Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Biblical View

In ancient Greece, physicians took the Hippocratic Oath as they entered their medical career. This oath takes its name from a greatly respected physician of the day who practiced and taught medicine around 400 BC. For decades in North American medical schools, students took a form of this oath upon graduation. It includes the following promise:

I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment; I will keep them from harm and injustice. I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art (Ludwig Edelstein, The Hippocratic Oath: Text, Translation and Interpretation, 1943, p. 3).

The use of this long-standing oath has been discontinued in most modern medical schools, and we can see why—its promise is no longer very compatible with the social demands and expectations of today’s society, in which physicians are expected to provide abortions and assist in suicides. Many governments, like those in Canada and parts of Europe, have passed legislation that would require a doctor to violate the Hippocratic Oath. Indeed, some seek laws to force medical staff to expand their services beyond helping the sick recover and providing comfort to the critically ill—to assisting in the killing of a person.

Canada’s program provides an opportunity for close examination. Many welcome the program—dubbed MAID, for Medical Assistance in Dying—as a merciful act that meets the needs of those who are suffering and have no hope of recovery. Others feel passionately that MAID and programs like it devalue human life and fear it may eventually be used to eliminate any obligation to care for the elderly, the severely disabled, and the vulnerable.

Promoting Assisted Suicide Rather Than Aid

In December 2022, the CBC reported on the case of Paralympian athlete Christine Gauthier, a former member of the Canadian armed forces who had suffered permanent injury in a training exercise and required a wheelchair for mobility. She was eligible for assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for five years had repeatedly applied for installation of a wheelchair ramp to provide better access to her home.

Instead of a wheelchair ramp, she eventually received a letter from Veterans Affairs offering to support an application for Medical Assistance in Dying. The situation aroused significant attention and anger, and people became even more concerned when the Toronto Star reported that “several former service members who reached out to Veterans Affairs Canada for assistance over the past three years were counselled on assisted dying” (“Canadian Paralympian Says She Was Offered Assisted Death in Wheelchair Ramp Fight, Raising Concerns About Assisted Dying Law,” December 4, 2022).

Even the Prime Minister at the time felt compelled to publicly deplore the offer of a medically assisted death to resolve Gauthier’s wheelchair access issues. This was not supposed to happen—the government had promised rigorous safeguards to prevent abuse of the legislation that opened the door to MAID in Canada.

In 2016, after several years of heated debate, the Parliament of Canada had passed legislation to enable persons meeting some rather stringent conditions to legally access medical assistance in dying. Those initial conditions, intended to prevent abuse of the process and to protect the vulnerable, included the following:

• Written consent must be given, supported by assessments from two physicians.
• The requesting individual must be deemed mentally competent.
• The requester must take a minimum 10-day reflection period.
• Physicians cannot be required to perform this service if it is against their conscience or religious beliefs.
• The patient must be in a grievous state in which death is reasonably foreseeable.
• Two witnesses to the request are required, neither of whom can be a beneficiary.

This satisfied enough of the concerns that had been raised during the development of the law to acquire the necessary consensus. Still, some feared “definition creep” that would let what was supposed to be very limited access become “death on demand.”

How Death on Demand Becomes Normal

In 2021, as many had feared, activist pressure resulted in amendment of the legislation, now allowing people to be placed in one of two “tracks.” Track 1 is for those with a medical assessment projecting death as reasonably foreseeable—but restrictions were loosened so that patients in Track 1 need only one independent witness instead of two, the 10-day waiting period can be eliminated, and the need for final consent can be waived for patients who have been rendered incapable of giving final consent. Applicants for whom death is not reasonably foreseeable are placed in Track 2, in which there is a minimum assessment period of 90 days to determine eligibility, clinicians who are considered experts in applicants’ conditions must be consulted, applicants must be informed of available treatment or counseling for their conditions, and applicants must be informed of alternative methods of relieving their suffering.

Clearly, the safeguards promised in 2016 had been eroded—yet advocates were continuing to appeal for more relaxation of the rules. The Parliament of Canada approved what it had assured Canadians would never happen, allowing assisted death to be provided for people suffering from mental illness. Due to an outcry from mental health professionals, this provision has been delayed several times, but it is now set to take effect on March 17, 2027.

Next Step: Camouflaging Infanticide?

The current pressure on Canada’s government is to expand MAID for those suffering from severe mental illness, including minors. The National Post (October 11, 2022) revealed an even more disturbing side to the issue in an article titled “Quebec College of Physicians Slammed for Suggesting MAID for Severely Ill Newborns.” Krista Carr of Inclusion Canada stated that “Canada cannot begin killing babies when doctors predict there is no hope for them. Predictions are far too often based on discriminatory assumptions about life with a disability…. An infant cannot consent to their own death. This isn’t MAID, it’s murder. And providing MAID to a person who cannot consent is a standard that is wildly dangerous for all persons with intellectual disabilities in Canada.”

