The Vatican's "Vapors" Over Tube Time

According to this story from today’s New York Times…

Over the past week, the Vatican and an Italian doctor have sparred over the doctor’s accusation that (Pope John Paul II) should have been fitted earlier with a feeding tube. The doctor, Lina Pavanelli, an anesthesiologist, argued in a magazine article, then again this week in public, that the failure to do so before March 30, 2005, when the Vatican announced that John Paul had been fitted with a nasal feeding tube, deprived him of necessary care and thus violated church teachings on euthanasia. He died, at 84, on April 2 that year.

In an article in the magazine, Micromega, Dr. Pavanelli argued, “When the patient knowingly refuses a life-saving therapy, his action together with the remissive or omissive behavior of doctors, must be considered euthanasia, or more precisely, assisted suicide.”

…

The accusation came as the Vatican restated its position on feeding tubes. Last week, a Vatican office described them as “an ordinary means of preserving life” that should be used even in cases of long-term deep coma where there is little hope for recovery. The Vatican does not approve of means it considers “disproportionate,” those involving a heavy burden and unlikely to save the patient.

That often means artificial respiration, but even that case is complicated. At a news conference on Wednesday, Dr. Pavanelli appeared by the side of the widow of Piergiorgio Welby, a writer who died last year after deciding to be removed from a ventilator that had kept him alive for nine years.

At the time, several church officials said that act amounted to euthanasia, and Mr. Welby was denied a church burial.

In the article, the Vatican said that the Pope had received the feeding tube several days prior to the March 30th announcement.

I’d really like to believe that, but as many of us remember, John Paul had been gravely ill for a very long time, and I just don’t understand the medical reason why he would have received the tube when he was so close to death and not sooner (basically, though I don’t know anything for certain of course, I’m inclined to side with Dr. Pavanelli).

I just would like to see a little more humanity from “the good shepherd” in Rome on this issue. I think we all have our own stories about family members passing from our midst, and mine involves my dad. Fortunately, he had a living will (and I can’t emphasize enough how important it is to have one – full disclosure: I need to practice what I preach on that). His wishes, and ours, were honored by our family doctor and the institution where he passed away, fortunately for us all.

And I think refusing a Catholic burial to a man who had been kept alive on a ventilator for nine years but decided that he’d had enough is cruel, especially when these legitimate questions persist about John Paul’s death.

I believe in a kind and forgiving God that sees us for what we truly are and knows that most of us are doing our best so we can be with him in the end one day. And part of that is not seeking to do harm to others or ourselves.

And I’m pretty sure the Vatican believes that also, though sometimes I wonder.