Models used for illustrative purposes only. Photos: Cover: © Getty Images. All rights reserved. Grandmotherand Doctor: © Veer. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2014, UnitedStates Conference of Catholic Bishops, Washington, D.C.

1446

years before, stating that the patient shouldnot receive antibiotics, could still befollowed even if the patient, like Rosa,faced a simple urinary tract infectionwhich is easily cleared up by antibiotics.

Of course there are times when failinghealth is not so easily remedied as inRosa’s case. In some situations, proceduresare appropriately refused. One shouldconsider the benefits and burdens of aprospective procedure and conscientiouslyjudge whether or not to accept it.However, because of the inherent dignityof the person and our moral obligation toprotect each human life, our Church

teaches that we should take reasonablesteps to preserve life and should neverwithhold or administer treatment with theintention of ending the life of the person.

It is incredibly difficult to see someone welove suffering, and it is natural for us towant to alleviate their hardship.Additionally, we live in a culture thatplaces value on productivity and prefers toget rid of what is deemed useless. Somepeople therefore support measures that, atfirst, might seem like a compassionateresponse, but in fact are not. Advocates forlegalizing assisted suicide and euthanasiapromote the illusion that we can “help”

those in need by killing them or assistingthem in killing themselves. However, thisresponse ignores the person’s true needsand does not respect their dignity. Eachperson deserves real solutions and supportwhen facing physical, emotional andspiritual challenges. Cutting someone’s lifeshort before their time deprives them ofunknown opportunities for God’s grace towork in their life.

God’s infinite love for each one of us helpsus to grasp our identity and our worth.The recognition of this dignity leads us torespect and protect each person’s life,including our own, and ought to be at thecore of whatever medical decisions wemake. Let us place our trust in the Lordand ask for his continuous guidance, forthese decisions and for all those we face inour lives.

*The story of Rosa and Teresa (their names are changedfor their privacy) is just one example of how importantit is to reflect in advance on how we would wantdecisions made on our behalf if we cannot speak forourselves. To find out what pastoral and educationalresources may be available locally, contact your diocesanpro-life office.

Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities3211 Fourth Street NE • Washington, DC 20017Tel: (202) 541-3070 • Fax: (202) 541-3054www.usccb.org/respectlife

Find us at facebook.com/peopleoflife!

To order materials call toll-free (866) 582-0943.

Rosa* knew from experience thedifficulties and expenses of watching aloved one die. She was totally devoted toher husband as he suffered and died fromcancer eight years earlier. The idea of highmedical bills, “tubes” and pain upset her,and even though she had not viewed herhusband as a burden, she feared being oneto her family.

Then, Rosa was hospitalized with aterrible urinary tract infection which madeher dehydrated, weak and confused. Herdaughter Teresa had been appointed as herhealth care agent. Teresa met with themedical staff, who helped her understand

that the proposed treatments would notcause an undue burden to her mother. Infact, they would be temporary andappropriate care in Rosa’s situation. Teresawas grateful that the medications, nutritionand hydration that Rosa was given, allthrough “tubes,” cured her infection. Rosais now as active as she has ever been andrealizes that there are certain situationsthat can’t be anticipated when illnesscomes. It’s best not to refuse future carethat may turn out to be very welcome.

Human life is good and to be protected.All medical decisions ought to reflect thiscore belief. Yet black-and-white answers to

our questions about end-of-life issues arenot always possible, and it can be verydifficult to know how to make medicaldecisions. Each and every human person isdistinct and unrepeatable, and eachmedical situation may be unique. In eachset of circumstances we need to judgewhether a given treatment will provide realbenefit to the patient, without causingharm or other burdens that are out ofproportion to the good being done.

We should each be prepared for thosedifficult situations when medical decisionsmust be made. We can safeguard ourCatholic values by appointing aresponsible and trustworthy person now tomake decisions for us, in the event that weare incapable of doing so, either physicallyor mentally. It is important to be aware ofthe different legal or medical documentsthat are available or are often used todefine a patient’s care. Depending on howthey are crafted, some documents can becounter to Catholic morality and moreharmful than we might realize.

The safest option is to designate a healthcare agent who not only understands ourCatholic values but also shares them andcan apply them to current situations andrespond to questions as they arise. Thisperson, usually a close family member orfriend, acts as a proxy decision maker ifthe patient is not able to make his or herown decisions. In choosing an agent orproxy, a person can declare in writing thatall treatment and care decisions made on

their behalf must be consistent with andnot contradict the moral teachings of theCatholic Church.

Less flexible is a living will, which simplylists treatment options or care that thepatient wishes to accept or reject. Nomatter how well-crafted, such a documentcan never predict all the possible problemsthat may occur at a later time or anticipateall future treatment options. A living willcan be misinterpreted by medical providerswho might not understand the patient’swishes.

Some states and healthcare systems havebeen implementing a troubling documentknown as a “Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment,” also called by aconfusing array of acronyms (POLST,MOST, MOLST, or POST). The POLSTdocument is filled out by a doctor or othermedical professional to define treatmentsto be withheld or administered in a futuresituation. It has been criticized for placingmore power in the hands of physiciansthan in patients’ hands. Indeed, in somecases the patient need not even sign thedocument. Once signed by the physician, itbecomes a doctor’s order to other medicalstaff, and may override the patient’s ownpast advance directives and even thepatient’s appointment of a health careagent. It may be applied to patients whoare not in a terminal situation and whomight only need antibiotics, nutrition andhydration, or other proportionate care. Yeta POLST document signed months or