Dr. Jack Kevorkian helped put assisted suicide on the map in the U.S., but is assisted suicide, or the active death-dealing of euthanasia, in the name of compassion, a defensible moral action?
Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #251 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.
Switzerland has made it easy to kill yourself. An assisted suicide pod passed an independent legal review showing it complies with Swiss law. At the push of a button, the pod fills with nitrogen gas, rapidly lowering oxygen levels and killing the user. Switzerland has permitted assisted suicide since 1942.
“Euthanasia refers to active steps taken to end someone’s life to stop their suffering and the ‘final deed’ is undertaken by someone other than the individual, for example a doctor…Assisted suicide is about helping someone to take their own life at their request – in other words the final deed is undertaken by the person themselves. Assisted dying can be used to mean both euthanasia, generally voluntary, and assisted suicide; however, some campaign groups use it to refer only to assisted suicide of terminally ill people.”
Assisted suicide is most prevalent in Switzerland, The Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Belgium. The Netherlands became the first country in the world to formally legalize both physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia through explicit legislation passed in 2001.
“The Canadian approach to euthanasia and assisted suicide, euphemistically known as Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD), has expanded in recent years and has sparked significant debate about its ethical and societal implications. Euthanasia was first intended only for those nearing the end of their lives. Now, Canada has one of the most permissive euthanasia policies in the world, revealing a rapidly increasing culture of not just accepting death, but actively promoting it.”
“Since the establishment of Canada's Medical Assistance In Dying (MAID) law in 2016, more than 60,000 people have used euthanasia to die. Euthanasia accounted for 15,343 deaths in 2023 or 4.7% or about 1 in 20 of all deaths in the country.”
“In Canada, assisted suicide is permitted but nearly non-existent. Instead, MAiD deaths are almost exclusively due to euthanasia, where a doctor actively ends a patient’s life…Some Canadian doctors have become experts in killing, with one doctor “administering fatal substances” to over 400 patients.”
In the U.S., “just over seven in 10 Americans, 71%, believe doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it.”
At the same time, doctor-assisted suicide -- a term used to describe patients ending their own lives with the aid of a physician -- garners slightly less but still majority support…Religiosity has the most significant impact on one’s perceptions of morality regarding this question. Sixty-seven percent of those who seldom or never attend religious services say doctor-assisted suicide is morally acceptable, compared with 29% of those who attend services weekly; 66% of the most religious Americans believe doctor-assisted suicide is morally wrong.
In the United States, assisted suicide was first legally approved in the state of Oregon,1994, when voters passed the Death with Dignity Act. After legal challenges, it officially took effect in 1997. Euthanasia is illegal in all 50 states, while assisted suicide is legal in several states. Patients must be adults with a terminal prognosis, be mentally competent, make multiple requests over time, be informed of alternatives such as hospice and palliative care. Thus far, at the federal level, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that there is no constitutional right to assisted suicide.
Advocates argue that mentally competent adults should have the right to decide the timing and manner of their death, emphasizing bodily autonomy, control over end-of-life decisions, and avoiding prolonged suffering. Supporters argue that some suffering—physical or existential—cannot be adequately relieved, even with advanced palliative care. Supporters often argue there is no morally relevant difference between withdrawing life support (widely accepted) and prescribing medication the patient may take to hasten death.
From a Christian moral perspective, assisted suicide, assisted dying, and euthanasia are deeply problematic because they conflict with core beliefs about the sanctity of life, human dignity, suffering, and God’s sovereignty. Christianity teaches that human life is a sacred gift from God, not a possession to be disposed of at will. The Bible tells us life was created by God in his image (Genesis 1:27).
Because human beings are made in the image of God, their worth does not depend on health, productivity, or independence. Intentionally ending innocent human life, even to relieve suffering, is therefore typically considered a violation of God’s moral law. One of the clearest moral foundations for this view is the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13).
Traditionally, Christians have understood this prohibition to include the deliberate taking of innocent life, including one’s own. While compassion for suffering is central to Christian ethics, compassion must be expressed in ways that respect moral boundaries. Directly intending death as a solution to pain crosses that boundary by redefining killing as care.
“Suffering is usually behind a request for euthanasia. The most commonly cited reasons for a euthanasia request are the loss of ability to engage in meaningful activities (over 95%) or to perform activities of daily living (over 83%). Just under 60% cite inadequate pain control (or fear of it).”
But Christian moral theology holds that suffering, though painful and often mysterious, can have spiritual meaning. “We know that suffering builds us up in ways we cannot now see. As we read in James 1:12: “Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.”
Rather than eliminating the sufferer, Christians are called to respond with presence, love, and care. “Suffering allows us to care for each other, and to be cared for. It’s a reminder that we are not in control of our own lives, but reliant first on God, and then on those around us.” The growth of hospice movements reflects this conviction: that people deserve comfort, dignity, and companionship at the end of life, not abandonment through lethal means.
The Apostle Paul said, “For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us...For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together…but we ourselves…groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for…the redemption of our bodies” (Rom. 8:18, 22-23).
The Catholic Church articulated this position clearly in Evangelium Vitae by Pope John Paul II. The encyclical states that euthanasia is a “grave violation of the law of God” because it involves the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person. At the same time, it distinguishes between killing and allowing natural death to occur, affirming that burdensome or disproportionate medical treatments may be refused when they offer little hope of benefit.
“As our culture has embraced death for the suffering, ‘dying with dignity’ has come to mean ending life before one becomes too disabled or dependent on others. Nearly 65% of people euthanized in Canada cited ‘loss of dignity’ as a source of suffering behind their request to die. But, as Christians, we know that dignity is not found in one’s ability, health, or disposition. We know that every person has dignity, simply by the fact that human beings are made in the image of God…So-called “death with dignity” tells a person “they are no longer worth helping, that they are nothing but the sum of their aches and pains, their fears and their despair”…Canada’s initial euthanasia law is based on the arbitrary idea that some human beings have dignity, and some do not; some lives are worth living and some are not.”
Christian moral arguments against assisted suicide and euthanasia rest on the sanctity of life, obedience to God’s commandments, the redemptive understanding of suffering, and a commitment to compassionate care that never intentionally ends innocent human life.
Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. For more Christian commentary, see my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com, or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers.
And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.
© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2026
*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/ or my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers.