ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, February 20, 1997 TAG: 9702200012
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: WILLIAM R. MATTOX JR.
IN A BIZARRE twist in the emerging debate about euthanasia, a leading medical researcher says that modern science may have more faith in traditional religious teachings against physician-assisted death than some of today's leaders in the Episcopal Church.
David Larson, president of the National Institute for Healthcare Research, says that he was ``very disappointed'' in a recent report issued by the influential Episcopal Diocese of Washington, which takes a half-step toward explicitly embracing euthanasia. The 54-page document, which outlines arguments for and against euthanasia, concludes by drawing no conclusions. ``Although some might have preferred that we reach morally binding conclusions, we have not yet found a way to do so,'' the diocese said.
The diocese's deliberate decision to take no position in the growing euthanasia debate is clearly a departure from traditional church teachings against euthanasia. And it is clearly a departure from a growing number of medical research studies that, according to Larson, suggest that faith can significantly ease pain and suffering among terminally ill patients.
For example, Larson points to a study that appeared in the journal Medical and Pediatric Oncology, which found that advanced cancer patients with high levels of religious commitment experienced less pain and discomfort in coping with their illness than did patients with low levels of religious commitment.
Similarly, a recent study from The Journal of Clinical Psychology found that patients with strong religious convictions experience less anxiety, depression and distress in facing death than patients with little or no religious convictions. A study published in The Journal of Gerontology found that elderly patients who believe in an afterlife have far less fear of death than seniors who say they do not believe in or are uncertain about life after death.
And a study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry found that individuals who do not pray frequently or attend church regularly are much more apt to contemplate suicide than those who do these things religiously.
As a doctor affiliated with the Duke University Medical Center, Larson knows that the end of life can be quite painful. And he recognizes that a belief in God does not wipe away human suffering or ensure that patients with a terminal illness will experience a miraculous recovery.
Indeed, one of the studies cited by Larson found that religious commitment does not appear to prolong life among patients with advanced forms of cancer.
But Larson believes that medical professionals should pay closer attention to the tenet in the Hippocratic Oath, which says that doctors should ``do no harm'' to their patients. And he believes religious leaders should pay closer attention to the teachings of St. James, who says that anyone who is sick should be comforted by having ``the elders of the church pray over him.''
Indeed, Larson (who, incidentally, is an Episcopalian) finds it both ironic and tragic that at the same time that many in the scientific community are discovering empirical evidence that faith helps people cope with serious illness, some in the religious community are suggesting that physician-assisted death may offer greater ``comfort'' to the afflicted than spiritual counsel and support.
It is ironic. And tragic. And a bizarre twist in the ongoing debate about faith and science.
William R. Mattox Jr. is a columnist who writes frequently on new research findings.
- Knight-Ridder/Tribune
LENGTH: Medium: 67 linesby CNB