Fake progress” “

“On the confines of life: the relations between science, ethics and law” was the theme of an international conference held in Rome on 25 and 26 October. At the centre of attention: the attacks on life represented by abortion and euthanasia, genetic manipulations on human embryos and the diffusion of an “aseptic” view of healthcare, that leads to the justification of every type of intervention on the human body, even in the absence of clinically ascertained death. “Instead if ensuring the invalid as dignified an end of existence as possible, preferably surrounded by his/her own family, the sin against the fifth commandment ‘Thou shalt not kill’ is being committed: a sin legalized in my country, Belgium, three weeks ago”: so said Philippe Schepens, general secretary of the Word Federation of pro-life physicians and member of the executive Council of the Pontifical Academy for Life, at the beginning of his report to the conference. “Of course – said Dr. Schepens – in my country medicine will adopt every excuse to justify the adoption of euthanasia, which is already legal in Holland and will soon become legal in most countries of Europe and then of the world”. Schepens’ thesis is that the adoption of euthanasia responds to a general view shared by those whom he has called “biocrats”, and who have de facto introduced a kind of “surrogate of otherworldly happiness” on this earth based on cold efficiency. This elitist logic of managing the power in the hands of physicians can also be found in the attempt to endorse the concept of “cerebral death” as true from a scientific point of view: so said the philosophers Robert Spaemann (former director of the Institute of Philosophy at the University of Munich in Bavaria) and Joseph Seifert (rector of the international Academy of Philosophy of Liechtenstein). They described so-called “cerebral death” “as subordinated to the frenetic hunt for transplant organs” and described its growing legitimacy at the strictly juridical level. “In this sense – they said – attempts are being made to attribute to the State the power to accelerate the death of patients, with the pretext of performing a service of social utility”. The “utilitarian” perspective on the use of the human body within the healthcare system rests – according to Daniel Raffard de Brienne, of the Association of French Catholic Writers – on the evolutionist credo, according to which “man is matter is a state of perennial becoming and hence in the last analysis at the disposal of scientific experimentation”. “Some more critical spirits may wonder today – he said – whether the dissolution of social mores and of society as a whole, with the calm and legal recourse to the assassination of the sick and the yet to be born, represent real progress or are not rather the signs of a regression to beyond the bounds of animality. What is hailed as progress is a bioethical threat against humanity”.¤ Some questions to Joseph Seifert. How do you evaluate the presence of forces in Europe that want to introduce euthanasia? “The tendency towards euthanasia and the killing of the elderly and the sick will become, after abortion, the biggest problem of Europe and the world. It’s an issue destined to assume growing importance, because it clearly suggests that the respect for life at its end is being lost. The concept of euthanasia, moreover, is applied not only to those who freely want to die, but is also used to justify the killing of those who don’t, or who can’t, give their consent, either children with genetic malformations or embryos with prenatal problems. We are in a situation analogous to that of Nazism, where the killing of ‘nonconformist’ persons was justified in the interests of society. I think that this problem is of the utmost gravity from an ethical, social, medical and political point of view”. What position will gain the upper hand in Europe? “I’m not a prophet, but my opinion is that at the very least what is being played out is an ever more passionate struggle to protect life not only at its beginning but also at its end. It’s enough to think of Holland and Belgium where the law on euthanasia is already in force. I think, nonetheless, that the tendency to introduce similar laws is very strong in Switzerland, Germany and other countries. I hope that the right to life may be affirmed, but I greatly fear that the opposite, the negative, tendencies may win. But I say so not to encourage passivity, but to appeal to everyone to place the healthy and positive forces at the service of life and of its protection”. Luigi Crimella