Million Dollar Assisted Suicide

Al Mohler deals very effectively with the theme of assisted suicide in the Clint Eastwood film Million Dollar Baby.  An excerpt: 

Beyond all this, the worldview of "Million Dollar Baby" represents a direct repudiation of Christianity's respect for the dignity of human life. Compare this movie to the real-life story of Joni Eareckson Tada, who triumphed over her own paralysis and has become a witness, both to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to the true dignity of human life, even among those who have suffered disastrous spinal injuries....The Christian worldview leaves absolutely no room for assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other form of what the secular world increasingly embraces as the "good death"....Helping a friend to die is not a heroic act. True heroism consists in affirming human dignity and in lovingly calling hurting people out of depression, not into suicide.

Particularly timely with the events surrounding Terry Schiavo currently.

Comments

[Scott M]

Am I the only one who saw this movie and didn't at all think it promoted euthenasia? Sorry if you haven't seen the movie... you may not want to read on... because I'm about to give away the ending...

Yes, it's true that after Maggie (Hillary Swank) is paralyzed in a boxing match, she convinces Frankie (Clint Eastwood) to help her end her life. After an agonizing crisis of faith and love, Frankie reluctantly agrees to give in to Maggie's wishes. You understand when you watch the movie that Frankie is giving up his life for what he believes is the best thing for Maggie. After the euthenasia, he leaves boxing, leaves his friends, his family, his life... and disappears to live alone with his memories. You get the sense that he would have gladly died in Maggie's place... and in a way, when she dies, he dies too. He is not flippant... and his decision is not selfish. This movie is a tragedy in the tradition of the great works of classical theater, in my opinion. It is not merely a hollywood tear-jerker. There are real characters with real struggles and really tough decisions to make. Frankie is a man who never had much room for religion, yet he attends Mass daily. Under his rough exterior, you get the feeling that he is looking for redemption, but has resigned himself to the fact that he will never earn it (which we as Christians know is exactly the case). Frankie is complicated and brooding. Throughout the movie, you see him slowly but surely open up to love someone more than he loves himself. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Surely this is a Christian theme we can all say amen to.

I walked out of that movie thankful to be a Christian, because without Christ, I would likely want to die as well, if I were in Maggie's shoes. I also walked out of there with a feeling of compassion for those who stand in Frankie's shoes and have to make a decision to pull a feeding tube, or shut off a heart machine, or end one life to save another. These are not decisions to be taken lightly, and the movie does not take them lightly. It stares honestly at a painful truth... and it doesn't blink. For this reason, I think Million Dollar Baby is not only acceptable Christian fare... but I would recommend it wholeheartedly. Few movies I've seen bring the viewer so close to a crisis of this magnitude and make him wonder what he really believes... and whether he has the faith to act on his beliefs. I think it's good to be challenged to think about why euthenasia is wrong... and to be placed vicariously in the position of making that heart-wrenching decision.

[Joe]

I'm with Scott on this, and would add the comparison between Maggie and Joni don't wash (check my blog for more of my ramblings). I've been talking over the flick with friends for a little while now, and we tend to think most of our Southern Baptist cultural commentators are missing a lot here.

[Doug]

Well, I have to say I have yet to see the movie, but my wife and I have no interest in seeing it for the very reason you have stated, assisted "suicide". Um, last time I looked, I thought murder was sin, and my opinion is that if one "assists" another in the act of murder (even if it's the murder of one's self in this case), it's still muurder. "Thou shalt not kill" comes to mind, but who am I to "judge righteous judgement"?

"Oh, but didn't you serve in the Marine Corps, and don't they train you to kill? Don't you think this is a double standard?" Sorry, I beat you to the "punch" on that question! Taking another's life for no reason, or even if the reason may be to send someone into eternity because I despise, and hate them, or despise, and hate the misery they are encountering, is DEAD WRONG! Defending one's love of country, or defending your rights that are granted by God through the use of our Consitution is a total different picture. God raises up kingdoms, and destroys kingdoms. He does this through the use of another country's military might, or sometimes through their own love of their prideful excesses. Look at the book of Daniel how God used Babylon to judge Judah, then used the Meado-Persians to inflict judgement on Babylon.

I took a vow before God and man that I would "Love, Honor, and Cherish" my wife "Til Death Do Us Part". If she were injured in an auto accident where I would have to take care of her for the rest of her life, or my life, then by GOD's GRACE, I WILL! It's a cheap way out of the life God gave man, even if that life was injured, to kill one's self. God does NOT make a mistake when it comes to His Grace on life, even the lives of those who are lost.

"Ok, what about a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) claus in your records? Isn't THAT suicide?" Another good question! No it is not suicide if you are so severely injured in an accident that the only means to support you would be on breathing, and feeding tubes. The DNR would only be in effect in the case of an accident where a doctor would have to use those methods to allow you to have a heart beat, even though you would be brain dead, but your organs are still functioning. That is the ONLY reason for a DNR! No, it is not suicide to wait for the rest of the body to pass away if the brain has no function. (I wonder if that's the case with me sometimes....Hmmmm?)

Now, in the case of Terry Schiavo, she still has some cognisant ability to see and respond to her mother, and others in the room. For her husband, I would love to see that man go to prison, and then have a tube shoved in his arm through assisted suicide!

