Submission from Soka Gakkai International New Zealand (SGINZ) to the Health Select Committee on the Petition of Hon Maryan Street and 8,974 others requesting That the House of Representatives investigate fully public attitudes towards the introduction of legislation which would permit medically-assisted dying in the event of a terminal illness or an irreversible condition which makes life unbearable. Summary of submission: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SGINZ does not support the introduction of legislation as described by Maryan Street and co-submitters. In Nichiren Buddhism, the experience of human life is seen as a precious opportunity and every human being has infinite dignity and worth. It teaches that is possible to create value even from difficult and painful experiences. From this perspective, Buddhism does not support euthanasia, which could lead to a devaluing of life and in the worst case, to people being led to feel that they should end their lives in order not to be a burden to others. Though Buddhist literature contains nothing specifically prohibiting suicide and euthanasia, on the basis of Buddhist belief in the dignity of life it cannot be considered to condone it. (Toynbee and Ikeda, p168) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Background The closing date for submissions is Monday, 1 February 2016 The Health Select Committee has received a petition requesting That the House of Representatives investigate fully public attitudes towards the introduction of legislation which would permit medically-assisted dying in the event of a terminal illness or an irreversible condition which makes life unbearable. The petition asks for a change to existing law. Therefore the committee will undertake an investigation into ending one s life in New Zealand. In order to fully understand public attitudes the committee will consider all the various aspects of the issue, including the social, legal, medical, cultural, financial, ethical, and philosophical implications. The Committee will investigate: 1. The factors that contribute to the desire to end one s life. 2. The effectiveness of services and support available to those who desire to end their own lives. 3. The attitudes of New Zealanders towards the ending of one's life and the current legal situation. 4. International experiences. The committee will seek to hear from all interested groups and individuals. About SGINZ Soka Gakkai International New Zealand (SGINZ) is a grassroots Buddhist association promoting peace through individual transformation and contribution to society. It is part of the international SGI network of 12 million members in more than 192 countries around the world (website: www.sgi.org). SGI members around the world share a common vision of a better world through peace, culture and education. At the core of SGI's Buddhist philosophy is conviction in the infinite value and potential of every individual, and the right of all people to lead happy and fulfilled lives. SGINZ is a New Zealand registered charity, number CC10723 (website: www.sginz.org). SGINZ has a membership of about 2,000, located mainly in the main centres, but also spread throughout the country. It has a permanent community centre in Ellerslie, Auckland, and leased community centres in Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin. Members meet to study and share Buddhism at the community centres and often in private homes. SGINZ has 1
recently purchased land in upper Cuba St, Wellington on which it plans to establish a permanent Wellington community centre. SGINZ has a Board of Directors (Trustees) of the charitable trust. Operational decisions are made largely by SGINZ s National Planning Committee, which comprises representatives of SGINZ s membership groups: young women, young men, women and men. SGINZ is proud of its highly engaged and vibrant youth and its ethnically and socioeconomically diverse membership. About this submission This submission summarises the SGI s views on medically assisted dying, which are specifically the views of: 1. Daisaku Ikeda, President of the SGI, as expressed in his dialogues with: a. Arnold Toynbee, which spanned the years 1971 to 1974. Originally published in 1976, the dialogue was reissued for a new generation in 2007 under the title Choose Life: A Dialogue, and b. Dr Renee Simard (cancer researcher), and Dr Guy Bourgeault (bioethicist and education researcher), both from the University of Montreal. 2. Dr Yoichi Kawada, Director of the Institute of Oriental Philosophy, Japan, (established by Daisaku Ikeda in 1962) as expressed in a web article. Daisaku Ikeda Daisaku Ikeda is a Buddhist philosopher, peacebuilder, a prolific writer, poet, educator and founder of a number of cultural, educational and peace research institutions around the world. He was the third president of the Soka Gakkai (value-creating society) and is founder of the Soka Gakkai International. He has developed and inspired possibly the world s largest, most diverse international lay Buddhist association. Based on the 700-year-old tradition of Nichiren Buddhism, the movement emphasises individual empowerment and social engagement to advance peace, culture and education. Comments in the submission are referenced, and a list of references is provided. Note that all three sources are short and easily read. SGINZ thanks the Health Select Committee for the opportunity to submit on this important and topical subject. The Buddhist view of life and death From the Buddhist perspective, life and death are two phases of a continuum. Life does not begin at birth nor end at death. Buddhism views life as a continuation through the three existences of past, present and future. An individual s karma contained in his or her life continues beyond death. Buddhism teaches that it is possible to transform one s karma, and that this is made possible only through the way one lives. Thus, Buddhism does not accept any justification for euthanasia, which is to choose death as a result of viewing one s life solely in negative terms. Moreover, Buddhism sees inherent and supreme dignity in every individual. Active euthanasia deprives the individual of the potential to manifest his or her highest qualities, known as Buddhahood, which still exists however difficult the situation. 2
