THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO
Death & Dying
Conversations About End-of-Life Issues
The following are a series of emails from an on-going conversation I had with a pediatric ICU nurse over several months in 1999.
Thanks for writing back. It’s nice to have someone to chat with that’s on the same wavelength. Ditto about the lessons. We are all searching and if we keep an open mind the truth of the universe will be revealed to us. I have been reading Conversations With God and I find it refreshing. I am amazed at the similarity of thought that I read in the book and my own views. More amazing still is that the things presented by the God entity are word for word things that I have said and opinions that I share with friends and family. Not that I think I am so enlightened only that I feel it represents a much broader belief system. It is like the universal unconscious or conscious or whatever it was that Jung wrote about. I just think these things are widely held belief systems. Conflict occurs when humans stray from this universal belief and that is where the darkness comes in. We all know on some level the truth and we are like the salmon swimming upstream to arrive back at the beginnings.
So about my patients. I love my little “hemers” as we affectionately call them. That means hematology-oncology patients. Talk about huge lessons in a hurry. I think if you subscribe to the thought that we choose our paths, then these souls are truly great and distinguished. There is so much suffering that they must endure physically. Then there are the lessons again. Sometimes the mechanics and dynamics of the family pretty much tell the story. I had a darling little girl that I took care of named Mary. Her mom was extremely involved and knowledgeable about the physical aspects of the little girl’s tumor and in the techniques involved in her care. The mom spoke like a dr. to the dr.s, a nurse to the nurses, and not at all did she speak to the child. It broke my heart that there was not much of a relationship with the precious little girl yet there was an incredible bond with the child’s illness. The child’s tumor was not about to go into remission and remission was the only hope they had of getting the child to a place where they could do a marrow transplant. All the time I heard the mom say we can’t stop trying to get a remission because then the tumor will take over and she won’t get a transplant. All the talk revolved around the disease state and what the next round of chemo would be. I said to the mom what chance do they give for recovery with the transplant. It was less than 50 percent. I told her that transplants were incredibly difficult for patients to endure and a less than 50 percent chance wasn’t the best odds. She said there wasn’t any other choice. I got the distinct feeling that the woman was not so afraid of losing her daughter as she was of losing this illness. It gave this woman a way to interact with people in the only safe way she knew how. It was a technical cold relationship that she forged but anything closer would have been threatening to her. I saw in the midst of all this a woman who was most likely the product of a sterile unloving home. (She was germaphobic, too.)
Well I guess I have made a short story long once again, as I seem to do . At any rate there was a huge sacrifice on the part of this child. This mom had to lose a child to get into the place of learning how to build relationships. I wonder if the woman ever got a clue. The child had an explosive tumor growth and died quickly without getting a transplant. No dr. ever said to this family that the transplant was a long shot. No one dared to suggest that perhaps the most humane thing to do would be to take the child home. How ridiculous it would be to suggest that they simply hold and love their precious baby and tell her of a place where suffering is absent. That there is a place that is warm and loving as anything she had ever known. To tell her that it was a pleasure and a joy to share the time they had with her courageous spirit and all that they had learned from her brave fight. It gets easier and easier for me to express myself to these families and to these children. I know of my God’s plan for this world and that we mortals haven’t control over how it comes down. Come down it will, come hell or high water and we’ve certainly seen a lot of both of those things recently!!! Thanks so much for being there to share with me. I love you for that!!! Let me hear from you again soon.
Interesting story about Mary and her mother, how people handle these difficult situations. She resorted to intellectualism and forgot to love. I think doctors hold out hope as a carrot to people even when there is no hope and wonder when someone will have the good sense to stand up and say it’s time to prepare for death. Human beings fight so much against death that they’ll believe anything.
I get letters from people who opted for the life saving surgery and their loved one died anyway, now they feel guilty. And others who decided against the surgery and the person died and now they feel guilty. It’s too bad death has such a bad reputation! I remember back when organ donation was becoming a big issue but everyone was afraid to ask, maybe someday we’ll have the courage to say it’s time to go home, how can we help you prepare? The right to die is the next big issue!
