Many individuals do.
Some countries also.
The more exacting question is whether it is logical or moral to support Assisted Suicide while opposing the Death Penalty. The arguments against Capital Punishment hold firm against Assisted Suicide. It is absolutely contradictory to agree with one, while opposing the other.
Retribution v. Safety of Society
Much of the debate about CP pivots on retribution (“an eye for an eye”) or whether it is an essential protection from the most dangerous people in society.
In 1987, the Minister of Justice of Canada, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, made a persuasive argument against the Death Penalty: “Are we, as a society, so lacking in respect for ourselves, so lacking in hope for human betterment, so socially bankrupt that we are ready to accept state vengeance as our penal philosophy?”
One can paraphrase his quotation to reference Assisted Suicide: ‘Are we, as a society, so lacking in respect for ourselves, so lacking in hope for human betterment, so socially bankrupt that we are ready to accept state violence as our Health-Care philosophy?’
The Catholic Church & Capital Punishment
Pope Francis approved a revision to section 2267 of the Catechism because the Church has strengthened its teaching on Capital Punishment: “...the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.” (Full text in Appendix.)
The Church’s position is quite beautiful, if not practical in every circumstance. “…there is an increasing awareness that the dignity of the person is not lost even after the commission of very serious crimes” and because there are “effective systems of detention” that we should not “definitively deprive the guilty of the possibility of redemption.”
Capital Punishment v. Death Penalty
In this article generally the term ‘Capital Punishment’ [CP] is used synonymously with the ‘Death Penalty’ [DP] though there is a subtle difference.
· “…the death penalty is the actual act of killing the individual…
ARGUMENTS:
· Innocence & Irreversibility
It has been shown many times that capital punishment can lead to a miscarriage of justice and the execution of an innocent person. Similarly, people can accept Assisted Suicide under duress, coercion, through depression, incompetence or a lack of understanding.
· The Value of Human Life
If the death penalty is morally wrong because of the intrinsic value of every human life, then so too is suicide & euthanasia.
· Deterrence
There is little evidence to suggest any deterrent value to the death penalty. Indeed, “The report examined murder rates in 11 countries that have abolished capital punishment, finding that ten of those countries experienced a decline in murder rates in the decade following abolition.”
The problem with Assisted Suicide is the exact opposite to deterrence. The glamourization of AS & Euthanasia as being more “dignified” and “compassionate” is causing ‘suicide contagion’: the Werther Effect.
· Fair Application
In the U.S., the death penalty is unfairly applied across capital cases. Proportionately more poor and African-Americans are sentenced to death.
Similarly, no-one can ascertain that AS applicants truly “deserve” death. In Canada by March 2023 the mentally ill will be able to apply for euthanasia instead of being treated appropriately. Civilized societies must prevent suicide — not collude with suicidal delusion.
· Brutalisation
Capital punishment brutalises everyone involved in a case. The prisoner; their family; the executioner; the lawyers & courts, society as a whole and damages our human rights.
The process for Assisted Suicide can brutalise the suffering patient; family & friends; the doctors (in Ontario doctors, “found themselves overwhelmed by the act of killing another human being”) other health professionals; it debases the Medical Profession, society and our human rights.
It will be many years before we see the true effects on the small children who now have to live with what their parent has done. (“Mammy did not love me enough...”)
· The Killing of a Citizen
Many countries now believe that the state-sanctioned killing of any citizen is wrong.
Only a handful of countries — all first-world countries — have allowed a citizen the legal right to demand their own death. Even stranger, a few countries allow a citizen the right to demand their death, at the hands of another citizen!
A healthy society must restrict suicide for its own self-preservation.
· Expense
In western societies Capital punishment is vastly more expensive than life imprisonment because of the legal challenges and delays. (Immediate execution is cheaper, but leads to more innocent people being killed.)
Appropriate active treatments or palliative-care are vastly more expensive than the provision of suicide or euthanasia. Just 70 to 80 years ago the world thought it barbaric to promote the extermination of the sick, the disabled and the mentally ill to save money. (This is happening in Canada.)
· Punishment v. Treatment
The death penalty is unique in Jurisprudence because it does not allow for error or rehabilitation.
A.S. is unique as a “medical treatment” because it does not attempt any amelioration or cure. Hippocrates guided us: Cure sometimes; Treat often; Comfort always.
· Humane Application
The administration of the death penalty can be inhumane (The Lancet, 2005). Similar difficulties with prolonged death or complications can occur with a self-administered suicide (and with euthanasia, though likely less frequently.)
· Necessity
Capital punishment is unnecessary because there can be true life-imprisonment without parole for the most dangerous in society.
Autonomy allows a person to refuse health-care — such refusal should not commit the state to the provision of death.
· International Obligation
Almost every country has signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, which supports Article 3: “Everyone has the right to Life, Liberty and the Security of the Person.”
This is breached by both CP and AS.
Misguided Compassion
Even though the Supreme Court of Canada strongly opposes capital punishment, it used twisted logic to argue that the Right to Life includes the Right to Die, even at the hand of another citizen!
The SCC should have properly defined this new ‘right’; correlated it with the Right to Life and require Parliament to amend the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
It will be fascinating to see some prisoner claim that life-imprisonment is a cruel and unusual punishment due to prison rape, loneliness, lack of sex, etc., and that they are entitled to Medical Assistance in Dying. (Canadian MAiD includes A.S. & Voluntary Euthanasia.)
Will this become the ‘back-door’ death penalty?
Will we harvest prisoners organs for sale, like the Chinese do with the incarcerated Falun Gong and Uyghurs? Or just harvest them for free so some ethicist can claim that it is ‘acceptable?’
JRR Tolkien was a devout Catholic and spoke to us through Gandalf in Lord of the Rings:
“Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life.
Can you give it to them?
Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
Kevin Hay
Appendix:
