Use of “Machines” to Keep a Person Alive

A debated topic in the world is the question of whether or not to keep a person alive with the superior help of a machine. This issue is mostly personal preference but the Catholic Church has a set view on this issue.

According to Pope John Paul II’s 1995 Encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, he states that it is a very complicated issue, in which many things have to be defined. Pope John Paul II states that this issue is linked closely to euthanasia and, “for a correct moral judgment on euthanasia, in the first place a clear definition is required.” Throughout his encyclical, he talks about the issue of removing “extraordinary means” that are keeping a person alive. He concludes by saying that if a thorough thought process has taken place and death is “imminent and inevitable,” then it is acceptable, and morally okay, for a person to end the prolongation of life by removing extraordinary means.

This statement is backed up and supported by Our Sunday Visitor’s “Bioethics: What constitutes ‘extraordinary means’ of care?” In this statement, it says that, “The Church allows patients to reject ‘extraordinary means’ of medical treatment and to accept palliative care in order to alleviate all of their pain, even if it might hasten death.” This is saying that the Catholic Church states that it is okay to take away a ventilator or breathing machine, as they are both “extraordinary means,” and allow the natural process of death to take its course. Vincentian Father Richard Benson said that, “The Catholic Church has a very clear position that death doesn't have to be prolonged.” This statement on Our Sunday Visitor’s Web site is “what the Church teaches” and demonstrates thorough and complete research. This document backs up and affirms what Pope John Paul II said in his encyclical, and it also refers to him later on in the document.

Another source, The Catholic World News, published an article regarding the Terri Schiavo case, talking about how ever since the controversial case, a lot of attention has been directed towards the Catholic Church’s end of life issues. “Catholic Teaching on End of Life Issues Misrepresented,” talks about how food and water are ordinary means, that should always be provided regardless, as this was the controversy in the Terri Schiavo case. Extraordinary means, ventilators or life prolonging machines, are optional and the church does not state that a person has a certain duty one way or the other with regards to this. In the article, Richard Doerflinger states that, “the Church teaches that we have a moral obligation to support life...People talk about ordinary and extraordinary means. That just means that when the efforts to sustain life start doing more harm than good to the patient the moral obligation ceases to apply.” Doerflinger sums up the Church’s stance very well in the article and simplifies it also. This article thoroughly represents the Catholic Church’s views on ordinary and extraordinary means and clears up the misrepresentation that was brought about with the Terri Schiavo case.

All three of these sources and documents clearly state the Catholic Church’s views on the end of life issue of using a machine to keep a person alive. It is always necessary to provide ordinary means, such as food and water, but it becomes a conscientious decision and a preference when it comes to extraordinary means.