Redefining infanticide as MAID in some conditions would give rise to possibilities that ought to be terrifying to all of us. If one can kill an infant, one is only a small step from euthanizing others who are not sufficiently aware to give informed consent. That could include Alzheimer’s patients and a host of others who might be considered an economic drain on society.

Easing the Burden of Cost

Indeed, financial concerns are already in the mix. The January 23, 2017 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal included an article analyzing the cost of euthanizing a patient versus the cost of continuing care.

Assuming a low-cost scenario and standard end-of-life care (i.e., base-case analysis), we expect that net health care costs would be reduced by $33.2 million per year if 1% of deaths are due to medical assistance in dying. When end-of-life costs were reduced by 40% and 70% with the assumption that a palliative approach would have been chosen, net cost savings are reduced to $19.3 million and $8.9 million, respectively (“Cost Analysis of Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada,” CMAJ.ca).

As costs associated with health care continue to rise, it was, of course, inevitable that this aspect of the issue would be examined. However, it is contributing to a growing perception that some human lives are simply disposable.

On February 24, 2026, the National Post reported that by June 2026, Canada would record its 100,000th death through MAID. That prediction proved to be correct, and that total was reached just ten years after legalizing the practice. Trudo Lemmens, a professor of law and ethics at the University of Toronto, has made the case that MAID is being treated in Canada as a type of therapy, “even for only remotely disease-related suffering. Canadian patients are much more frequently confronted with offers of MAID and with a physician providing it as a form of care,” Lemmens wrote. “If Canada’s MAID deaths grow to one in 10 deaths, Canada will have ‘failed miserably to protect the vulnerable,’ said Daryl Pullman, a professor of bioethics at Memorial University. ‘Death is now “therapy” in Canada and the MAID regime is the most efficient part of the Canadian healthcare system,’ Pullman said” (National Post, April 10, 2024).

An article from The Walrus, titled “Have Assisted Dying Laws Gone Too Far?”, quotes Toronto-based psychiatrist Virginia Duff, who feels that “ninety days isn’t long enough for comprehensive reflection…. ‘The title of the act is “medical assistance in dying,”’ she says. ‘But these aren’t people who would otherwise be dying. We’re not just assisting them. We’re actually making it happen, which is very different’” (May 30, 2023).

The same article describes two Canadian professors—Heidi Janz and Catherine Frazee—who “have spent years listening to the stories of disabled Canadians, many of whom live in poverty and struggle with social isolation. MAID, says Janz, ‘has become an acceptable solution to poverty for people with disabilities.’”

Even University of Toronto psychiatrist Dr. Karandeep Gaind, an active supporter of MAID, is worried that expanding the legislation to include “those seeking death for mental illness” is going too far: “We cannot differentiate those seeking psychiatric euthanasia from suicidal individuals who resume fulfilling lives after being provided suicide prevention, rather than facilitated death,” he writes (“Canada Delays Expanding Medical Assistance in Dying To Include Mental Illness, but It’s Still a Policy Built on Quicksand,” The Conversation, December 15, 2022).

Diminishing The Value of Life?

So, how did we get here? Not many years ago, we as a society would have been repulsed by MAID policies. They were contrary to the culture of the land. What has happened to change all that?

Much of the demand and policy on the matter of MAID is a consequence of not understanding the purpose behind human existence. The question concerns whether we humans are of more value than a cat, dog, or ferret that we might take to the vet to be “put down” when they are grievously ill. Many today would answer that question differently than they would have 30 years ago. Society’s belief in the value of human life has steadily eroded—and our peoples have also largely abandoned the idea that we, the earth, and indeed the universe, are the product of a Creator.

Mathematics, the laws of physics, and the incredible biological complexity required to establish and sustain life all preclude the development of life from non-living matter through any accidental chemical process. Every reasonable understanding of the probabilities involved in producing life on this planet points inexorably to the essential need for a Designer and Creator. As society increasingly rejects the scientific reality that a great intelligent force must have made this planet and its life-forms, it can no longer comprehend that human beings were created for a specific and unique purpose. Human beings—each and every one, whether healthy or infirm—have an inherent value that goes well beyond that of other life-forms.

When we lose understanding of the reality that we have been deliberately designed and created, we lose the sense of our value and no longer consider life sacred—it no longer has purpose or meaning to us. So, why were we created, and what does that purpose tell us about how we should view assisted death?

