitioner who has taken the solemn, Hyppocritic oath to save the life under his treatment to the best of his ability cannot be seen in the light of an executioner, so to say.

It is strange how in human society killing is not always considered sinful. Cruel, ruthless, brutal killings have been taking place everywhere down the ages.

Wars in the name of political ambitions and crusades for fanatical religious faiths are all part of man's history to this day. Soldiers fight for the country with patriotism serving in the army, navy and air force.Killing the enemy is their bounden duty.

Policemen and commandos are deployed to quell riots and to maintain law and order. When mobs turn rebellious “Shoot-at-sight” orders are issued. The killings by the military force and the police have legal sanction. They are morally right. There is no place for remorse.

In “Mahabharatha”, Lord Krishna convinced Arjuna with the gospel of Gita about “Karma” and “Dharma”. Killing of the kith and kin which Arjuna abhorred was rationalized beautifully.

In ancient civilizations also killing has been sanctioned by law and custom. In Sparta, it is said, the warrior race did not think it worthwhile bringing up children who lacked physical stamina. It was their custom to roll tender babies down hilltops. Only the survivors were picked up and reared.

Neither was suicide ignominious and condemnable as a coward's escapist decision. With Romans it was considered valour to kill oneself than be captivated by the enemy. Mark Antony is a famous example.

The Rajput ladies in India who killed themselves before the captors entered their premises were ennobled. The practice of “Sati” has flourished for long deifying the hapless widows who were virtually pushed into the funeral pyre of their husbands.

Social evils and terrorism have been carrying on killing in many forms and for no noble purpose.Compared to the categories of killing cited above, euthanasia is a completely different variety. Its aim is humane.

Some years ago the lady of my neighbouring house who was in her thirties fell ill with cancer. I vividly remember her last days and her pathetic wails are still ringing in my ears. In spite of all treatment her condition deteriorated fast and towards the end she groaned in pain begging her husband to give her some poison to end her insufferable ordeal. But he refused to comply with her desperate wish. He could not think of it. He cannot bring himself upto killing with his own hands his wife whom he adored. Perhaps he feared his conscience would torment him for the rest of his life. It never occurred to him that he will be actually rendering her real service by fulfilling her wish. Such is the stance taken by an individual in the present social background built on ethics of old times and fear of interfering with divine will.

Do we not put suffering animals to sleep? Is that not a gesture of grand kindness? Even Mahatma Gandhi who preached and lived for “Ahimsa” requested the calf suffering in heartrending pain be put to sleep.

If animals meet with such gracious mercy do we human beings not deserve it much more strongly and urgently? What is the use of prolonging the life of a comatose person lying unconscious in a vegetable state for years on end?

The emotional trauma of the relatives and the heavy medical expenses can very well be saved in cent percent hopeless cases. When it is obvious that the utmost modern medical facilities cannot alleviate the pain and suffering of a terminally ill person whose remaining life shall tick on only for a few more days, hours or minutes, is it not merciful to take resort to euthanasia? Valuable medicine, time, money, service of the medical personnel can all be spared as also the unspeakable, indefinite anguish of near and dear ones. It is unnecessary to prolong the mental agony of all concerned.

In this modern age when thinking patterns and concepts have crystallized to a finer and saner level, let us learn to come to terms with death - willed death. Let us give death the dignity it deserves. It is easy once the decision is taken with conviction and confidence. It is better that way. It is a service of a special kind, of supreme discretion. Let us strive to get itsanctioned legally and ethically. Let sentimental tears give way to sensible adieu.

[blahblah]

Mrs.PP,I am sure your arguments came from a great heart,and you have put it down beautifully.However,I feel,if mercy killing is legalised it is surely going to be misused.I remember a recent case when a mother fought in court for her suffering son's right to die.It is a difficult question indeed.I somehow feel I will vote against it given a chance-not too sure.

I wonder why no one participated in this thread so far.May be you too are finding the qustion difficult.

[NM]

I wonder why no one participated in this thread so far.May be you too are finding the qustion difficult.

You're right, blahblah...Yesterday, I started out writing soemthing but could not go on....I have mixed feelings abt it..
On one hand, if I am the affected one, will definately request for my dear ones to put me to sleep forever....don't want to suffer and let our dear ones suffer too, not knowing what's going to happen and when/ if I will ever be able to be normal again.

But, on the other hand, if it happens to my loved ones, I don't think I will have the courage to let them go...seeing the dearly beloved's face is, I think, a btter option than to let them go permanently and live onmemories..but then again, guess, this is a selfish feeling! Guess one can only participate in this kind of thread if one had had the experience.....

