COMMENTSON THE ADVISORY: Onthe Proposed Law Legalizing Euthanasia (HB 564) Commissioner Mercedes V. Contreras-Danenberg I agree that euthanasia, defined in the proposed Advisory as “the termination of humanlife by painless meansfor the purpose of ending physical suffering,” could be constructed as a form of suicide and could be a violation of the constitutional policy that the State values the dignity of every humanperson(Article II, Sec 11, Phil. Const.). I likewise agree that any act or omission, which in itself or by deliberate intent, causes death in order to eliminate suffering, constitutes murder and is contrary to the dignity of the humanpersonandto the respectdueto his Creator. However, some personal experience, replicated in many other people’slives, had presented and will continue to present, a dilemma that is not answered by the proposed Advisory. Someexamples: 1. Recently, my brother died in the United States. After about a month in the Intensive Care Unit of the Los Angeles County Hospital, he was declared “braindead” by the team ofdoctors treating him. For several more days, the doctors usedall other meansavailable to revive him. Whenall failed the same team of doctors met with his family, explained the wholesituation, and advised them to make a decision onthelife support system that kept him alive. In close consultation with the doctors, the family decided finally to take awaythelife-sustaining instruments. The Hospital Pastor, who accompaniedthe family andrelatives at the time that the support system was being taken away, helped them accept in faith, the surrenderofhis life in prayer to God. Incidentally, by the timethe very critical moment came, the hospital bills had already run to about $500,000.00. QUESTION: Does our Advisory allow for such a decision? Would our Advisory not eventually only reinforce the feeling of guilt in the family, who,after all, had no choice but to take the decision, after the doctors had come to a medical dead-end? Does the Advisory implythat the doctors and the pastor were criminally liable? 2. A pastor from Makati Medical Center presented the following case ina discussion someyears ago: A wife, whose husband had been terminallyill, has asked for his help. The husband had beenin andoutofthe hospital and availed of all medical meanstofighttheillness, to no avail. The wife told him that she and her husband had earlier made an agreement that he should die at homeandnotin a hospital. The daughter who was a medical doctor, however, disagreed with that. Thus, when the critical moment came, the daughter, despite the wishes of the parents, summoned an ambulance and brought in a medical team. The Pastor, who was present as the drama unfolding, decided to support the daughter’s wish. The father was broughtto the hospital wherehe died a few hourslater. The Pastor’s question, “Did I do the right thing?” 37