Mother wins right to end disabled daughter's life


Taken from the link.

The ruling sets a precedent as it is the first time a child breathing on their own, not on life support and not suffering from a terminal illness, has been allowed to die.

So, if you were the parents of the child and your child incessantly manifest that she/he wants pain to go away and just have soothing peace, how would you construe the manifestations of your child? If you were the doctor, would you accept that science failed in her/his case? If you were a preacher, would you say that people are allowed to escape from the burden that each one peculiarly carry? If you were the judge, would you really think that you have the power to end the life of a child, who is severely sick but breathing on her/his own?


The issue with things like this is the difficulty to stand in oppositions with situations like this. From a moral standpoint we do not have the right or authority to take life. Something like this reflects what Hitler did. The problem comes into play when the motive changes. Hitler killed to kill the “weaker” or “inferior” but people like this mother want to end her daughters life because she thinks it is merciful to end the pain. From a Catholic standpoint this is still wrong. It is not our choice to make. Yes we can deny extraordinary measures to ensure someone lives who is terminally ill and just let them die naturally but if we opt for extraordinary measures once they are in place they cannot be removed (correct me if I am wrong please). Now if someone is just in pain we can give them everything we can to make them feel better (morphine, painkillers ext.) But we cannot kill them.

As Christians we recognize that life is difficult and much of it is a cross to bear. That suffering is what transforms our souls to the will of God, because through him we find out strength.

As far as if it was my daughter I would look for medical treatments to help numb the pain but I would not euthinize her.
If I was the doctor I may be forced to accept that science failed but there are still ways to numb the pain.
If I was a preacher I would preach against the notion that we can end our own burdens because it would contradict the faith.
If I where a judge I would absolutely not have the power to end a child’s life because it would violate my faith.

The problem is that we now live in a post christian and morally relative society. They believe they are doing good but their arguments for things such as this are fueled by emotion not reason and faith.


You are not obligated to use extraordinary measures, even if they have been used before or are currently in use. Note: feeding tubes are NEVER considered extraordinary measure as long as the body can process the food & water.

If there is a medical means to reduce the suffering without directly ending the life, that would be the preferred “treatment” if the cause of the suffering can not be cured.


Where is this located?
Years ago in Canada a disabled girl was denied food and water, killing her of course, allowed by the courts.

There is always the hard cases that come along to change the laws, by moving us emotionally. Once the laws are changed, then we see what a Pandora’s Box we’ve opened, with so many abuses that happen. The abuses that are possible with a change of law are never publicized during the initial hard cases. There are countries that are further along where you can see what is going on there. Do you really want to live in a country where a family member or doctor decide for you that you are using up too many resources and make the euthanasia decision for you? Without your knowledge or consent? For your child or your parent? Your spouse? When it’s law, it becomes *your obligation to free up limited resources for others. * When the first hard cases of promoting abortion happened, the moving force was the girl was raped, change the laws so she doesn’t have to carry the baby to term. How cruel would you have to be to make a girl carry her rapists baby to term? What if it were your daughter? The emotion that this argument fuels! Yet today we have millions of babies in the womb terminated for their mere inconvenience. Teens having access to abortion without the parents being notified. Promiscuity like we’ve never seen, sexually transmitted diseases rampant in number and type. We’ve thrown our daughters and granddaughters to the wolves. Euthanizing the weak and vulnerable is the next natural progression once we have abortion firmly in place. It’s a sunami coming in that seems impossible to stop. God help us.


:thumbsup: Thanks for the correction!


This one was in London. They removed her food and water and it took her 14 days to starve to death. So sad.


So sad all around. I do not see how denying food and water was at all merciful. Why not strong painkillers which would have taken away the pain but probably shortened her life (double effect).

The mother said she will never forgive herself. She obviously loved her daughter very much and will live with the memories for the rest of her life.


If they did this to an animal there would be indignation and probably prosecution.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit