Faith leaders back palliative care as ëassisted dyingí row continues
-21/04/06
As the p
Faith leaders back palliative care as ëassisted dyingí row continues
-21/04/06
As the political row continues over the Assisted Dying Bill currently before parliament in the UK, leaders of faith communities in Essex and East London have joined together to champion the benefits of supportive care for people living with terminal illness and their families.
But backers of reform, including theology professor Paul Badham, say that the undoubted benefits of palliative care should not be used to obscure the difficult practical and moral questions which led Lord Joffe to bring forward his Bill ñ the situation of people whose agony may otherwise be maintained or extended by technology.
Terminal illness is something which many people will have to face. Research indicates that one person in every three will develop some form of cancer in their lifetime, and even for those under the age of 65, one in three will not survive.
In announcing the faith leadersí supportive care initiative, the Anglican Bishop of Chelmsford, The Rt Revd John Gladwin, said: ìIt’s not just about buildings but the care provided by hospices, Macmillan nurses and district nurses in people’s homes and day care facilities. In addition we want to encourage policy makers to bring the valuable experience of supportive care into mainstream healthcare provision.î
At present there are around 3,000 hospice places available across the whole country ñ with resourcing limits still placing the style and approach of the widely-praised hospice movement beyond the current capacity of the National Health Service.
NHS campaigners want that issue addressed, stressing that private or charitable initiatives that benefit only the few are not enough.
Palliative care, say it supporters, aims to help people make the most of every moment they have and to achieve their personal goals. The highest value is placed on respect, choice and empowerment. Supportive care includes hospice care and community care.
The multidisciplinary approach also involves pain control through drug therapy, symptom relief and skilled nursing, together with a full range of additional services ? counselling, complementary therapies, spiritual and personal care, creative activities, physiotherapy and bereavement support.
Referring to the Essex and East London faith leadersí joint commitment, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Brentwood, the Rt Revd Thomas McMahon, said: ìIt is vitally important to act now to safeguard, develop and fund supportive care services for people living with terminal illness and their families.î
Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui from the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, Rabbi David Hulbert from the Bet Tikvah Synagogue, Newbury Park, and the Sukkat Shalom Synagogue, Wanstead, and Mr Harmander Singh, principal advisor to Sikhs in England, have also given public support to palliative care ñ and have opposed euthanasia.
Mr Singh declared: ìIn the present day climate of rationing resources, more effort could be made in reducing hospital administration to a minimum. Life is precious and beyond monetary value.î
Though a 2004 NOP survey showed that 81 per cent of Anglicans and Catholics favour medical help to die for those ìsuffering unbearablyî, spokespeople for the major religious groups in the UK have been outspoken in opposing the Assisted Dying Bill, which was introduced in the House of Lordís on 8 January 2004 and has gone through a revision process.
Opposition and questioning has also come from disability organisations, with a spokesperson for RADAR declaring: ìAssisted dying legislation will not create autonomy until supported independent living is a real societal value and a reality for disabled people.î
Care Not Killing, a new alliance of 21 organisations formed to promote palliative care and oppose euthanasia, was launched on 31 January 2006. Members include the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Council of Disabled People, RADAR, the Christian Medical Fellowship and the Medical Ethics Alliance.
However, supporters of Lord Joffeís Bill argue that it is promoting choice and empowerment, not coercion towards euthanasia. They say that it is inhuman and unfair to compel people who wish to end their suffering to stay alive, to deny choice, or to impose one particular moral interpretations on the dilemma faced by people in exceptional circumstances.
They also reject the suggestion that the Bill will lead to abuse ñ families or medical professionals encouraging people to die for resource or convenience reasons.
The British Medical Association, though traditionally against euthanasia, has adopted a neutral stance to the legislation , pending further investigation. It admits that its members are deeply divided on the subject.
Those who back change include humanist and secularist organisations (who say that religious groups are using moral blackmail to obscure the facts of assisted dying) Dignity in Dying (the re-branded Voluntary Euthanasia Society) and civil rights advocates.
The Modern Churchpeopleís Union (MCU), a historic society to promote open theological debate within the Church of England, is one of the religious bodies to have come out broadly in favour of Lord Joffeís Bill.
