@article{ref1,
title="Evolution of Church teaching on prolonging life",
journal="Health progress (Saint Louis, Mo.)",
year="1988",
author="O'Rourke, K.",
volume="69",
number="1",
pages="28-35",
abstract="God gave us the gift of human life to show forth his goodness and love. We, in turn, show our love for God by respecting and fostering that gift. Thus it is not an act of responsible human love to willfully and directly end one's own or the life of another. At times, however, the choice of another good may justify the indirect surrender of human life--for example, martyrs who surrender their lives rather than deny God. From the earliest centuries of the Church, the main questions concerning care for life as an act of love for God focused on suicide and euthanasia. But as the possibility of prolonging life through medicine or surgery increased, theologians started questioning how much effort should be expended to stay alive. The terms &quot;ordinary means&quot; and &quot;extraordinary means&quot; to prolong life were gradually introduced in Catholic teaching over the centuries. &quot;Ordinary means&quot; originally were those readily at hand and available to all; &quot;extraordinary means&quot; were expensive, difficult to obtain, or inconvenient to arrange for the average person. Over the years, they were used to signify whether particular means were morally obligatory (ordinary) or morally optional (extraordinary). Today the terms &quot;proportionate-disproportionate&quot; and &quot;burden-benefit&quot; have replaced &quot;ordinary&quot; and &quot;extraordinary&quot; to a great extent.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)<p /><p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0882-1577",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}