I came across a headline that posed a bold idea: “Killing MS
Patients VIA Assisted Suicide to Harvest their Organs?” As a theoretical
question for provocative bioethicists to ponder or advocate, it may be interesting,
but I live in the real world far from academia. The real world is being asked
to answer that very question, by a woman with advanced MS.
|
Sherri Muzher |
Michigan resident Sherri Muzher (43) recently told a Fox
news affiliate that she wants to have an assisted suicide and donate her organs
for transplantation. She said it would be a “nice legacy to give” and that “We
ought to be able to make our own decisions, and if that collateral effect means
helping others, why would anyone have a problem with that?” Sherri’s proposal
sounds so altruistic, so selfless and generous beyond measure.
Although the media said Sherri is terminal, MS cripples its
victims but rarely kills them. I have had MS for nearly twice as long as Sherri;
mine has reached an advanced stage too. If Sherri’s wish for an assisted suicide and
donation of her organs were to happen, it would have awful implications for her
in the short term and ominous implications for the futures of other seriously
disabled people like me ― particularly with organ shortages intensifying.
Let’s examine the reality of Sherri’s assisted suicide proposal:
If done by poisoning, there would be a high likelihood of contaminating her
organs making them unusable for transplantation. But let us pretend that
somehow she was poisoned but her organs were not. There are some medical
realities once she dies. After death there is no heartbeat, circulation or
respiration, thus no oxygen for her organs.
Without oxygen, irreparable damage would begin to occur to her liver and
heart within 4-5 minutes and her kidneys by 30 minutes, quickly making them
useless for transplantation.
A highly renowned medical authority I consulted for this
column stated, “To make use of her organs the transplant team would have to insert
tubes into her while she was very much alive.” This would be painful. They
would hover near Sherri, monitoring for her moment of death, then immediately plunge
a scalpel into her chest and abdomen making an incision from collar-bone to
pubis. The clock would be ticking.
Once they artificially oxygenate Sherri’s organs, it would take
about 30 minutes to remove her kidneys, 3 hours to remove her liver and about an
hour to remove her heart. Recipients would probably be waiting in adjacent
operating rooms.
Okay, take poisoning out of the scenario. If Sherri’s death
was achieved by organ removal while she has a beating heart, circulation and
respiration, it would not be an assisted suicide as she presently envisions; it
would be imposed death by a transplant surgeon. Altruistic romance and sterile
operating rooms are not a good mix, especially when death is the goal. Sherri’s death would be achieved only upon the
final removal of her heart. Her gutted and mutilated body would be returned to
her family for burial or cremation.
The Sherri Muzher case would create the thin edge of a
bloody wedge in North America. It would begin to establish a precedent for
organ procurement programs to view people with severe disabilities as sources
of much needed organs. In case you think I’m drawing an extreme case, let me inform
you that it’s already happened in Belgium.
|
Wesley J. Smith |
National Review
columnist Wesley J. Smith chronicled this in an August 30th column
entitled “Hunt on for Disabled “Euthanasia Organ Donors””. He quoted a document from the 21st
European Conference on General Thorasic Surgery that was held in the U.K. last
May. The document detailed how doctors euthanized “patients suffering from an
unbearable neuromuscular or neuropsychiatric disorder with explicit wish to
donate organs. Euthanasia was executed by an independent physician in a room
adjacent to the operating room in the absence of the retrieval team.” In other
words, suicidal people with physical or mental disabilities were killed by one
set of doctors then their warm bodies quickly wheeled across the hall to
another operating room where a different set of doctors began the harvest.
Will people with severe disabilities (like me) be considered
commodities rather than patients in our own rite? If this happens, people who
are comatose will be at even greater risk and their families pressured to stop
life sustaining treatment or impose death.
The Sherri Muzher case would create a darker cultural
deviation and open a Pandora’s box society will ultimately wish had never been opened.
It will put other vulnerable lives at great danger and further strip our
increasingly secular society of the ideal of the sanctity of every human life.
We must understand a truism of history: Human descent into
the abyss of depravity and death is taken one step at a time. It might begin with
good but misguided intentions but eventually ends with twisted evil intent masquerading
as good.
MDP