Helen brought up the question of anthroposophy and assisted dying on another thread on karma and reincarnation. It’s quite fascinating, as it has to do with death and dying and also with suicide, which is terribly interesting in an anthroposophical perspective. Some interesting viewpoints were heard in the other thread (see the comments after Helen’s). I then googled and I found this document from the Medical Section at the Goetheanum. It’s written by anthroposophical MD and leader of the section, Michaela Glöckler. It’s absolutely worth reading.
… confusion inevitably arose from the attempt to establish a uniform opinion covering as many anthroposophical institutions as possible or, indeed, of “anthroposophists”. The positive outcome of the debate was, however, that very fundamental questions in this respect with regard to the way that anthroposophy and anthroposophists see themselves acquired a sharper outline: what, for example, would be the value of the anthroposophical perspective if it could only join fundamentalist opinions without difficulty? What would happen if specifically its aura of greatest possible understanding and active tolerance in dealing with the subject were its particular hallmark? Does an anthroposophical opinion represent “anthroposophy”, one or several institutions, or the view of individual people working in a wide variety of fields? Anthroposophy sees itself as a path of knowledge , “to guide the spiritual in the human being to the spiritual in the universe“ (13). Hence there is the potential for all shades of opinion among anthroposophists from fundamentalist views and sectarian tendencies to undifferentiated conformity with whatever happens to be the mainstream – but there cannot be a single anthroposophical opinion.
Well. I have not read it to the end yet, but please add your thoughts and other reading suggestions — if you have — in the thread.