What can Christians do as more countries embrace euthanasia?

Throughout October, CNE revisited various talking points within assisted dying/euthanasia that are going on throughout Europe. With more EU states revisiting and/or approving legislation on assisted dying, what can Christians do to cultivate human dignity and that all lives are worth fighting for within our countries?

As much of healthcare becomes strained due to increased dependence, lack of funding, and an ageing population, patients complain that the current system is numerically focused with little regard to treating the actual condition. CNE believes that in order to restore what is broken, it will require taking smaller steps before the larger leaps can take place.

As part of those strides, here are the five ways to move foward:

1. Christians must be informed on the latest attitudes regarding euthanasia.

Support for assisted dying is rising according to a 2024 study that was cited in an EU Parliament briefing. The study found that an increasing number of countries have legalised EAS (Euthanasia and Assisted suicide). It was also the case that within those places, the number of people who opted for assisted dying also went up.

The EU also cited a 2019 report that at least 87 percent of Dutch adults residing in the Netherlands approve euthanasia “under certain circumstances”.

Another study from 2023 revealed that out of 35 high-income states, all but two had developed more positive attitudes about euthanasia over a 40-year period. The report also acknowledges that shifting attitudes, medical advances, and a greying population may be drivers behind countries consistently revisiting euthanasia.

At present, Belgium, Spain, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands permit physician-administered assisted dying. France has recently passed their assisted dying bill in its parliament while Ireland, Malta, Cyprus, Portugal, and Slovenia are debating how to incorporate euthanasia into their healthcare, the EU report also revealed.

2. The reports on abuse regarding vulnerable populations are in need of an update and further investigation.

In the same EU briefing that shows current attitudes on euthanasia, it also cites studies from 2007 and 2009 which are more than 15 years old. These older studies also predate critical amendments were made within states that adopted euthanasia.

In the 2007 study the EU cites, the assisted dying rates for the US state of Oregon and the Netherlands revealed no “heightened risk” for vulnerable groups such as the uninsured, elderly, the poor, and people with mental health conditions. They also cite a 2009 report that looked at two decades of euthanasia in the Netherlands.

The report showed that euthanasia did not “lead to any abuse” and that “no evidence of a slippery slope” of ending the lives of vulnerable groups such as those with psychiatric illnesses.

To insert this data into the EU’s latest report does not accurately reflect the current picture. Take for example a recent study from the Psychiatric Times that revealed that “psychiatric euthanasia” in the Netherlands went from virtually non-existent (1-2 cases per year from 2002-2010) to 138 in 2023.

3. In addition to abuse on vulnerable populations, the lack of safeguards needs to be addressed.

Last month in October, CNE highlighted a Canadian study by Cardus that compared euthanasia/assisted dying structures across the world.

The Cardus report evaluated various the processes behind patient/physician requests, consent, assessors/witnesses, and others.

The report also showed that stronger safeguards were needed to protect vulnerable populations. We also reported on France’s recently passed assisted dying bill and the UN’s concerns on the lack of safeguards regarding the severely disabled.

Additionally, some media reports have pointed out critical blindspots within countries that have established systems of euthanasia/assisted dying in place. Take for example, the case of Brigitte Stegemann in Canada which we referenced in a previous report and the ongoing cases that are now allowing young adults and teens with mental health challenges to end their lives. More awareness needs to be raised on these stories as well as answering the harder questions as to why these events are happening.

4. Palliative care needs to be brought to the forefront within our healthcare systems.

It should not be an afterthought on our budgets but an effective, first-line option among our healthcare practitioners.

Several advances in palliative care have occurred within the digital age, and with AI now becoming more established, these can create more opportunities to make it more accessible. In an academic editorial on advances in palliative care, its authors reference a necessary directive by palliative care researcher, Allan Kellehear: “We should make it everybody’s business,” he says.

Kellehear also says that we need to change the 95 percent rule that often applies when it comes to end of life care. Approximately 95 percent falls on “informal caregivers” on administering care in that person’s final year of life such as family, friends, and community members. The remaining 5 percent actually rests on “direct contact with healthcare services.”

How can we change this statistic and provide better support to those who are suffering and/or at the end of life? If palliative care and other alternatives to care were truly prioritised, less would opt for euthanasia as a means to end their suffering.

5. Confront the deeper philosophical questions on suffering within our communities.

Secular worldviews lean toward doing everything possible to eliminate suffering and choose the path of least resistance. In the Christian worldview, suffering has meaning, and for those who know Him, He promises an eternal life in Heaven where our suffering is no more. Jesus suffered terribly on this earth to give humanity the greatest gift. He took place at the cross so we no longer have to die in our sins.

Pastor and theologian Tim Keller provided much insight into the concept of suffering and offers us this challenge:.

In the secular worldview, suffering has no meaning and is viewed as “an interruption or the end of your life’s story.” But what if suffering can be viewed as “a chapter to one’s life story” and can position us in “reaching our life goals”? He says in a post by The Gospel Coalition. How would this understanding revolutionise the way we see suffering as a society?