[Sandeep]

I think mercy killing can be allowed with special permission from authorities. Since the chances of missusing this is high getting this permission should very very difficult and should be done in rarest of the rarest cases. May be at governor or presidencial level (Like it is done for in the case of mercy for death penalty)

May be in cases where a person is brain dead but whose heart is beating or in cases death is sure to come at the end of painful suffering.

Its unimaginable the suffering of a person who knows this dead is near or for his family who has to helplessly see him suffer.

Again you can never understate the possibility of missusing this by selfish family members.

[blahblah]

On one hand, if I am the affected one, will definately request for my dear ones to put me to sleep forever....don't want to suffer and let our dear ones suffer too

Think about the intense mental agony they will go through to live with the feeling that you would have lived[even though in suffering] atleast a few more days,if they chose to.That heavy feeling will never go away.I would rather endure the pain so that I don't grieve my dear ones.

However,it should be taken note that,world wide activists in favour of mercy killing[euthanesia or assisted suicide] have grossly exaggerated the suffering and have exploited the fear of suffering pain which is part of human character.Modern day medicines are a lot effective and can reduce the pain to a remarkable extent.

Again,Belgium and Netherlands are probably the only nations which have legalised assisted suicide and were not free from controversies either.So I would say it is too early for India to take a decision on this.

My father and an aunt died from cancer and I have been a witness to what they were going through.Both of them endured the pain and suffering with courage and dignity till their last breath.

So shall I be,or that's what I feel now.

[NM]

"
My father and an aunt died from cancer and I have been a witness to what they were going through.Both of them endured the pain and suffering with courage and dignity till their last breath.
So shall I be,or that's what I feel now.

Blahblah...I am sorry to hear that......
yeah...that's why, I said my thoughts may be selfish.....anyway, we can never tell, can we, unless we're in that situation..

[Shakthiprabha.]

ABSOLUTELY GREAT MESSEGE. sensible in everyway....

Its better to die once, than to die with pain 10000 times, every second.

[pavalamani pragasam]

The magazine section of today’s(10-4-’05) The New Sunday Express has published this interesting article by Timeri N Murari:

An ode to euthanasia
If humans lived for ever, what’ll happen to this earth?

At one time, Eskimos would carry their very old and infirm, after a simple ceremony of goodbye, out onto the ice and leave them there to die, either from the cold or to be eaten by the bears. This primitive form of euthanasia was very necessary as the harsh environment and limited food supply would not afford support to anyone who could not contribute to the survival of the tribe. Of course, the unhealthy never survived long anyway. In the wild, animals kill their young if they judge it will not be able to survive or if it will unbalance the pack or family unit. Primitive man too must have allowed the infirm, young or old, to die, and moved on in his perpetual search for food. Nature never has any patience for those who cannot fend for themselves.

Man has evolved since those days, and bounded free from the natural laws of survival. Medical science today can perform miracles, unimagined, except in science fiction, even a century or two ago. Today, virtually any one of our internal organs can be repaired or replaced, excluding the brain. No doubt that will happen too one day but until that day comes, and if the brain dies, we’re ‘dead’ too. We can be given artificial limbs, and the blind another person’s eyes. With such advances, our collective dream is to live forever. There are some who believe that one day we will perform the ultimate miracle, reserved only for the gods –raise the dead. In America, cryonics is in its infancy and there are a few people who have been frozen in nitrogen( or whatever chemical) for that day of medical resurrection. Having advanced so much in medical science to keep us alive and functioning, there is the understandable reluctance to take the life of someone who is in a coma. A miraculous day may yet arrive to breathe life back into the brain. Or replace it. When that does happen, we won’t need to debate the question of euthanasia, no doubt it will ever be over whose brain we receive.

Ancient Greek thinkers have favoured euthanasia, even though they opposed suicide. An exception is Hippocrates(460-370 BC), the ancient Greek physician, who in his famous oath states that “I will not prescribe a deadly drug to please someone, nor give advice that may cause his death.” During the Renaissance, English humanist Thomas More (1478-1535) defended Euthanasia in book “Utopia”(1516). More describes in idealic terms the function of hospitals. Hospital workers watch after patients with tender care and do everything in their power to cure ills. However, when a patient has a tortuous and incurable illness, the patient has the option to die, either through starvation or opium. In New Atlantis(1627), British philosopher Francis Bacon(1561-1626) writes that physicians are “not only to restore health, but to mitigate pain and dolours; and not only such mitigation may conduce to recovery, but when it may serve to make a fair and easy passage.”