[Scott M]

Oy. First of all, with all due respect... if you haven't seen the movie, you certainly have no foundation on which to base an argument. For one thing, Maggie is not just paralyzed in the movie, she is on a breathing machine. This is a far cry different than someone who is simply injured or even paralyzed. Rather than pulling the breathing tube out and watching her die of suffocation, Frankie injects her with adrenaline, which stops her heart immediately. Would it have been OK in your opinion to pull the tube and let her die, but not to inject the adrenaline? Ok... that's your opinion. Mine is that both acts are essentially the same. DNR laws are at best inconsistent and conflicting. It make no sense to me that it is ok for me to predetermine that I don't want to live with the aid of a machine... but if I decide that fact after I've already been hooked up to that machine, I am committing suicide. This is a touchy issue with all kinds of shades of gray. It is not, as you propose, a simple black and white issue of "thou shalt not kill."

I'm not making an argument that Frankie made the right choice... my point is not whether assisted suicide is right or wrong. I was making an argument that this movie does not give a blanket endorsement of assisted suicide. It doesn't glamourize death or devalue life. It simply deals frankly with a difficult and heart-wrenching issue in very stark, emotional and conflicting terms. For a better commentary on the movie... read Joe Thorn's comments here. He writes... "In reality, MDB is a sophisticated story about familial love and redemption, suffering and loss, and culminates in the moral crisis of a religious man who feels he sins against God if he pulls Maggie's plug, but sins against her if he doesn't. Though he chooses to let her die he doesn't do so triumphantly."

He goes on to say, "MDB does not give answers, but raises questions. Good questions, and can provide us with a context in which we can talk about the value of life, compassion and redemption. The movie is not disingenuously manipulative, but it makes us feel compassion for people who are confronted with this situation. It is not propaganda, nor is it a sneaky Hollywood trick to undermine family values. Does Frankie make the right decision? I don't think he knows. I don't think Eastwood knows. Maybe you know. If you do, try to do more than push the whole film into one of two boxes (right or wrong). Try to avoid walking all over what is beautiful in the film. More is required of us as Christians. Try to at least understand why people see things the way they do. Perhaps a merciful, compassionate response that holds to the truth is possible."

I don't care if you watch the movie or not... but keep in mind that if you don't, you may be basing your arguments on false assumptions.

[Doug]

Scott,

Maggie is COGNISANT! She still has her ability to reason, and to make decisions. It's not like she's brain dead, and cannot make a decision on her own. Do we take a man, or woman with ALS off the breathing machine before, or after they die? Cognisant life is different than brain dead. That's my point. Maggie asks for this assistance. What if my wife were not able to breath on her own, but was cognisant? Would I want to walk into the room with a knife to slit her throat to help relieve her suffering if she was begging me to do it? Murder is murder no matter how you "slice" it! Ask the people of Michigan and their infamous Dr. Death!

"It is appointed (by God) unto man, once to die..." but not at the hands of another. The state has the right to do so to carry out the justice to the convicted, if such a conviction merits said judgement. That is God Ordained justice. We cannot be God when we make the decision, even on our own, to carry out such an injustice as to assist one in his or her own death. That's murder!

[Scott M]

Is it suicide to refuse chemotherapy if you have cancer, because you don't want to suffer through the treatment? If I don't insist that my loved one undergo surgery for a life-threatening illness, am I assisting in their suicide? If I sign a DNR order or create a living will that instructs doctors not to revive me if I flatline on an operating table, is that suicide. Is my lawyer assisting my suicide when he drafts my living will for me? There are very many shades of gray in the debate. If you're going to take a hardline stance on this topic, at least be consistent.

[Doug]

I am consistant. Explain my inconsistency. How am I being inconsistent?

RE: "Would it have been OK in your opinion to pull the tube and let her die, but not to inject the adrenaline?" NO! Pulling the tube would be assisted (murder) suicide.

As far as a DNR, no where did I insinuate a DNR was suicide. A DNR is when the doctor has determined that the body function is in the process of shutting down because the brain has "flatlined" or is more appropriately considered dead. Without the electro-stimulus from the brain, the body will surely die. Why would I desire to continue to be fed through a feeding tube, on a breathing machine, or whatever you want to call it if the brain has no function (some people consider me brain dead anyway, but I digress)? When the brain shuts down, sometimes the body will continue to function as if there is activity. To set me aside to wait for my body to catch up with my brain is not suicide. That's why it is called a DNR. Also, a DNR may not need (not sure) to be signed off by an attorney.

A living will is when you are dying, and money is needed to help pay off those medical bills that accrue before your death. It's the money saved through your plan (i.e. 401k) that is tapped for this so your estate does not end up in probate for years because of unpaid medical expenses. An attorney may need to help pull this together.

To refuse chemo is not a suicide mission. I still don't understand the process of chemo because that could kill anyone just as much as the cancer. I may not have all the facts on cancer, but I know from my grandmother's, and my nephew's (4 1/2 year old) experiences, chemo was not working. The cancer continued to spread, and so the DNR was put in place. Both passed away. Was it murder? No! There are people who have survived cancer without chemo. How did they survive 100 years ago without it? Also, what would motivate you not to attempt chemotherapy? Is your desire one of selfishness, "I don't want to suffer", or would it be for the loved one not to watch you suffer? Either way, it's not suicide. Cancer, and chemo are irrelevant arguments. Both can kill.

As to the loved one going through a life-threatening illness that an operation may save their life, why would you talk a family member, or loved one from going through that surgery? That makes no sense!

In my "shades of gray area" (you're assuming this), there are no shades of gray. The whole discussion is about the fact Clint Eastwood's character helps a woman who is paralized, and is on a breathing tube. The only way for her to live is to be on this machine. If the macine's plug is pulled, she will die. So, instead of pulling the plug to kill her slowly, he takes a needle, shoves it into her, pushes the end of the syringe, and injects a fatal dose of adrenaline into her to help "eliviate" her pain. Murder, plain and simple!

[Scott M]

Sigh...