Sometimes, cherishing life can be cruel.

Denying the right to suicide, for instance.

Earlier this month, a girl suffering from terminal cancer appealed to the National People's Congress (NPC) for legislation on euthanasia. The girl said she didn't want to live in misery because she is paralyzed, only able to move her head and fingers.

Her mother feeds her three meals a day, carries her to the toilet, and helps her turn over a dozen times every night.

The appeal came too late to be taken up at this year's NPC session but it aroused extensive concern from the public after it was reported by the media last week.

A media survey found that 90 percent of those surveyed sympathized with the girl and supported legalizing euthanasia but only 26 percent would help her terminate her life if they were the girl's relatives.

The paradox mirrors most people's feelings about mercy killing.

Netizens' remarks posted on Internet bulletin boards in the past week indicate that most people regard a peaceful death as a better choice for the girl than letting her continue to suffer but they are all afraid of being called heartless if they helped her die. Such scruples stem from rising public concern about the value of life.

In recent years, Chinese have become increasingly aware of the importance of protecting lives from avoidable harm, thanks to the introduction of concepts about the value of life from the outside world. They are no longer apathetic about deaths caused by abuse of power by law enforcement officials or disasters caused by negligence.

Scholars have been advocating such new concepts, and the acceptance of these noble thoughts is considered progress in civilization.

However, some people, especially some academicians, are so obsessed with being seen as noble that their concepts about life become distorted. For instance, they argue against euthanasia, alleging that people have no right to terminate their lives because life is the most treasured thing in the world.

One academician said in a discussion hosted by Sina.com that anyone who hopes to end his or her agony through euthanasia should consider the "will of society".

These arguments are questionable. The poetic phrase "Life is the most treasured thing" does not constitute a serious argument. It does not disallow all attempts at ending life. For example, could it become an argument against the 1948 hanging of Hideki Tojo, the notorious Japanese war criminal?

The above-mentioned academician who talked about the "will of society" did not elaborate. I guess he refered to the feelings of people around the person requesting euthanasia. Does this mean that the person has to endure suffering to satisfy the feelings of others?

Nobody would ask for euthanasia if it were not for suffering unbearable agony with absolutely no hope of a remedy. Isn't it cruel to ask the person to endure anguish only to satisfy other people's "noble" thoughts about the value of life? If this is noble, I would rather be called ignoble or immoral.

As for the argument that legalizing euthanasia would create opportunities for murder under the name of mercy killing, this is far-fetched to say the least.

If we treasure life, we should respect people's right to die so long as they regard death as less agonizing than living on.

Email: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily 03/21/2007 page10)