Interview Rev. Dr. Joseph Parkinson
Director L J Goody Bioethics Centre
Part 2
Hong Nhung:A common argument against the Church’s teaching on euthanasia is that: “Why should I suffer and then die, when I can choose to die without suffering?” A few people, even Catholics, have an impression that the Church seems to commend suffering. How would you respond to that?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:I’d make several points, first of all. Generally speaking, in our health system, it’s not necessary to suffer pain in the process of dying. Generally speaking. Most pain can be controlled, if not eliminated, controlled to a reasonable level. It’s true that there is some breakthrough pain, which is extremely difficult to control. But generally that is towards the very end of life, it’s often in the last days or hours. But of course what we’re talking about is suffering, not just pain. Suffering can be more than just physical pain, it can be psychological, and it can be spiritual. There are other aspects to suffering which can’t necessarily be controlled, certainly not by medication anyway. Now the Church holds that suffering can be redemptive. If the person unites themselves with the sufferings of Christ. So that means the person chooses to identify their own suffering with the suffering of our Lord. And of course does that with a clear sense of the resurrection, that suffering is not the end of the story, that there’s something extraordinary and wonderful after that. So we would certainly hold that as a valuable part of our understanding of suffering. But that’s something for each individual to choose. It’s not something that the Church says everyone has to endure. It’s a choice we each can make for our own reasons. And it’s quite okay to not want to suffer. That’s all right. We are committed as a Church which promotes health care, to minimize the suffering, to reducing it -- through analgesics, through medications, through counselling, all of the other ways that are able to achieve that. Even when medications might render a person unconscious, when that’s necessary, then we’re quite comfortable with that. So in a sense, there’s no real need for people to die in pain. If they choose not to, if they want to have that pain controlled or suppressed, that can happen. Your question, I think, is about euthanasia, “Why shouldn’t I just be able to ask for an injection that will kill me?” There’d be an argument; I suppose if that’s all euthanasia lobbying wanted. But in fact, they’re on the public record saying that they really want the right to choose when to die – the moment of death and the mode of death, even without suffering. When a person’s simply tired of life, that, “this is the time to end it, so I’ll end it” But it’s also important to realise, that in order to do that, a person needs the help of someone else, a doctor or a nurse, often euthanasia really means physician-assistance suicide. Now there are major problems with that. Do I really have the right to ask someone to kill me? Can I make that demand of you? Can I put you under that sort of pressure? Can I expect the medical profession to change what has been its driving method; it’s dynamic for hundreds, even thousands, of years; to ask the medical profession, to change that now because some people want to end their lives at a time of their own choosing. Nowhere that has passed laws to enable euthanasia have those laws been able to control the practice. It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about the Netherlands or Switzerland or Belgium or the state of Oregon, in the United States. In all those legislatures, there’s ample evidence of abuses of the law, that people are being euthanized without being asked first. The requirements of the law not being met by doctors. Nowhere has been able to control it, so, my sense is, while I can understand people wanting the right to die at a time of their choosing, I don’t know that anyone has the right to ask or demand help in doing that, and I know it’s impossible to control it, if the law is passed.
Hong Nhung:In Vietnam, we have programs to assist AIDS patients and their children, to provide health care and aged care for the poor, and palliative care for the sufferings. We understand that we ought not to simply argue against euthanasia, and physician-assisted suicide. To be truly credible in our stand, we need to stand up for the suffering, the dying, and those afraid to endure. Is there anything else that you can suggest?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:I understand and I agree entirely. We can’t as a church, simply be sending a negative message all the time. Jesus wasn’t always all about telling people what they shouldn’t do. He was about empowering them to be everything God calls them to be and embraces them to be. So, it’s certainly true that there comes a time when we need to be prepared to put our money where our mouth is and commit to initiatives that will support the dying, that will provide relief for suffering that will seek to look after and comfort and seek cures for HIV and so on. This is a challenge for the whole church, this is not just for the bishops, and it’s for the people of the church to take up as well. And of course, in a sense, the bishops can only do what the people will enable them to do. I can only agree with the direction of your question. We need to do more than simply say, “no”, all the time, we need to be promoting the dignity of life in positive ways, in whatever way we can and building up what Pope John Paul [II] called, “the culture of life” That’s a whole atmosphere, an ethos which respects all people regardless of where they are, where they come from or where they’re going. How we do that? Well, we each need to do it in our own personal life first of all, but then as a church we also need to be committed to making that happen; health care and in a whole lot of other ways as well.