In a detailed submission on MCUís behalf to the Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill, Professor Paul Badham, who holds the Chair for Theology and Religious Studies in the University of Wales, argues for a ìgood deathî as a legitimate Christian option and understanding.
He writes: ìIt is interesting that, though historically Jesus died a cruel death at the hands of his enemies, the fourth Gospel presents it as his own choice: ëNo one takes it from me. I lay it down of my own accord.í From a Christian perspective death is not viewed as a disaster, but as gateway to fuller life. In the early Church this was very firmly believed.î
Dr Badham goes on to argue that ìbefore St. Augustine changed Christian attitudes to this question, many of the early Christians continued to hold the stoic understanding of suicide as, ëa noble deathí. The beliefs of the early Christians provide an interesting counter balance to those of their successors today who give priority to the prolongation of life at all costs.î
However MCU argues that legislation on the matter needs to be carefully controlled and monitored, arguing against a time limit on any declaration of intent which ìmay put pressure on a patient to ask for implementation of assisted suicide before that date.î
In a careful submission to the Select Committee, the British Humanist Association (BHA), which favours change, also raised reservations about some aspects of the Bill.
Advocates of hospice care, the majority of whom oppose assisted dying, say that it is one of the UK’s outstanding success stories. From the opening of the first modern hospice, St Christopher’s, in south London in 1967, it has grown into a worldwide movement that has radically changed the way people approach death and dying.
But groups such as MCU say that this does not take away the need to face difficult decisions over assisted dying, and that a merciful approach to people who wish to be relieved of undue suffering at the end of life is not the ìcult of deathî that some critics say it is.
Further resources: Hospice Information site, Professor Badham’s MCU submission on Assisted Dying, the Christian Medical Fellowship briefing, and British Humanist Association submission on Joffe.
[Also from Ekklesia: Adviser to Archbishop of Canterbury says mercy killing may be OK;
Euthanasia on the increase as British couple commit suicide; Amendment defeated but Government offers concessions over Mental Capacity Bill; Campaigner’s disquiet at passing of Mental Capacity Bill; Outrage from churches over euthanasia on newborns]
Faith leaders back palliative care as ëassisted dyingí row continues
-21/04/06
As the political row continues over the Assisted Dying Bill currently before parliament in the UK, leaders of faith communities in Essex and East London have joined together to champion the benefits of supportive care for people living with terminal illness and their families.
But backers of reform, including theology professor Paul Badham, say that the undoubted benefits of palliative care should not be used to obscure the difficult practical and moral questions which led Lord Joffe to bring forward his Bill ñ the situation of people whose agony may otherwise be maintained or extended by technology.
Terminal illness is something which many people will have to face. Research indicates that one person in every three will develop some form of cancer in their lifetime, and even for those under the age of 65, one in three will not survive.
In announcing the faith leadersí supportive care initiative, the Anglican Bishop of Chelmsford, The Rt Revd John Gladwin, said: ìIt’s not just about buildings but the care provided by hospices, Macmillan nurses and district nurses in people’s homes and day care facilities. In addition we want to encourage policy makers to bring the valuable experience of supportive care into mainstream healthcare provision.î
At present there are around 3,000 hospice places available across the whole country ñ with resourcing limits still placing the style and approach of the widely-praised hospice movement beyond the current capacity of the National Health Service.
NHS campaigners want that issue addressed, stressing that private or charitable initiatives that benefit only the few are not enough.
Palliative care, say it supporters, aims to help people make the most of every moment they have and to achieve their personal goals. The highest value is placed on respect, choice and empowerment. Supportive care includes hospice care and community care.
The multidisciplinary approach also involves pain control through drug therapy, symptom relief and skilled nursing, together with a full range of additional services ? counselling, complementary therapies, spiritual and personal care, creative activities, physiotherapy and bereavement support.
Referring to the Essex and East London faith leadersí joint commitment, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Brentwood, the Rt Revd Thomas McMahon, said: ìIt is vitally important to act now to safeguard, develop and fund supportive care services for people living with terminal illness and their families.î
Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui from the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, Rabbi David Hulbert from the Bet Tikvah Synagogue, Newbury Park, and the Sukkat Shalom Synagogue, Wanstead, and Mr Harmander Singh, principal advisor to Sikhs in England, have also given public support to palliative care ñ and have opposed euthanasia.
