Donald B.
Ardell – September 25, 2011
The infamous GOP presidential debate from Tampa last week
(but aren't they all?) had many lowlights. The depths were plumbed when CNN's
moderator, the "Situation Room" blowhard Wolf Blitzer, asked Rep. Ron
Paul about a person who elected not to purchase health insurance but later
needed expensive medical care to survive. Ron Paul replied, "That's what
freedom is all about - taking your own risks." Blitzer, seeking
clarification, then asked, "So society should just let him die?"
The Tea Bagger audience went wild with acclaim for that
idea. A loud "Yeah!" was heard above the clamor.
None of the other Republican presidential candidates offered
a softer, more nuanced perspective.
I was hoping Blitzer would ask one of the candidates about
assisted suicide, which I prefer to call "merciful assistance" in
checking out. Here, too, Republicans distinguish themselves in the worst
possible ways. Republicans, being religious extremists, wholeheartedly support
death without dignity, no matter the pain, costs or
suffering. The "let the market decide - if you can't pay, too
bad" Republicans prefer intrusive in this instance, rather than supporting
freedom to choose one's time and method of death. They oppose giving Americans
the right to qualified assistance to put an end to suffering, even when there
is no hope for cure, no relief from pain, no prospect for quality of life.
Remember Clint Eastwood’s recent film “Million Dollar Baby?”
The movie provided a dramatic look at assisted suicide. Many religious leaders
were outraged, angry at the idea that humans, not their sky god, can any right
to take a life, even one's own, under any circumstances. If God wanted us to
die peacefully without pain in dignified ways, he would have made such
arrangements.
Earl Wettstein, President of the
"Final Exit Network," cites polls that show more than 70 percent of
Americans support an individual's right-to-die. Under
circumstances similar to those depicted in "Million Dollar Baby" and
sketched above (i.e., a terminal person suffering unremitting pain with no
prospect for recovery), most Americans would choose to die – and would
want qualified assistance in doing so. I have asked countless friends and
nearly all my relatives about this, and the view seems unanimous that everyone
people want to be able to choose and insist upon the right to help those they
love and support to die. People want to eliminate legal barriers to merciful endings.
One of my heroes, a man who suffered greatly because of his commitment to
merciful endings, was Dr. Jack Kevorkian. But there are other advocates for the
right to this final freedom, the liberty to choose when and how to die. One
prominent advocate for merciful endings is Philip Nitschke, an Australian
doctor who believes everyone over 50 should have an end of life plan - and the
legal right to carry it out. At present, he cannot assist provide merciful
endings, but he can and does offer the ultimate form of self-help knowledge.
You an learn about Dr. Nitschke and his approaches in this
interview.
What are your ideas about merciful endings? Do you support this concept in
general and would you want to have such an option yourself in your final
moments? What do you think is the likelihood that all Americans and other free
people around the world will have such a right in the future?
Donald B.
Ardell is the Well Infidel. He favors evidence over faith, reason over
revelation and secular perspectives over the gobbledygook of spirituality. His
enthusiasm for reason, exuberance, athleticism and liberty are reflected in his
books (14), newsletter (588 editions of a weekly report), speeches and most
recently, a full deck for playing a REAL wellness card game. Write Don for a
sample copy of his newsletter at awr.realwellness@gmail.com