The recent announcement by Canadian TikTok star Rebecca Luna that she would be receiving voluntary euthanasia under Canada's medical assistance in dying (MAID) law is deeply disturbing.
Her decision has been covered widely in Canada and abroad, with largely favorable reports on her plans as well as her daughter's posts regarding her mother's final hours with her family.
The social contagion effect of media coverage of suicide is widely acknowledged in academic research, and for years governments have invested millions in educating media professionals and the public about responsible coverage.
Suicide is on the rise in many parts of the developed world, including my home country of Ireland. I remember with shock and horror instances of my peers posting suicide notes on social media sites like Snapchat, the trauma this caused to those who saw them and the fear that it might put the idea into someone else's mind.
But when it comes to voluntary suicide, it appears that this fear – backed as it is by a significant body of research – is cast out the window in the liberal West's bid to normalize assisted dying.
Luna's Diagnosis
There is no denying Luna's tragic situation. She was diagnosed in her mid-40s with early-onset Alzheimer's, an aggressive, debilitating disease. Her doctors suggested she had just five to seven years to live.
Luna took to TikTok to educate viewers about the nature of her condition, opening up about how it was affecting her life as a single mother of two.
As her illness rapidly worsened, she began speaking about her desire to die under Canada's liberal euthanasia laws.
She kept her almost 100,000 followers up to date with her meetings with MAID physicians, discussing potential dates and difficulties in determining the right time to go.
Then, on Thursday 23 July, she posted a video on TikTok announcing that she would be ending her life the following Saturday.
TikTok Assisted Suicide Message
The reasons Luna gave for her decision are instructive and disturbing. She explained that it was driven by a feeling that she was living in a body that was not “comfortable, safe, good, nothing – it feels terrible”.
She discussed this with her palliative carer, who kept reminding her that the choice was hers. This was Luna's chance to “prioritize myself and I haven't done that my whole life”, the 49-year-old said.
The TikTok star said she would never have chosen young-onset Alzheimer's for herself, adding that she wanted “relief … and a lack of suffering” because “I've suffered enough in this world”.
Later in the video, Luna reflects on her life and complains about Christians commenting negatively on her decision to pursue euthanasia. She questioned why they were trying to make her “feel bad for dying”, saying “I'm not choosing this [early-onset Alzheimer's]; this was chosen for me”.
The Media's Craven Coverage
Her decision made headlines across the world, with articles reflecting on her “poignant” and “emotional” farewell video and reporting viewer comments like “so happy she was able to go on her own terms” and “she showed true grace and acceptance”.
There was no examination or critique of the fact that Luna had effectively published a suicide note on a popular social media platform, garnering more than four million views and almost 200,000 likes.
Nor was there any mention of the frighteningly incompetent administration of Canada's euthanasia laws, or the way in which they are being abused by providers, with safeguards being ignored on a regular basis.
There was no engagement with voices critical of the practice, which range from pro-life advocates to palliative carers, who argue that the laws exploit the vulnerable, stigmatize people with disabilities and let governments off the hook for the execrable state of public health care.
This is bad reporting, given what we already know about the potential for the social contagion of suicide. It not only presents Luna's publicizing of voluntary euthanasia without criticism but commends it as a tool of empowerment for vulnerable people, when it is anything but.
False Vision of Autonomy
It used to be that a good death meant having led a good life and being fully prepared at the end to give an account of yourself before God.
Now, a good death means controlling how you die and when. In this way, voluntary euthanasia is an expression of our materialist, technocratic age, attempting to extend human control over dying and sickness.
Luna and her carer argued that ending her life was her choice, a hard one taken to avoid suffering in a body that she no longer exerted full control over.
But it is all a dangerous myth, as Luna herself acknowledges in responding to her critics, saying she did not choose to be sick and dying. Assisted suicide is not a choice; it is a response to feeling trapped by experiences we did not choose – frightening experiences that challenge the core of our self-understanding and expectations of life.
But instead of a culture that sees these moments as a chance to draw the sufferer out of the darkness of pain and into the light with love and support, we have one that encourages them on their path of death, physical and spiritual.
The Culture of Death
Voluntary euthanasia is yet another expression of the “culture of death” diagnosed by Pope Saint John Paul II. As with all other aspects of this culture – abortion, child euthanasia and eugenic practices – it is the weak and the vulnerable that bear the brunt.
When you think of the progress that has been made in the past centuries in caring for the sick and the disabled, inspired by a Christian understanding of the dignity of man, to see it undone by our age of tolerance is deeply depressing.
Assisted dying erases and stigmatizes disability in the same manner as some countries' efforts to eradicate Down syndrome by aborting children.
Even in dying, we must consider what we owe to others, especially the most vulnerable. Our actions do not occur in isolation but as part of the community. They send a signal as to what is good and what is evil.
So in cases like Luna's, it is not only about the death of an individual but also the possibility that her example – and favorable media coverage of it – will lead others to see euthanasia as a prudent choice rather than a defeat, whitewashing a law that is bad not only in its conception but in its execution.