Made in the Image of God

We read in the first chapter of Genesis that man was made not as a member of the plant kind, nor of the animal kind. Rather, we were made in God’s image, after His likeness, a physical model of the God kind. Human beings were endowed with a spirit that, in tandem with the human brain, enables reasoning, speech, awareness, and learning capacity far exceeding the abilities of all other forms of life on earth.

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Genesis 1:26–28).

Scripture also tells us that God made millions of immortal angels as well—beings who have greater power and intellect than humans. Yet human beings were created with a potential higher than theirs. Addressing God, King David wrote, “What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You visit him? For You have made him a little lower than the angels, and You have crowned him with glory and honor” (Psalm 8:4–5). As physical beings, humans are presently lower than the angels, who were created to assist us in reaching our great destiny.

In Hebrews 1:14, the Apostle Paul makes a statement referring to the role of angels in our day: “Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?” But, as Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 6:3, human beings will be placed above angels in the future: “Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?”

Life on earth is an opportunity to learn to be like God—to learn to imitate His character, His way of doing things, His way of interacting and reacting. He provides us with different circumstances to gradually mold us to that end. His goal is to give us eternal life, which we do not yet possess. “And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope. Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Romans 5:3–5).

Character is the attribute of knowing right from wrong and having the desire, will, and strength to choose what is right. Of course, right and wrong are determined only by God, as we learn in the pages of the Bible. For those who develop God’s character in their lives, great potential and responsibility await: “To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne” (Revelation 3:21). Our Creator wants to share eternal life and rulership with us!

A Lesson from the Book of Job

There is an account in the Bible that shows how God will sometimes severely correct and train those He loves—in order to develop their character so they might eventually share life with Him in His Kingdom. Job was a good and decent man who, though extremely wealthy and powerful, served God faithfully. But he lacked humility, understanding neither how small he was compared to God nor his dependence upon Him. To help him see reality—not to punish him—God allowed great and severe trials to afflict Job.

During the course of Job’s terrible suffering, his wife was pained to see her husband covered in boils, having suffered the loss of their children and all their possessions. So, in her sorrow, “his wife said to him, ‘Do you still hold fast to your integrity? Curse God and die!’ But he said to her, ‘You speak as one of the foolish women speaks. Shall we indeed accept good from God, and shall we not accept adversity?’ In all this Job did not sin with his lips” (Job 2:9–10).

Essentially, Job’s wife was telling her husband to curse God for the suffering he was enduring and thus bring about his death. Perhaps she would have had him apply for MAID if it had been available. But Job, even in his pain and sorrow, still trusted God. The account ends with Job gaining an understanding he would never have had without that suffering, and he went on to enjoy many more years of success and happiness, having become richer in the righteous character that will produce peace and prosperity in the world to come.

At the end of our lives, we may be at our weakest—humbled by circumstances and often in very difficult situations regardless of our wealth. This is the final trial we face, and facing it well—with dignity and courage, asking God for direction and help—earns us the greatest wealth of all: a beautiful, godly character.

The TRUE Value of Life: We Are Children of God

It is not for us to decide when we will die. Disability, illness, and poverty can be terrible trials, but they do not diminish the inherent value of a human life. God values each life to its final moments—and when we see life as God does, we can begin to understand the bigger picture.

The book of Romans calls us the children of God, with God as our Father and Jesus Christ as our brother. This relationship is literal: “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God” (Romans 8:18–19). That is why King David made a stunning statement about his—and our—coming resurrection from the dead: “As for me, I will see Your face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness” (Psalm 17:15).

David understood that when he rises in that resurrection, he will be like God in appearance and composition, and he will possess God’s righteous character. We find the same truth in 1 John 3:2. This applies not just to David, but to all who remain faithful to God to the end of their lives.

And yet, there remains hope for those who today lack knowledge of God’s eternal purpose for every human being He has created—yes, including the many for whom life or death now means little, who no longer even recognize that there is a Creator who has great hopes for all of us. You can learn more about this hope, unknown to even the vast majority of those who profess Christianity, by requesting a free copy of Is This the Only Day of Salvation? or by reading it online at TomorrowsWorld.org.

The Gospel that Jesus Christ brought reveals that we are called to be resurrected as members of the family of God, to spend eternity in happiness and fulfillment. That is why we do not have the right to terminate our lives—we are His creation, and He wants to work with us until we become what He created us to be, ready for that resurrection. Choosing suicide interferes with that plan—with achieving our potential. Our study guide What Is the Meaning of Life? makes this unmistakably clear. If you have not already read it, please take the time to request it from the Regional Office closest to you, listed on page 4 of this magazine, or to read it online at TomorrowsWorld.org. It will further explain why your Creator would not have you make such a choice as MAID.