Keep Your Laws Off My Body
Why an Octogenarian's Suicide Should not be a Crime
Ben Harley
Issue date: 2/9/10 Section: Opinion
"Keep your laws off my body."
What do you think when you hear that phrase? Me, I always think of pro-choice demonstrators. I think of rallies outside on clinics. I think of poster boards cluttered with cliches on both sides of the fence.
But what does that phrase really mean? It means that those who paint it, wear it or say it believe that the individual's rights are more important than any legislative body. These people believe in personal freedom and individual liberty. I am one of these, and so was Kathleen (Kay) Carter.
According to "The Vancouver Sun", Carter was an 89-year-old resident of Vancouver, Canada. She suffered from a terminal disease known as spinal tenosis. According to The Sun" Carter felt as if her body was, "totally collapsing." Thus, she decided to end her life.
She, her two daughters and her son-in-law had to go to Zurich, Switzerland for the operation. In Canada, just like Illinois, it is illegal to end your own life, or to help a loved one die with dignity.
It is ridiculous that a dieing old woman would have to leave her country to avoid the pain that would come with her inevitable demise. There is no reason that the government should stop Kay from dieing in the manner she chose. It is her life to live and to end. She was rational; she made a rational decision.
I believe that we live in a culture that is too preoccupied with death. We are frightened of it, perhaps more so than any other generation. We are constantly attempting to prolong the inevitable. We take pills, change lifestyles and eat organic foods all in the hope that we can eek another year out of our existence.
And we are doing a great job of surviving. The average American's life span, according to The National Vital Statistics System, has risen by over 10 years in the last 40 years. While, this may be great news, it defiantly is not natural.
We are surviving because of human creations such as immunizations, surgeries and other medical advancements. So the question becomes: if the extension of life isn't natural, why are we so obsessed about the end of life being natural?
Further, how do we draw the line between what consists of a natural or unnatural death? If an elderly woman refuses a blood transfusion is that unnatural? Did she just commit euthanasia?
Is a smoker attempting euthanasia with every drag?
We cannot answer these questions for certain. The government can not attempt to create laws that attempt to keep us all alive forever. And why should they try? These are personal issues, and they need to be dealt with personally.
At the end of the day society needs to recognize that the right to die is an inalienable, personal right. None of us were given the choice to be born or not, but every day we make the choice to live. If someone no longer wants to make that choice, then who are we to stop them?
It's their life. Let it be their death
What do you think when you hear that phrase? Me, I always think of pro-choice demonstrators. I think of rallies outside on clinics. I think of poster boards cluttered with cliches on both sides of the fence.
But what does that phrase really mean? It means that those who paint it, wear it or say it believe that the individual's rights are more important than any legislative body. These people believe in personal freedom and individual liberty. I am one of these, and so was Kathleen (Kay) Carter.
According to "The Vancouver Sun", Carter was an 89-year-old resident of Vancouver, Canada. She suffered from a terminal disease known as spinal tenosis. According to The Sun" Carter felt as if her body was, "totally collapsing." Thus, she decided to end her life.
She, her two daughters and her son-in-law had to go to Zurich, Switzerland for the operation. In Canada, just like Illinois, it is illegal to end your own life, or to help a loved one die with dignity.
It is ridiculous that a dieing old woman would have to leave her country to avoid the pain that would come with her inevitable demise. There is no reason that the government should stop Kay from dieing in the manner she chose. It is her life to live and to end. She was rational; she made a rational decision.
I believe that we live in a culture that is too preoccupied with death. We are frightened of it, perhaps more so than any other generation. We are constantly attempting to prolong the inevitable. We take pills, change lifestyles and eat organic foods all in the hope that we can eek another year out of our existence.
And we are doing a great job of surviving. The average American's life span, according to The National Vital Statistics System, has risen by over 10 years in the last 40 years. While, this may be great news, it defiantly is not natural.
We are surviving because of human creations such as immunizations, surgeries and other medical advancements. So the question becomes: if the extension of life isn't natural, why are we so obsessed about the end of life being natural?
Further, how do we draw the line between what consists of a natural or unnatural death? If an elderly woman refuses a blood transfusion is that unnatural? Did she just commit euthanasia?
Is a smoker attempting euthanasia with every drag?
We cannot answer these questions for certain. The government can not attempt to create laws that attempt to keep us all alive forever. And why should they try? These are personal issues, and they need to be dealt with personally.
At the end of the day society needs to recognize that the right to die is an inalienable, personal right. None of us were given the choice to be born or not, but every day we make the choice to live. If someone no longer wants to make that choice, then who are we to stop them?
It's their life. Let it be their death
Be the first to comment on this story