Editorial

All human beings need food and water to live. Most of us consider eating and drinking to be a normal part of our daily routine.

But what happens when we can't feed ourselves? As we know, even perfectly healthy babies cannot feed themselves. They rely on other people for food and water.

	Related items from this week's edition: Mailbag/Letters: • Sick, handicapped deserve respect • Direct euthanasia unacceptable Bishop Speaks page: • Lawyers, officials: Called to be ministers of justice, truth Guest commentary: • Feeding tube: Not considered extraordinary medical procedure

Some people have physical conditions which make eating and drinking difficult if not impossible. They need assistance - sometimes in the form of feeding tubes - to help them get nutrition. A key ethical question is: Should food and water be considered ordinary or extraordinary means of health care?

On March 20, 2004, Pope John Paul II said, "The administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act." He was speaking to more than 350 physicians and medical ethicists from 42 countries at a Vatican conference. Pope John Paul II made it clear that even a person in a "vegetative state" retains his or her dignity and never becomes a "vegetable."

Although the pope's remarks in 2004 were received with surprise by some, they should not have been. The Catholic Church has always had a "presumption" in favor of the use of nutrition and hydration, as long as this is of sufficient benefit to outweigh the burdens to the patient.

As you can see by the recent letters to the editor in the Catholic Herald, people have strong opinions on these issues. We would be wise to remember our late Holy Father's words as we participate in the ongoing debate in our society on these issues.

Mary C. Uhler

Mailbag

	Mailbag policy We reserve the right to edit or reject letters. Limit letters to 200 words or less. All letters must be signed. Please include your city or town of residence. Send letters to: Mailbag The Catholic Herald P.O. Box 44985 Madison, WI 53744-4985 Fax: 608-821-3071 E-mail: info@madisoncatholicherald.org

Sick, handicapped
deserve respect

To the editor:

In response to Robert Toomey's letter (April 28 issue):

I am not sure where he got the information that a feeding tube is artificial life support and extraordinary means. But it's funny that Robert didn't quote the paragraph directly above and several surrounding the one that he cited where it very clearly states the church's position on this matter. (All italics are from the Catechism, not mine.)

"2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of the handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable." Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.

Also paragraph 2276 states: "Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible." Under paragraph 2269, the Catechism states, "The fifth commandment forbids doing anything with the intention of indirectly bringing about a person's death. The moral law prohibits exposing someone to mortal danger without grave reason, as well as refusing assistance to a person in danger."

	Related items from this week's edition: Editorial: • Food, water: Remember pope's words Mailbag/Letters: • Direct euthanasia unacceptable Bishop Speaks page: • Lawyers, officials: Called to be ministers of justice, truth Guest commentary: • Feeding tube: Not considered extraordinary medical procedure

Paragraph 2258 states, "Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right to directly destroy an innocent human being."

Death with dignity is often given as a reason for killing someone. Dignity is defined as "the quality or state of being worthy of esteem or respect." Starving and dehydrating someone to death does not treat them with esteem or respect. Everyone deserves the right to be fed. God is the author of life and decides when He's ready to call us home.

This is a slippery slope. Since Terri passed away, I have read about others starved to death. One was an 81-year-old woman not in a permanent vegetative state or terminally ill whose granddaughter said, "Grandmama is old and I think it is time she went home to Jesus."

If you have a preference how you die, discuss it with God; this isn't an area of our life that we are given the decision to make.

Jill Yanke, Cottage Grove

Direct euthanasia unacceptable

To the editor:

	Related items from this week's edition: Editorial: • Food, water: Remember pope's words Mailbag/Letters: • Sick, handicapped deserve respect Bishop Speaks page: • Lawyers, officials: Called to be ministers of justice, truth Guest commentary: • Feeding tube: Not considered extraordinary medical procedure

In a letter to the editor, Mr. Robert Toomey (April 28 issue) wrote in defense of the murder of Terri Schiavo, quoting the Catechism as justification for actions taken by Florida courts. He would contend that my use of the word "murder" is too strong, rather this was a case of letting "nature take its course." His arguments could have some validity were it not for the circumstances surrounding her death.

He quotes the Catechism in order to defend his position. However, if we read further in the Catechism, it states, "Direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act of omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God (CCC 2277)."

In the case of Terri Schiavo, her death was not imminent. The removal of her feeding tube was not an act inspired by mercy, but rather one inspired by convenience and selfishness. The Catholic Church clearly teaches that it is wrong to remove a feeding tube in such a situation. It teaches this doctrine not only in word but also in deed, as found in the life and death of Pope John Paul II. In his dying days he had a feeding tube inserted, teaching us how to both live and die with dignity.

Greg Wagner, Middleton