Hong Nhung:Three years ago, we published your speech – a very eloquent one – at the launch of the book “Advancing the Culture of Death: Euthanasia And Physician-Assisted Suicide” written by our fellow countryman, Fr. Peter Hung Tran. The book was translated into Vietnamese and later published. It has contributed a lot on the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine there. We are happy to hear that Fr. Peter Tran has been working here with you for quite a long time now. Would you like to tell us how the book and its author have contributed to Bioethics in Australia?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:Well, that would take a long time to describe. Father Tran’s book is one of the clearest and best-researched defences of the Catholic position on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. It was a great pleasure to help launch that book because we need that clarity of thought; we need people prepared to express themselves clearly, as Father Tran does in the book. And we need people who are prepared to speak to address groups, to be out there, telling the story – face to face. Father Tran’s been doing that, speaking to groups and different parts of this city and this state. The book has been taken up right around Australia. It’s been given to politicians, to policy makers, to hospitals; it’s present in libraries right around the country now. And I think it will continue to be a really important statement of our church’s position on this question. But Father Peter’s work isn’t limited just to that, he has also been taking part in adult education and teacher in servicing and he’s travelled to different parts of the state to speak to various Catholic groups. He continues to research here, and I know he’s been publishing in Vietnamese and I’m very much happy for him to continue that and extend that because as a Church here in Perth, he have benefited greatly from the Vietnamese born population of Perth and particularly the number of priests who have come to us from the Vietnamese born population. And so I think there is a time when we can return the compliment, return the favour, support the Church in Vietnam as well. I see that as our task here. I know that Father Peter will also be teaching in New Zealand coming up and I’m happy to be helping him prepare for that. He’s been doing tremendous work, and this is all in addition to his main work, which in the monastery in North Perth. So we’re very pleased that Father Tran is working with us and we’re hoping he’s going to stay with us for a long time.
Hong Nhung:Fr. Parkinson, thanks for your time and your help to raise awareness among our readers on issues relating to abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.
Director L J Goody Bioethics Centre
Part 2
Hong Nhung:A common argument against the Church’s teaching on euthanasia is that: “Why should I suffer and then die, when I can choose to die without suffering?” A few people, even Catholics, have an impression that the Church seems to commend suffering. How would you respond to that?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:I’d make several points, first of all. Generally speaking, in our health system, it’s not necessary to suffer pain in the process of dying. Generally speaking. Most pain can be controlled, if not eliminated, controlled to a reasonable level. It’s true that there is some breakthrough pain, which is extremely difficult to control. But generally that is towards the very end of life, it’s often in the last days or hours. But of course what we’re talking about is suffering, not just pain. Suffering can be more than just physical pain, it can be psychological, and it can be spiritual. There are other aspects to suffering which can’t necessarily be controlled, certainly not by medication anyway. Now the Church holds that suffering can be redemptive. If the person unites themselves with the sufferings of Christ. So that means the person chooses to identify their own suffering with the suffering of our Lord. And of course does that with a clear sense of the resurrection, that suffering is not the end of the story, that there’s something extraordinary and wonderful after that. So we would certainly hold that as a valuable part of our understanding of suffering. But that’s something for each individual to choose. It’s not something that the Church says everyone has to endure. It’s a choice we each can make for our own reasons. And it’s quite okay to not want to suffer. That’s all right. We are committed as a Church which promotes health care, to minimize the suffering, to reducing it -- through analgesics, through medications, through counselling, all of the other ways that are able to achieve that. Even when medications might render a person unconscious, when that’s necessary, then we’re quite comfortable with that. So in a sense, there’s no real need for people to die in pain. If they choose not to, if they want to have that pain controlled or suppressed, that can happen. Your question, I think, is about euthanasia, “Why shouldn’t I just be able to ask for an injection that will kill me?” There’d be an argument; I suppose if that’s all euthanasia lobbying wanted. But in fact, they’re on the public record saying that they really want the right to choose when to die – the moment of death and the mode of death, even without suffering. When a person’s simply tired of life, that, “this is the time to end it, so I’ll end it” But it’s also important to realise, that in order to do that, a person needs the help of someone else, a doctor or a nurse, often euthanasia really means physician-assistance suicide. Now there are major problems with that. Do I really have the right to ask someone to kill me? Can I make that demand of you? Can I put you under that sort of pressure? Can I expect the medical profession to change what has been its driving method; it’s dynamic for hundreds, even thousands, of years; to ask the medical profession, to change that now because some people want to end their lives at a time of their own choosing. Nowhere that has passed laws to enable euthanasia have those laws been able to control the practice. It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about the Netherlands or Switzerland or Belgium or the state of Oregon, in the United States. In all those legislatures, there’s ample evidence of abuses of the law, that people are being euthanized without being asked first. The requirements of the law not being met by doctors. Nowhere has been able to control it, so, my sense is, while I can understand people wanting the right to die at a time of their choosing, I don’t know that anyone has the right to ask or demand help in doing that, and I know it’s impossible to control it, if the law is passed.