Buddhism presupposes that life exists throughout past, present, and future, as does karma. Suffering does not end with death but, incorporated in karma, continues to exist even after death. Karma will never alter unless the individual changes it by his own efforts. (Toynbee p168) Discussion about euthanasia and its risks Buddhism does not support the shortening of life by physical, chemical or any other contrived means. However, The progress of medical treatment including methods used in palliative care units offers hope, even though treatment cannot totally eliminate suffering. Still, instead of taking this as a reason to affirm active euthanasia, the Buddhist preference is to seek to support methods of alleviating unbearable pain through medical advances and the care provided by family, friends and the medical team. (Ikeda et al, p119). Risk 1: Denying the potential of life Discussions about euthanasia often consider situations where people may be suffering unbearably but still have a period of life left. Because life is synonymous with hope, where there is life, there is the possibility of creating value. In criticizing euthanasia, I am thinking of persons who, though in virtually unbearable suffering at the time, do have a period of life left to them, a period in which they can possibly achieve something worthwhile or maybe even brilliant. (Toynbee and Ikeda, p163). Every effort on the part of the sufferer, such as smiling or thanking their caregivers, may create value by encouraging and inspiring them with their courage in the face of difficulty. Risk 2: Denying the value of life The freedom to assist another to escape unbearable pain or other suffering by taking their life, or to seek death for oneself in such a situation, may be seen as a logical conclusion of human thought. However, such an approach involves a risk in the form of an undervaluing of human life. For example, if people come to regard euthanasia as totally acceptable, is it not possible that the elderly who, as a result of illness, are bedridden and dependent on the care of others for whom they can no longer do anything in return might feel guilty about simply remaining alive? In cases of this kind, recognizing euthanasia as born of a spirit of mercy might deprive all society of compassion. (Toynbee and Ikeda p 163-4). Bourgeault refers to studies conducted before and after the adoption of euthanasia legislation in the Netherlands. These studies reportedly show that, despite regulations, in the few years before publication of his comments (in 2003), more than one thousand cases of non-voluntary euthanasia were performed annually (Ikeda et al, p119). Risk 3: The risk of discrimination Our own life demands the same maximum respect that we must accord another person. The loss of a suffering person s talents and abilities are sometimes considered among the justifications for euthanasia/assisted dying. Should this attitude become widely accepted, people without obvious talents might come to be considered unworthy of living. Talents and the ability to reason are a part, not all, of the total entity of life. To argue that once a person s abilities have failed, he can no longer live in a meaningful way is to put too narrow an interpretation on life itself. (Toynbee and Ikeda p165) Risk 4: The risk of becoming passive in the face of fate Some may seek to end their suffering as a way to attain freedom. Ikeda asks, however, whether what is attained by ending one s life is in fact freedom. When a sufferer views their 3
life as a form of bondage, the freedom they have to overcome their situation seems to disappear, leaving only the so-called freedom to decide between life and death. Ikeda holds that choosing death in such a situation is allowing oneself to submit to the workings of fate, a passive rather than active decision. Such a decision is fundamentally disempowering (Toynbee and Ikeda, p165). Examples Josei Toda, second president of the Soka Gakkai, died with dignity in 1958. From his sickbed and until his final breath, he continued to encourage others, give advice to those in distress and answer questions about Buddhism. He radiated health in the truest sense of the word, even after he became ill. Ikeda s interlocutor, Guy Bourgeault provides the example of his mentor Mr Cormier, a champion of human rights, also died with dignity, saying I m not sick. It is just my body that is being attacked by cancer. He never considered his cancer as a sickness, but as a condition he could continue to cope with (Ikeda et al, p121). Conclusion To summarise, Ikeda comments that whether to accept or reject suicide and euthanasia rests ultimately on one s view of life, death and religion. For Buddhists, life itself is the ultimate positive value. Consistent with the dignity of life, it is wrong to kill and good to prolong life for as long as possible. (Toynbee and Ikeda, p166, 168). Life itself has value and is additionally precious because the Buddha nature is inherent in it. It is impossible to objectively prove the ceaseless continuity of life. Therefore, attitudes towards euthanasia and suicide must be a matter of faith. Because human life is considered inherently precious, Buddhism cannot support any deliberate action to cut it short (Toynbee and Ikeda, p 168). Moreover, suffering does not end with death, but is incorporated into karma and continues to exist after death. Ikeda notes four risks associated with euthanasia: 1. Denying the potential of life: life has the limitless capacity to transform itself, and value can be created even in the face of suffering 2. Denying the value of life: life has intrinsic value, so allowing euthanasia where life superficially appears to have little value may lead to reduced levels of compassion in society 3. The risk of discrimination: the loss of one s talents and abilities does not diminish the value of one s life. Justifying euthanasia on the basis of the loss of talents and abilities is to define life too narrowly. 4. The risk of passivity in the face of fate: euthanasia with the aim of attaining freedom from suffering does not in fact mean freedom. Freedom in this situation is meaningfully interpreted as the freedom to improve or overcome the situation. To use euthanasia as an escape is to passively submit to fate. Finally, Buddhism holds that whatever the cause, the termination of life is determined at a level beyond human consciousness. Consultation Leaders of Soka Gakkai International in New Zealand (SGINZ) were consulted in the preparation of this submission. They were in agreement with the views expressed and made only minor comments which have been taken into account. Consulted were the Oceania 4
and Vice Oceania SGI Chiefs (whose responsibility includes the South Pacific region), the General Director of SGINZ (the leader of the organisation in New Zealand), and the SGINZ Public Relations team. The Public Relations Department of our affiliate organisation in Japan is aware of this submission and provided advice as to useful sources, but they do not yet have an official position on this topic. The submission was prepared by a Trustee of SGINZ who is also member of the Public Relations team. References Ikeda Daisaku, Simard Renee, Bourgeault Guy. On Being Human: Where ethics, medicine and spirituality converge. Middleway Press, Santa Monica 2003, pages 116-124 Kawada Yoichi. Living and Dying with Dignity: A Buddhist View, SGI Quarterly, 2004. Accessed on 9 November 2015 at http://www.sgiquarterly.org/feature2004apr-2.html Toynbee Arnold, Ikeda Daisaku. Choose Life: A Dialogue. I.B. Tauris, London, 2007, pages 161-9. 5