Catholic Q and A

Q. Is Euthanasia Legal in the Netherlands?

A. In 2002, the Netherlands enacted a law which allows euthanasia and assisted suicide. This law permits a very lose interpretation which tolerates not only the terminally ill to be killed, but anyone who is suffering. Doctors also take many liberties with patients who they feel are no longer a benefit to society. The legalization of these procedures has instilled fear in many in this cost conscious country. A law that is so contrary to the natural law must be a form of legal positivism and relativism. Through the exploration Pope John Paul II's writings on the dignity of human life and the use of right reason, one can easily see that this law should be opposed and reversed.

A Dutch law that permitted both euthanasia and assisted suicide went into effect on April 1, 2002 (International Task Force [ITF] 1). This law requires the "procedure be carried out in a medically appropriate fashion" meaning that a former crime can now be considered a medical treatment (ITF 1). Anyone aged 16 or older can prepare a "written statement containing a request for termination of life " (ITF 1). A doctor may carry out this statement even if it had been written years before and the person s views may have changed. This law states: "Teenagers 16 to 18 years old may request and receive euthanasia or assisted suicide. A parent or guardian must "have been involved in [the] decision process, but need not agree or approve " (IFT 1). Those aged 12 to 16 may also request and receive euthanasia or assisted suicide, but in this age group, a parent or guardian must consent (ITF 1). Under this Dutch law, to qualify for assisted suicide or euthanasia, a doctor must believe that the "patient 's suffering is lasting and unbearable" (IFT 1). This does not require that the ailment be physical or the patient be terminally ill. Perhaps the senior is bored with life, a teenager suffers from untreated depression, or one is suicidal. Also, doctors are not required to consult with psychologists before consenting to a patient's desire to die.

According to recent polls, over 80% of the Dutch population is in favor of voluntary euthanasia (Miniter 1). Of the 130,000 Dutchmen who died in 1990, some 11,800 were killed or helped to die by their doctors (Miniter1). This statistic came 12 years before euthanasia and assisted suicide were legally sanctioned by this new law. Of this number, an estimated 5,891 people (an average of 16 per day) did not consent to be killed, but yet their doctors took this liberty (Miniter 1). This practice, known as termination without request or consent is not even formally considered euthanasia by the statistics complied by the government (Smith 1). Because the Dutch officially define euthanasia as the ending of one s life due to request, they do not consider those who did not request death to have been euthanized. This means that approximately 4% of all Dutch deaths are due to involuntary euthanasia and go unreported as such (Smith 1). These numbers still do not reflect those in other groups who are put to death involuntarily such as disabled infants, terminally ill children, and mental patients. According to a 1997 study, 8% of infants who die in the Netherlands are killed by their doctors (Miniter 2). According to a recent survey, which did not mention euthanasia, 10% of Dutch senior citizens admitted that they were afraid of being killed by their doctors without their consent (Miniter 2).

Before the 2002 law, over 50% of Dutch doctors admitted to practicing euthanasia. Only 60% of these doctors kept records of their euthanasia practices and only 29% filled out death certificates for euthanasia patients correctly (Dykxhoorn 1).

The Netherlands is a country of socialized medicine where doctors are constantly being lectured on keeping costs down. In some hospitals, signs are posted listing how much senior s treatments are costing (Miniter 2). Pressure to do away with the old is felt not only by doctors, but seniors alike. Many voluntary euthanasia cases may not be truly consensual (Miniter 2). If a senior s children are pushing for euthanasia, the senior may not want to burden his or her children with the cost and time of remaining alive. In the last two decades, elderly suicides rates dropped 33% as euthanasia experienced an almost equal rise (Miniter 2). The Netherlands has few hospices so dignified methods of diminishing suffering are usually never considered or discussed with the patient.

In their nearly 30 years of euthanasia practice, Dutch doctors have gone from killing terminally kill patients who ask for it, to chronically ill patients who ask for it, to disabled patients who ask for it, to depressed patients who ask for it, to babies who cannot by definition ask for it, to thousands of patients without request or consent, writes Wesley Smith (3).

This law is an example of legal positivism, the idea that a law is valid simply because it has been properly enacted. Legal positivism is based on relativism the idea that no one can know what is truly right so it must be decided through the political process. By looking at the example of the Dutch euthanasia law, one can see that man has no intrinsic value in legal positivism. Doctors can legally kill patients in the Netherlands because a law has been enacted in the proper way not because it has been found to be an intrinsically good action.

Natural law theory is a contrasting way to look at the philosophy behind the law. Those that have faith in the theory of natural law believe there are objective rights and wrongs. If one subscribed to the idea of natural law, one would immediately see that euthanasia and assisted suicide are against the objective moral order that society should abide by. Every human has the fundamental right to life. Life is valuable regardless of its contribution to society. The law should take a special interest in protecting the rights of the vulnerable who can be easily exploited by society. The Dutch law specifically goes against this principle. It allows the weakest and most defenseless members of society the young, the old, the handicapped to be killed and often without their own consent.

Pope John Paul II writes:

Laws which authorize and promote euthanasia are therefore radically opposed not only to the good of the individual but also to the common good; as such they are completely lacking in authentic juridical validity. Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good. Consequently, a civil law authorizing euthanasia ceases by that very fact to be a true, morally binding civil law (133).

Therefore, those believing in the natural law theory see the Dutch law as an intrinsically unjust law and as such oppose it. The real purpose of civil law is to guarantee an ordered social coexistence in true justice, so that all may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way, writes the pontiff (130).

Laws, such as the Dutch law legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, that disregard man s fundamental right to life and follow the theory of legal positivism instead of natural law theory are wrong. They should be opposed and fought against. Laws such as these do not support the dignity of the human person or flow from the true source of law. The Netherlands should begin offering therapy and hospice to those seeking death to begin promoting a culture of life.

Sources

Dykxhoorn, Hermina. "Euthanasia in the Netherlands. " Christian Renewal. 3 pp. Online. Internet. 3 Nov. 2003.
International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. "Holland's Euthanasia Law." International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide. 2 pp. Online. Internet. 3 Nov. 2003.
Miniter, Richard. "The Dutch Way of Death." Opinion Journal from The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page. (April 28, 2001): 3 pp. Online. Internet. 3 Nov. 2003.
Paul, Pope John II. The Gospel of Life. Trans. by Vatican. New York: Random House, 1995
Smith, Wesley J. "Going Dutch. " Guest Comment. (December 18, 2000): 3 pp. Online. Internet. 3 Nov. 2003