Hong Nhung:In Vietnam, we have programs to assist AIDS patients and their children, to provide health care and aged care for the poor, and palliative care for the sufferings. We understand that we ought not to simply argue against euthanasia, and physician-assisted suicide. To be truly credible in our stand, we need to stand up for the suffering, the dying, and those afraid to endure. Is there anything else that you can suggest?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:I understand and I agree entirely. We can’t as a church, simply be sending a negative message all the time. Jesus wasn’t always all about telling people what they shouldn’t do. He was about empowering them to be everything God calls them to be and embraces them to be. So, it’s certainly true that there comes a time when we need to be prepared to put our money where our mouth is and commit to initiatives that will support the dying, that will provide relief for suffering that will seek to look after and comfort and seek cures for HIV and so on. This is a challenge for the whole church, this is not just for the bishops, and it’s for the people of the church to take up as well. And of course, in a sense, the bishops can only do what the people will enable them to do. I can only agree with the direction of your question. We need to do more than simply say, “no”, all the time, we need to be promoting the dignity of life in positive ways, in whatever way we can and building up what Pope John Paul [II] called, “the culture of life” That’s a whole atmosphere, an ethos which respects all people regardless of where they are, where they come from or where they’re going. How we do that? Well, we each need to do it in our own personal life first of all, but then as a church we also need to be committed to making that happen; health care and in a whole lot of other ways as well.
Hong Nhung:Three years ago, we published your speech – a very eloquent one – at the launch of the book “Advancing the Culture of Death: Euthanasia And Physician-Assisted Suicide” written by our fellow countryman, Fr. Peter Hung Tran. The book was translated into Vietnamese and later published. It has contributed a lot on the philosophical study of the ethical controversies brought about by advances in biology and medicine there. We are happy to hear that Fr. Peter Tran has been working here with you for quite a long time now. Would you like to tell us how the book and its author have contributed to Bioethics in Australia?
Fr. Joseph Parkinson:Well, that would take a long time to describe. Father Tran’s book is one of the clearest and best-researched defences of the Catholic position on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. It was a great pleasure to help launch that book because we need that clarity of thought; we need people prepared to express themselves clearly, as Father Tran does in the book. And we need people who are prepared to speak to address groups, to be out there, telling the story – face to face. Father Tran’s been doing that, speaking to groups and different parts of this city and this state. The book has been taken up right around Australia. It’s been given to politicians, to policy makers, to hospitals; it’s present in libraries right around the country now. And I think it will continue to be a really important statement of our church’s position on this question. But Father Peter’s work isn’t limited just to that, he has also been taking part in adult education and teacher in servicing and he’s travelled to different parts of the state to speak to various Catholic groups. He continues to research here, and I know he’s been publishing in Vietnamese and I’m very much happy for him to continue that and extend that because as a Church here in Perth, he have benefited greatly from the Vietnamese born population of Perth and particularly the number of priests who have come to us from the Vietnamese born population. And so I think there is a time when we can return the compliment, return the favour, support the Church in Vietnam as well. I see that as our task here. I know that Father Peter will also be teaching in New Zealand coming up and I’m happy to be helping him prepare for that. He’s been doing tremendous work, and this is all in addition to his main work, which in the monastery in North Perth. So we’re very pleased that Father Tran is working with us and we’re hoping he’s going to stay with us for a long time.
Hong Nhung:Fr. Parkinson, thanks for your time and your help to raise awareness among our readers on issues relating to abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.