The task we have set ourselves is the investigation of the canonical repercussions of a controversial procedure, namely, the removal of artificially assisted feeding and hydration from an unconscious patient resulting in the patient's death. Life-support systems, including assisted feeding and hydration, are able to keep a person alive indefinitely, and the moment of death is often a matter of someone's decision and action. While the problem is not entirely new, there has been little canonical reflection on its implications. The Church's teaching on the sanctity of life is reflected in canon law, and the Code of Canon Law provides penalties and other canonical effects for homicide and abortion. There has been considerable interest in the crime of abortion, but little attention has been given to the crime of homicide, in spite of the fact that medical personnel frequently take steps to end life. This issue of the removal of artificially assisted feeding and hydration from an unconscious patient has been intensely debated by moral theologians and has been the subject of bishops' statements in many countries, particularly the United States of America. Many of these statements have been about specific cases involving Catholic patients and Catholic hospitals. These cases are significant in the light of the worldwide movement to promote euthanasia, and legislatures in several countries have debated and sometimes passed laws allowing for euthanasia. If there is to be a role for Church law in the protection of life, a review of the doctrine of homicide is opportune. Accordingly, we propose to investigate the canonical crime of homicide in the light of a controversial issue. The question we intend to address is: does the canonical crime of homicide apply to the withdrawal of assisted feeding and hydration? If so, to whom does it apply, and in what circumstances? In Chapter One we will study theological reflection on the issue. In Chapter Two we will survey relevant papal and episcopal teaching regarding the preservation of life and the principles that allow for exceptions to the duty to prolong life. Chapter Three will investigate the canonical crime of homicide. The ambit of our inquiry will be limited to the question of imputability, and we will not take up the related issues of canonical process or penalties unless they help clarify aspects of imputability.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:uottawa.ca/oai:ruor.uottawa.ca:10393/6325 |
| Date | January 2002 |
| Creators | Doherty, John. |
| Contributors | Huels, John M., |
| Publisher | University of Ottawa (Canada) |
| Source Sets | Université d’Ottawa |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | 322 p. |
Page generated in 0.0112 seconds