Mr Singh declared: ìIn the present day climate of rationing resources, more effort could be made in reducing hospital administration to a minimum. Life is precious and beyond monetary value.î
Though a 2004 NOP survey showed that 81 per cent of Anglicans and Catholics favour medical help to die for those ìsuffering unbearablyî, spokespeople for the major religious groups in the UK have been outspoken in opposing the Assisted Dying Bill, which was introduced in the House of Lordís on 8 January 2004 and has gone through a revision process.
Opposition and questioning has also come from disability organisations, with a spokesperson for RADAR declaring: ìAssisted dying legislation will not create autonomy until supported independent living is a real societal value and a reality for disabled people.î
Care Not Killing, a new alliance of 21 organisations formed to promote palliative care and oppose euthanasia, was launched on 31 January 2006. Members include the Association for Palliative Medicine of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Council of Disabled People, RADAR, the Christian Medical Fellowship and the Medical Ethics Alliance.
However, supporters of Lord Joffeís Bill argue that it is promoting choice and empowerment, not coercion towards euthanasia. They say that it is inhuman and unfair to compel people who wish to end their suffering to stay alive, to deny choice, or to impose one particular moral interpretations on the dilemma faced by people in exceptional circumstances.
They also reject the suggestion that the Bill will lead to abuse ñ families or medical professionals encouraging people to die for resource or convenience reasons.
The British Medical Association, though traditionally against euthanasia, has adopted a neutral stance to the legislation , pending further investigation. It admits that its members are deeply divided on the subject.
Those who back change include humanist and secularist organisations (who say that religious groups are using moral blackmail to obscure the facts of assisted dying) Dignity in Dying (the re-branded Voluntary Euthanasia Society) and civil rights advocates.
The Modern Churchpeopleís Union (MCU), a historic society to promote open theological debate within the Church of England, is one of the religious bodies to have come out broadly in favour of Lord Joffeís Bill.
In a detailed submission on MCUís behalf to the Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill, Professor Paul Badham, who holds the Chair for Theology and Religious Studies in the University of Wales, argues for a ìgood deathî as a legitimate Christian option and understanding.
He writes: ìIt is interesting that, though historically Jesus died a cruel death at the hands of his enemies, the fourth Gospel presents it as his own choice: ëNo one takes it from me. I lay it down of my own accord.í From a Christian perspective death is not viewed as a disaster, but as gateway to fuller life. In the early Church this was very firmly believed.î
Dr Badham goes on to argue that ìbefore St. Augustine changed Christian attitudes to this question, many of the early Christians continued to hold the stoic understanding of suicide as, ëa noble deathí. The beliefs of the early Christians provide an interesting counter balance to those of their successors today who give priority to the prolongation of life at all costs.î
However MCU argues that legislation on the matter needs to be carefully controlled and monitored, arguing against a time limit on any declaration of intent which ìmay put pressure on a patient to ask for implementation of assisted suicide before that date.î
In a careful submission to the Select Committee, the British Humanist Association (BHA), which favours change, also raised reservations about some aspects of the Bill.
Advocates of hospice care, the majority of whom oppose assisted dying, say that it is one of the UK’s outstanding success stories. From the opening of the first modern hospice, St Christopher’s, in south London in 1967, it has grown into a worldwide movement that has radically changed the way people approach death and dying.
But groups such as MCU say that this does not take away the need to face difficult decisions over assisted dying, and that a merciful approach to people who wish to be relieved of undue suffering at the end of life is not the ìcult of deathî that some critics say it is.
Further resources: Hospice Information site, Professor Badham’s MCU submission on Assisted Dying, the Christian Medical Fellowship briefing, and British Humanist Association submission on Joffe.
[Also from Ekklesia: Adviser to Archbishop of Canterbury says mercy killing may be OK;
Euthanasia on the increase as British couple commit suicide; Amendment defeated but Government offers concessions over Mental Capacity Bill; Campaigner’s disquiet at passing of Mental Capacity Bill; Outrage from churches over euthanasia on newborns]