SUICIDE, ASSISTED SUICIDE, ACTIVE EUTHANASIA

49. II Samuel 1:1-10"After the death of Saul , when David had returned from the slaughter of the Amalekites , David remained two days in Ziklag; and on the third day, behold, a man came from Saul ’s camp, with his clothes rent and earth upon his head. And when he came to David , he fell to the ground and did obeisance. David said to him, Where do you come from? And he said to him, I have escaped from the camp of Israel . And David said to him, How did it go? Tell me. And he answered, The people have fled from the battle, and many of the people also have fallen and are dead; and Saul and his son Jonathan are also dead. Then David said to the young man who told him, How do you know that Saul and his son Jonathan are dead? And the young man who told him said, By chance I happened to be on Mount Gilboa; and there was Saul leaning upon his spear; and lo, the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. And when he looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered, Here I am. And he said to me, Who are you? I answered him, I am an Amalekite . And he said to me,‘ Stand beside me and slay me; for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still lingers. So I stood beside him, and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after he had fallen; and I took the crown which was on his head and the armlet which was on his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord."

50. See the discussion of Samuel Atlas, in Walter Jacob (ed.), American Reform Responsa, pp. 266­267

51. B. Gittin 57b.

rd (&)

. Sidney Goldstein, Suicide in Rabbinic Literature, New York , 1989. p. 43.

. B. Avodah Zarah 18a-b.

wn wa

54. Ketubot 104a.

55. The patients best interests take precedence over others when it comes to medical treatment.

wn

6. There is good reason ethically to suggest in most cases that indirect acts or the removal of impediments is preferable. However, we are dealing with extremes and we are also dealing with situations where the distinctions are less clear, but the outcome is no less conclusive. The termination of human life is never morally trivial.

57. Sinclair Op. Cit. 62-63.

58. Brock argues convincingly that there is little distinction between killing and allowing to die. Intent is crucial. The same act or omission is moral or immoral depending upon intent. One who acts in the patients’ best interests rather than his or her own has committed a moral act. One who acts in his/ her own interest commits an immoral act. Brock Ibid. pp. 162-65 Dorff Ibid. p. 15 argues that"we do nothing to hasten death and thereby co-opt the prerogative of God to determine such matters.." He maintains the distinction between sustaining life and prolonging death. The usual source of most Jewish medical ethicists is that Judaism permits only passive euthanasia defined as

58