‘This Far but No Further’ Should Be a Patient Right

A few years ago, the Episcopal Church with a quiet but clear voice spoke to the question of interrupting the dying process. The church said: “Many people have long been dismayed at the confusion expressed by the community of Southern California in presenting guidelines for the care of those whose life is drawing to an end.”

We see in the case of Anna Hirth, a 92-year-old comatose woman, a judge troubled by the complexity of the problem. The Hacienda de La Mesa Convalescent Home and the physician, Dr. Allen Jay, express fears of possible professional and legal repercussions. The administrator, Sig Diemer, “doesn’t want to be liable.” Helen Gray, the daughter, expresses anguish at the compelling forces that keep her strong-willed and independent-minded mother alive in an “abhorrent and undignified manner.” All of the confusion the Episcopal Church spoke to is present in this case.

To me, it is beautiful that the words of the Episcopal Church are identified with the will of a Jewish woman, Helen Gray, on quality of life and the inappropriateness of what is transpiring.

Speaking to this confusion in our midst, the church said, “These convictions flow from the Christian faith:

“1. That life is sacred.

“2. That death is a part of the process of life and of one’s relationship with God.

“3. That this life is not all there is to man’s creation and that any view that states ‘life is to be saved at any cost’ must be carefully weighed.”

The statement notes further, “Medicine is invited into the living and dying process. (For example, a person gives a written invitation to doctors and hospitals to begin treatment.) The reverse should be true--that a person can give written instruction to a doctor not to start life support systems.”

If the invitation to enter is respected, shouldn’t the invitation to leave be respected? Must a patient be enslaved forever to a doctor, a lawyer and a business entrepreneur?

Finally, the church said that, when death is imminent, an individual’s right to begin and terminate treatment should be honored.

Judge Milkes is to be supported in his decision “to allow the inevitable to happen.” The point of this writing is to affirm in as strong a way as possible the correctness of his decision and to applaud Helen Gray in her affirmation that life is more than length.

May we put behind us as fast as possible the necessity of having a lawsuit for every person who wants to say to the medical complex, “This far but no further.”