Prolonging life is the privilege of the wealthy, as is good medical care. There is a saying that if the rich could pay the poor to die for them, there would be no poverty left in the world. It’s a matter of economics and, when I think about Terri Schiavo’s 15 year coma –hospital bed, nursing care, doctors, drips, nutrition –and knowing the exorbitant costs of American health care, I am in awe. Did she have Blue Cross picking up the tab? Mentioning mundane money may sound frivolous when discussing a “right-to-life” issue but it’s a very vital part of the debate. Who can afford to financially support a Terri Schiavo for so many years? Certainly, only wealthy countries like America and those in Europe. In other parts of the world, including India, we cannot afford such a luxury of financial expenditure in the hope that one day- how many years?-our loved one will wake from the long sleep. We’re a country where our poor sell their kidneys to the rich in order to survive. Now, if that isn’t economics of medicine and immortality, what is? If the Terri Schiavo’s were of Asian or other ethnic origin, I wondered whether there would be such a heated debate on the right to “pull-the-plug”, “disconnect-the-feeding tube”.

I am moved by the small advertisements in our newspapers with the photograph of someone, often a child, pleading for financial assistance for a major operation. In my own experience with orphans, I know that a baby born with any kind of “anomaly”( a medical term meaning major problem) is immediately surrendered to an orphanage by its parents. It’s only because the parents –always the poor- can foresee the costs of supporting and raising the child. They just cannot afford it and, the orphanage, to them, is the equivalent of the ice flows of the Arctic. Better to let the infirm child float away and die, and not drag us down further.

I believe medical science can perform a few miracles but there should be a time limit for coma patients. I would certainly want the plug to be pulled on me should my coma last longer than a year, and that will be a clause in my will. Hey, let me go and let my wife continue with her own life. I am thinking too of the emotional burden on those who keep watch by our bedsides. I have nothing but admiration for Terri’s husband, who kept this vigil, but also compassion for him to have been placed on emotional hold for so many years. Quite rightly, he decided that the wife he loved(and could not love him back) needed to be released from her vegetative existence. She had left him long ago, and now he is free to take up his own life once again.

Even as medical science continues to perform such miracles and, that one day we can live forever, the question is not only who will be lucky ones chosen for such immortality but also can the earth sustain immortal human beings? That’s not in its blueprint.


Meet the writer at:www.timerimurari.com

[Badri]

Wow! Kudos to Mrs PP for once again introducing a tough moral proposition!!!

My grandmother was ill...very ill, and suffering towards the end. She begged more than once to stop all medication, and allow her to pass peacefully, than to be kept alive in pain. My grandfather could not bear it, and even asked us for suggestions...he said he was willing to stop all medication, which would by itself bring about the end. We opposed, vehemently. I was at the fore, angry with my grandad for even having suggested it...to me, he appeared cruel...

My grandmom passed away shortly thereafter, despite going ahead with the medication, and two years later, my grandad slipped into a semi-coma. We continued the life support systems till finally the end came naturally.

In both instances, despite the pain or the cost, we just did not want to do anything that could bring the end any closer...was it selfishness? Was it love? Was it hope that somehow, everything will become alright again, and to pull the plug would bring a premature end to what might become better?

Yes, in older socities, this was a common thing. "Mudumakkal thazhis" were a common feature, found even in the ruins of Mohenjadaro and Harappa. Almost all primitive tribes practice some form of euthanasia even today. So, would we be also considered primitive then, if we were to follow those same traditions? Where is civilization then?

Mrs PP quoted the Spartans and TN Murari, who in turn quoted the Eskimos. But if the fact that early scocities practiced some form it were a license for euthanasia, then, even rudimentary medication should be stopped! After all, it is survival of the fittest, why support the unfit with medication? Why take the new born to even a hospital? Let us see if the new born child is strong enough to weather its first disorders and diseases by itself.

Why bother with caesarian sections for pregnancy? Let the mother and child die then, if they are not "biologically" fit!!

When stated like this, I am sure all of us would realize how ridiculous that argument is. It may have been ok in primitive societies. Not in today's world. Will any mother, including those women in this hub who have so supported euthanasia be willing to go ahead with that for her child?

Hope is life...hope keeps us alive. In not letting our loved ones die, we are hoping they will recover. What if...what if the beloved one recovers? Should we not give them that time?

Again, Mrs PP quoted the Bhagvad Gita...going by the dicates of Karma, euthanasia is like suicide in that it leaves an incomplete life...which is against all shastraic principles. Simply going by that, it would have to be unacceptable. A view that is supported by every religion. No religion condones suicide, and for that same reason, would not condone euthanasia either

No, no matter how you view it, euthanasia cannot be accepted in human society. And calling it "mercy killing" is the greatest farce of all!

[Roshan]

badri,

I hold the same view as yours !!