The Right to the Last Rites

[jeremyp]

There is a proposal to ensure that Catholic priests will have the right to trample all over crime scenes in order to deliver the Last Rites.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58982505

This has been proposed in the wake of the Amess murder in which a local Catholic priest was allegedly barred from delivering the Last Rites to David Amess. It should be noted though that the priest in question has a slightly different narrative to that published in the press. He asked. The police said no and that was that.

What is the point of it anyway? Does God mind if somebody who has died has not received the Last Rites? I'm sure, in his infinite wisdom, God would have understood in David Amess's case. 

[ProfessorDavey]

There is a proposal to ensure that Catholic priests will have the right to trample all over crime scenes in order to deliver the Last Rites.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58982505

This has been proposed in the wake of the Amess murder in which a local Catholic priest was allegedly barred from delivering the Last Rites to David Amess. It should be noted though that the priest in question has a slightly different narrative to that published in the press. He asked. The police said no and that was that.

What is the point of it anyway? Does God mind if somebody who has died has not received the Last Rites? I'm sure, in his infinite wisdom, God would have understood in David Amess's case.

Yes - I heard this at the time.

Maintaining the integrity of a crime scene in order to preserve evidence that may be used to convict the person responsible and deliver justice has to take precedence over last rites. Indeed over anything beyond medical treatment aimed at saving the life in question. And actually that seems to me to be a more important issue - the presence of a priest attempting to pray/deliver last rites may affect the ability of emergency services to try to save the life in question.

[splashscuba]

Yes - I heard this at the time.

Maintaining the integrity of a crime scene in order to preserve evidence that may be used to convict the person responsible and deliver justice has to take precedence over last rites. Indeed over anything beyond medical treatment aimed at saving the life in question. And actually that seems to me to be a more important issue - the presence of a priest attempting to pray/deliver last rites may affect the ability of emergency services to try to save the life in question.

Also, will the law require police to identify the religion of the victim at the moment of death so that the priest can give the last rights to only Catholics. I for one would not want a priest meddling in a crime scene for one of my loved ones which could jepodize a conviction.

[Nearly Sane]

Points to any MP who tries to suggest a law giving them 100 million pounds for life because of 'David'.

[ProfessorDavey]

Also, will the law require police to identify the religion of the victim at the moment of death so that the priest can give the last rights to only Catholics. I for one would not want a priest meddling in a crime scene for one of my loved ones which could jepodize a conviction.

Indeed - and will there be a check that the dying person actually consents to such action.

[SteveH]

The Catholic church presumably does not regard the last rites as essential - Wikipedia says that they cannot be performed for the already dead, and many people die suddenly and unexpectedly - so no doubt common sense prevails regarding crime scenes, etc. I wonder if it's possible to perform them at a distance, if the dying person is inaccessible for any reason.

[Anchorman]

Thing is; I don't accept the multiple sacraments - two's enough for me - nor ddo I see the need for extreme unction; yet there are those to whom this seems vital at the end of thier lives. I think their wishes should be taken into consideration, maybe not as a primary concern, but not dismissed out of hand.

[jeremyp]

The Catholic church presumably does not regard the last rites as essential - Wikipedia says that they cannot be performed for the already dead, and many people die suddenly and unexpectedly - so no doubt common sense prevails regarding crime scenes, etc. I wonder if it's possible to perform them at a distance, if the dying person is inaccessible for any reason.

I was wondering that also. But the problem is that the Last Rites are clearly not mandatory and so the only use of them is to provide comfort to a Catholic person who knows they are about to die. In order to do that, you need to be near them.

[jeremyp]

Thing is; I don't accept the multiple sacraments - two's enough for me

Two is multiple.

[ad_orientem]

I wonder if it's possible to perform them at a distance, if the dying person is inaccessible for any reason.

I don't think so. Part of the rite is reception of Holy Communion and the annointing of oil.

[ProfessorDavey]

yet there are those to whom this seems vital at the end of thier lives.

There are plenty of things that individuals might consider vital at the end of their lives, I imagine the most common being surrounded by family and perhaps friends. But there are circumstances where this cannot be possible due to either the requirements for medical professionals to do their work or for police to secure a crime scene. You cannot take a view where one persons vital is considered more worthy than another person's vital, particularly if the difference is based on belief as that would run counter to equalities legislation.

I think their wishes should be taken into consideration, maybe not as a primary concern, but not dismissed out of hand.

True, but so should other reasonable end of life requests, such as allowing family to be present. The point is that there are circumstances where allowing either family or a priest would not be appropriate, due to the points above. So suggesting that allowing a priest somehow is acceptable but not a close member of the family seems deeply inappropriate to me.