Peace & Joy! Diane
I have no special affection for physical death that is for sure, but I don’t fear it either and interestingly enough I find that the more one practices being close to spirit in trying times the easier it gets. I had another tragic and unexpected death of a child in our ER on Sunday and I took the opportunity to pray with the child’s grieving parents…
To read more of this fascinating conversation…
THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO COSMIC CONSCIOUSNESS
• • •
Search “Diane Goble” in your device’s ebook store or Google “ebooks by Diane Goble”
or read a sample and purchase directly from publisher (click on title below)
Watch for a New Smashwords Discount Coupon every month
Reincarnation and the Evolution of Consciousness (2013) – 16,000 words – $1.99
Author reading Chapter “The Challenge of Being Fully Human“
Author on BlogTalkRadio with Pamela Edmunds’ Bridge Between Two Worlds – 2/12/14
Author on BlogTalkRadio with Pamela Cummins’ The Love Channel Show – 4/15/14
The Path to Peace & Joy (2013) – 15,290 words – $1.99
Author reading Chapter “Chakras“
How to Die Consciously: Secrets from Beyond the Veil (2011) – 52,520 words – $2.99
Author reading Chapter “End of Life Conversations“
Conversations with a Near-Death Experiencer – Book 1 (2010) – 95,840 words – $3.99
*** MARCH SPECIAL “50% Off” – Use code FJ47W at check out ***
More Conversations with a Near-Death Experiencer – Book 2 (2010) – 70,340 words – $2.99
*** MARCH SPECIAL “50% Off” – Use code ZQ22G at check out ***
Sitting in the Lotus Blossom (2010) – 64,100 words – $2.99
Author reading Chapter “The Wounded Planet“
• • • • • • •
The following CDs are suggested in some of Diane’s ebooks
Vocals by Diane Goble • Music by Shapeshifter
Sample and downloads available by clicking on links below
Beyond the Veil
Our Journey Home
by Diane Goble
We’re all going to die some day so–
shouldn’t we all be looking into this event instead of living in denial and pretending it only happens to other people?
shouldn’t we at least have some tools available to us so when it does, however it does, we’re prepared and know what to do next?
shouldn’t we prepare ourselves to take care of and comfort a loved one who is terribly ill or elderly and facing their own death?
That’s what I thought when I first began writing this book, which is what I was asked to do when I decided to come back into my body during my near-death experience while drowning during a white water river rafting accident in 1971.
The answers to all those questions you have about death, dying and what comes next are between these covers.
The paperback, published by Cosmic Creativity, is now available on amazon.com and at most major book retailers.
Posting reviews or sharing your thoughts about Beyond the Veil on retailer websites, like amazon.com, may contribute to the evolution of human consciousness and are much appreciated by all those who contributed to the publication of this valuable book.
… a way for individuals to consciously prepare for what’s to come, and to better understand the life in their death, and what happens next. Anyone can benefit from this book, so keep it handy. You may use it more often than you think.
~ P.M.H. Atwater, L.H.D., researcher and author of Near-Death Experiences: The Rest of the Story and We Live Forever: The Real Truth About Death
There is no easy way to bring up the conversation of death but Goble’s book shows us why this is one of the most important discussions that we can have.
~ Josie Varga, author of Visits from Heaven and Visits to Heaven
Ultimately learning how to be fully present and conscious for the one who is passing is one of the greatest gifts you can offer someone you love.
~ JoAnn Chambers, Vibrational Sound Healer and co-author of The Sonic Keys: Sound, Light & Frequency; DNA Activation, and The Secret of Abundance
This is a conversation you must have with yourself…
and probably should have with all family members–
not that you need to have all the answers right now, but just to get you started thinking about these important questions before it’s necessary to know the answers so there won’t be any family disagreements in the heat of a crisis. We all need to have these conversations about the end of our lives and what we do want and don’t want as far as treatment options, including invasive procedures, aggressive therapies, prescription drugs, palliative care, hospice, and when and where we choose to die, depending on the circumstances and based on our own values, traditions and beliefs. Ideally we need to review our choices every 5 years as we get older, if we have health changes, lifestyle changes, because we often make different decisions as our age and circumstances change. We need to think about situations like–
If your heart stopped right now, what is your family’s plan?
Does anyone know where your important papers, passwords, contacts, valuables are kept and what you want done with them and who to contact after you’re gone?
