Ascriptions of dignity vary radically with time, place, and the beholder. For example, Küng, H., a Swiss theologian who was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease and macular degeneration which can eventually lead to blindness, perceived human dignity in a unique way when he associated it with Parkinson disease.555 In an interview with Jimmy Burns concerning his health situation, Küng stated that he is considering assisted dying in neighbouring Switzerland.556 The renowned theologian considered living a life with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, macular degeneration and polyarthritis as an undignified life not worthy living.557 He could not perceive such a life, in which he would be ridiculed by
children in the city.558 He was somehow contemplating that assisted suicide would be one
of the means of giving his life back to God.559
We therefore assume that the choice he made was in line with his personal conviction that opting for euthanasia would be regarded as a personal call of duty to be responsible for the end of his life. Belgium has recently legalised euthanasia for terminally ill children of any age though on a wider level such a move has caused outrage from various sectors of life.560 There seem to be a strong wave worldwide that is aimed at doing away with life that is considered not worthy of living, while contrary to that motion, many Christians, Muslims and Jews have strongly condemned the act, as it would encourage the legality of assisted suicide for children with disabilities side-lining their autonomy.561 Similar sentiments and inclinations might be felt among families and mothers, who might be overwhelmed by the reality of having a child with disabilities. Based on different life experiences, some families may feel that they have an obligation to do away with the child with disabilities, since it is a life not worth living.562 It is in this sense that the term “dignity” is relative. It can mean anything to anybody. Modern demographics, in view of advanced medical research, new
555 The Tablet Interview, (2014), Frank Exchanges, in the “The Tablet”, 1st February Issue, 7. 556 Ibid.
557 Ibid. 558 Ibid. 559 Ibid.
560 Roberts, J., (2014), At the Hour of our Death, in “The Tablet”, Legal Matters of Life and Death, February Issue, 22nd February, 4-5.
561 Ibid.
562 Binding, K. and Hoche, A., (2007), Permitting the Destruction of Life Unworthy of Living, in Weitz, E.D. and Roubinek, E.S. (Eds), for certain populations and this population included mentally and physically disabled people who posed Re-Imagined Communities: National, Racial and Colonial Visions in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, (1922-1943), Minnesota: Minnesota University Press, 1-2. In this article, Binding and Hoche argued in favour of allowing the practice of euthanasia as financially burdensome to society and they offered a legal basis for permission to kill them.
areas of theological and philosophical debate on such acts of assisted suicide, have opened new avenues in society.563 To this effect, we observe that the perception of human dignity among many scholars and ordinary people in society has taken a novel outlook contrary to the ideals perceived by Christian theological beliefs.
At this point, we may affirm that once human dignity becomes relative, it may open the window for potential possibilities of child abuses. People in certain sectors of life may justify the act of abandoning, dumping, and killing children with severe disabilities.564 It is this understanding of human dignity that contributes negatively to the current situation of children with disabilities. Experience and mere observation of the situation in the region of KwaZulu-Natal indicates that there is a clash between the ethics of value and ethics of duty.565 Thomas Higgins posed a question: “Does the morality of an act depend on its nature or its consequences?”566 From the perspective of the current discourse, a moral evaluation
of any human act associated with children with disabilities is determined in two ways, the ethical moral evaluation, and the Biblical moral evaluation. From the ethical moral evaluation which may apply to wider community the same, there are factors that determine the morality of an act, namely the moral object, the intention and the circumstances.567 From the Biblical moral evaluation of an act, the morality of an act is based on two great commandments, love of God above all else and the love of your neighbour as yourself.568
From this point of departure, we affirm that an ordered love of God, your neighbour and
563 Pinker, S., (2008), The Stupidity of Dignity in The New Republic, published on Wednesday, May, 28. This phrase “The Stupidity of Dignity” per Steven Pinker does not mean that human beings lack an inherent dignity or moral worth rather it means that the term “dignity” itself has been constantly abused that it has become almost worthless in moral debates. The issue is, how can we justify mercy killing as dignified death without the consent of the child herself or himself. Mercy killing as the means to eliminate pain and suffering of the child cannot be termed as dying with dignity without the consent of the child. It is in such circumstances that the term “Dignity” has been abused and it has become a useless concept depending on its usage.
564 Otieno, G., Marinda, E., Barnighausen, T., and Tanser, F., (2015), High Rates of Homicide in Rural South
African Population (2000-2008): Findings from a Population-Based Cohort Study, in Population Health Metrics Journal, Johannesburg: BioMed Central Publishers, 2-9.
565 Ethics of value denotes the belief in certain realities and norms that safeguard core principles of life where as ethics of duty mandates someone to execute certain obligations while weighing the values that are in conflict while considering the best option that is realistic and manageable.
566 Higgins, T.J., (1967), Ethical Theories in Conflict, Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 21. 567 Di Ianni, A., (1979), The Direct / Indirect Distinction in Morals. In Curran, C.E., McCormick, R.A., (Eds).
Reading in Moral Theology No.1. Moral Norms and Catholic Tradition, New York: Paulist Press, 215-243. By moral object is meant what the free will chooses to do in thought, word, or deed or not to do. The intention is the purpose for which a person acts. It is the motive or reason an action id done. Circumstance means all the elements that surround a human action and affects its morality without belonging to its essence. Circumstances may sometimes change the degree of goodness or badness of an act. Also, check The Catechism of the Catholic Church. Art. No. 1750.
568 Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, (2004), Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, Nairobi: Pauline Publications, Art. No. 204.
yourself would best suit the contemporary situation facing children with disabilities and may be a suitable basis for morality. Based on the above evaluation of morality of a human act, abandonment, dumping and mercy, or direct, killing of children with disabilities might have failed to meet the above criteria for justification of an act. We therefore affirm that the morality of abandoning, dumping or killing of children with disabilities ought to be grounded on the ethical and Biblical moral values enshrined in the social doctrine of the Christian faith and in morals.569
We may consider them as carrying a compelling weight within the context of the determination of the morality of certain actions directed towards children with disabilities. Based on these grounds, morality would be considered as such that one is commanded by it and there is no option of opting out of it or making the claim that it does not apply to you.570 There exist certain types of actions which are absolutely prohibited by law, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative.571 For instance, some primary care givers or mothers would feel much more relieved after abandoning, dumping or killing of a child with disabilities. In this regard, the Children’s Act brings about the law to take the perpetrators to justice as enshrined in the laws of the nation i.e. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.572