But of course where there are no such concerns both are appropriate, with the caveat that it should be the choice of the dying person to have last rites, not a decision dictated by a priest.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There are plenty of things that individuals might consider vital at the end of their lives, I imagine the most common being surrounded by family and perhaps friends. But there are circumstances where this cannot be possible due to either the requirements for medical professionals to do their work or for police to secure a crime scene. You cannot take a view where one persons vital is considered more worthy than another person's vital, particularly if the difference is based on belief as that would run counter to equalities legislation.
True, but so should other reasonable end of life requests, such as allowing family to be present. The point is that there are circumstances where allowing either family or a priest would not be appropriate, due to the points above. So suggest that allowing a priest somehow is acceptable but not a close member of the family seems deeply inappropriate to me.

But of course where there are no such concerns both are appropriate, with the caveat that it should be the choice of the dying person to have last rites, not a decision dictated by a priest.

There are plenty of things that individuals might consider vital at the end of their lives, I imagine the most common being surrounded by family and perhaps friends. But there are circumstances where this cannot be possible due to either the requirements for medical professionals to do their work or for police to secure a crime scene. You cannot take a view where one persons vital is considered more worthy than another person's vital, particularly if the difference is based on belief as that would run counter to equalities legislation.
True, but so should other reasonable end of life requests, such as allowing family to be present. The point is that there are circumstances where allowing either family or a priest would not be appropriate, due to the points above. So suggest that allowing a priest somehow is acceptable but not a close member of the family seems deeply inappropriate to me.

But of course where there are no such concerns both are appropriate, with the caveat that it should be the choice of the dying person to have last rites, not a decision dictated by a priest.

If a right to die as one wishes is enshrined in law what warrant can then be claimed that a Roman Catholic has no right to the last rites. I would have thought that a catholic would have freely entered the arrangement that if a priest be on hand he should adminster the rite.

[ProfessorDavey]

If a right to die as one wishes is enshrined in law what warrant can then be claimed that a Roman Catholic has no right to the last rites.

Completely irrelevant comparison (or rather non-comparison).

The issue isn't that catholics don't have the right to the last rites, it is that these rights do not trump other obligations, namely that emergency services are able to complete their work, whether that be emergency medical care or police securing a crime scene. So there is a right but it is, in some cases, limited and not able to be complied with in all circumstances.

Now to go back to your (non) comparison - currently there is no right to receive support to end one's life (note rather than right to die). But even if the law is changed the right will be very limited - in other words only for people with a terminal illness, with less than six months to live and with support of two doctors and a court decision. So in the vast, vast majority of cases there is no right to die.

By contrast for a dying catholic in the vast, vast majority of cases the last rites can be provided - it is only in extremely rare circumstance where those rights are trumped by other obligations on allowing emergency medical treatment and/or securing a crime scene.

[ProfessorDavey]

I would have thought that a catholic would have freely entered the arrangement that if a priest be on hand he should adminster the rite.

Really - actually I doubt this is the case in many instances. Last rites should only be administered to those that actively seek it (ie. consent). Firstly just because you are a catholic it doesn't mean you have specifically consented (nor want) to receive last rites and secondly in many cases the person receiving them may be in no state to be able to agree or otherwise.

[jeremyp]

If a right to die as one wishes is enshrined in law what warrant can then be claimed that a Roman Catholic has no right to the last rites. I would have thought that a catholic would have freely entered the arrangement that if a priest be on hand he should adminster the rite.

A right to die as one wishes is not enshrined in UK law.

[ProfessorDavey]

A right to die as one wishes is not enshrined in UK law.

I think Vlad is talking about the bill currently in the Lords on assisted dying.

But firstly there is pretty well zero chance of this becoming law, and secondly even if it did it would only permit assisted dying in very, very limited circumstances.

[Anchorman]

I think Vlad is talking about the bill currently in the Lords on assisted dying.

But firstly there is pretty well zero chance of this becoming law, and secondly even if it did it would only permit assisted dying in very, very limited circumstances.

   



Technically, even were it passed, it would not ffect Scotland or NI...though a similar bill is being proposed as private members business in Holyrood  (again) at the present time.

[ProfessorDavey]

Technically, even were it passed, it would not ffect Scotland or NI...though a similar bill is being proposed as private members business in Holyrood  (again) at the present time.

Fair point.

But I think my main issue was to counter Vlad's assertion that if the assisted dying bill was passed there would be the right to die but not the right for catholics to receive the last rites. That is of course non-sense.

Were the assisted dying bill to become law:

There would no right to assisted dying except is very limited circumstances (terminal illness, less than 6 months to live, agreed by two doctors and the courts).

There would be the rite for catholics to receive last rites except is very limited circumstances (where administration would compromise the ability of emergency medical personnel to try to save the life or for police to secure a crime scene).

[Anchorman]

Fair point.

But I think my main issue was to counter Vlad's assertion that if the assisted dying bill was passed there would be the right to die but not the right for catholics to receive the last rites. That is of course non-sense.

Were the assisted dying bill to become law:

There would no right to assisted dying except is very limited circumstances (terminal illness, less than 6 months to live, agreed by two doctors and the courts).

There would be the rite for catholics to receive last rites except is very limited circumstances (where administration would compromise the ability of emergency medical personnel to try to save the life or for police to secure a crime scene).

   


A suggestion has been made here )by a non Catholic) that those who wish may carry a card stating that in the event of circumstances, a priest should be called or last rites administered.
That would satisfy the bearer's wishes...which shopuld be paramount, after all.

[jeremyp]

That would satisfy the bearer's wishes...which shopuld be paramount, after all.

Not necessarily. There are several scenarios I can think of where the wishes of the bearer would should not be paramount.

• Where allowing a priest near the victim would contaminate a crime scene
• Where allowing the priest in would endanger the lives of the priest or others (including the bearer - not everybody who receives the Last Rites actually dies)
• Where the priest would get in the way of rescue services doing their jobs in any other way

[ProfessorDavey]

A suggestion has been made here )by a non Catholic) that those who wish may carry a card stating that in the event of circumstances, a priest should be called or last rites administered.

That would be a bit like an organ donor card - and although that consents to removal or organs it doesn't create any obligation so to do. So the equivalent would be that were a catholic to carry such a card it would indicate consent to the last rites, but would not obligate a priest to deliver them and would not trump other considerations.

That would satisfy the bearer's wishes...which shopuld be paramount, after all.

See above - the bearer's wishes are important, but not determinative. So there will be circumstances where the wish of a catholic to receive the last rites is not borne out. One reason may be that there is no priest available, but other reasons are as Jeremy and I have been suggesting - e.g. that administration of the last rites would prevent emergency medical interventions, endanger the lives of others or potentially contaminate a crime scene. In these circumstances the wishes of the individual is trumped by other considerations, as happens in all sorts of other circumstances.

[Anchorman]

Not necessarily. There are several scenarios I can think of where the wishes of the bearer would should not be paramount.

• Where allowing a priest near the victim would contaminate a crime scene
• Where allowing the priest in would endanger the lives of the priest or others (including the bearer - not everybody who receives the Last Rites actually dies)
• Where the priest would get in the way of rescue services doing their jobs in any other way

   
If a person requests extreme unction, do we have the right to deny it them?
I don't subscribe to the need fotr such a thing - but I do subscribe to the human right to freedom of religion.

[ProfessorDavey]

If a person requests extreme unction, do we have the right to deny it them?

They have the right to request it, but no right to demand it. And yes there are circumstances where their request has to be denied. A good example would be a situation involving many injured people, e.g. in a train crash, where allowing a priest to administer the last rites to one person would prevent emergency rescue crews from doing their work to rescue others.

I don't subscribe to the need fotr such a thing - but I do subscribe to the human right to freedom of religion.

But there is also freedom for others who aren't religious - using the example above, how could it possibly be right to cause others to die on the basis of allowing one person to receive the last rites. That would infringe hugely on surely an even greater freedom - the right to life.

So, once again, I have no issue with the right of a catholic to request the last rites and, of course, in the vast, vast majority of cases their request can be fulfilled. But there are cases when it is completely acceptable to deny that request on the basis of the circumstances Jeremy and I have outlined. And there is a difference between on the one hand a request and on the other a demand and an obligation. 

[jeremyp]

   
If a person requests extreme unction, do we have the right to deny it them?

Yes, if there are overriding concerns.

I don't subscribe to the need fotr such a thing - but I do subscribe to the human right to freedom of religion.

And I subscribe to other people's rights to say no to religious demands that would adversely affect them or others.

[Alan Burns]

One thing is absolutely certain - we are all going to die.
As a devout Christian, what I consider to be of supreme importance is the opportunity for the dying person to ask forgiveness for their sins and to re affirm their acceptance of Jesus as their Saviour.  I know the person may have the  opportunity to do this without a priest, but I am certain that the presence of the priest will encourage the the dying person to be at peace with God before they end this earthly life.  What else could be more important?