If your persistent headaches led to a diagnosis of an inoperable brain tumor and a diagnosis of 6 months or less to live, would you consider the Death with Dignity option (do you know if it’s available in your state/country, what the requirements are)?
Are you aware that your Emergency Contact is not necessarily your Healthcare Representative unless that person is also designated in your Advance Healthcare Directive/Living Will?
If your spouse had a sudden illness requiring hospitalization, what things would you have to do that you wouldn’t ordinarily do? What if the person had been in an accident and was in a coma?
Do you really know what it means if you say do everything to save me?
Knowing that at some point you will die, how do you hope your death will be? Have you told anyone? Have you contemplated your own death?
Have you considered how you would manage becoming a full-time caregiver for a severely ill child or an elderly parent?
If you are entering your dying process, have you reconciled your life and found peace of mind or do you fear what lies ahead?
Beyond the Veil: Our Journey Home
was written by Diane Goble, a near-death experiencer who became a spiritual teacher, based on what she learned during her journey home and was asked to bring back to share with as many people as she could.
Her primary message is– We Don’t Die!
Her book is a resource manual, chock full of information about the options that are available to us as we are preparing ourselves for transition or being a caregiver for someone who is in the dying process.
It is a training manual based on the author’s professional course to teach caregivers to be Transition Guides for their dying loved ones or patients.
It is a personal workbook with plenty of Notes pages for those soon departing as they are guided through the practice of the Art of Conscious Dying and writing their own Personal Transition Guidebook.
It is printed in large type.
For those of you who need more, go to BeyondtheVeil.net. Diane will be offering classes and webinars with special guests, and private consultations about end-of-life issues and conversations in the near future. If you would like to receive updates, fill out the following form:
Of a certain age…
by Diane Goble, Columnist, The Nugget News, April 16, 2014
My best friend just had her second mastectomy last week. In the last two years, she’s had her gall bladder removed, a lumpectomy, a mastectomy and now this one. She says the good news is that she’s lost 20 pounds and can see her toes again!
She has several messages on her cell phone asking her to call another oncologist for follow- up. She’s procrastinating. “It’s not in my lymph nodes so I’m not going for radiation or chemo,” she says. “I’m done with the medical stuff.” She insists she’s going to eat better, exercise more, take up yoga and meditation, and try to be as healthy as possible until she dies. She’s contemplating an artistic tattoo to obscure her now breastless chest.
That’s the rub. You can go through all the treatments and deal with all the side effects of them– sick as a dog and wanting to die most of the time. You maybe get a few good months and then it comes back with a vengeance and you die anyway. The outcome is the same. The difference is the quality of life in between.
This doesn’t have any thing to do with age. My friend is in her 60s, five years younger than I am. It can happen to us at any time in our lives. We have jobs to get to, children to raise, relationships to deal with, bills to pay, retirement to plan for, and then suddenly we have to make these decisions about what we want and don’t want because we are diagnosed with a serious illness or have a life-threatening accident.
I had a stage IV melanoma a while back. Had the Moh’s surgery, no problems, no lymph node involvement. That follow-up oncologist wanted to do radiation and possibly chemo, but I said no thanks. I’ve been in remission for almost 8 years. That doesn’t mean it won’t still come back. One or two spots I’d probably have them removed but that with a vengeance thing… not so much. I’ll start planning for the end of my days.
I don’t have a problem with dying. I did that once. Drowned. It was a fantastic journey home and back again. I expect it to be the same the next time, only without the back again, so I look forward to moving on to what comes next… because I know there’s a next. Of course I’ll miss my family and friends but I know I’ll see them again soon.
My concern is more about what will happen to me while I’m still in a body. I refuse to put up with Alzheimer’s. Any inkling of that and I’m making my going away party plans before I forget how! I’ve filled out my Advance Healthcare Directive and appointed a non-family member as my healthcare representative so my children don’t have to make any decisions. They don’t want to talk about it so I sent them their copies and included a video of me telling them my decisions about what I want and don’t want. I’d opt for a heart attack over a prolonged illness, but if it were an illness, I’d be working on the paperwork process for physician aid-in-dying the moment I got that 6 months to live diagnosis then I’d keep working my Bucket List!
So how does one decide what they want at the end of their life? It has to be based on one’s own beliefs and values, not forced on you by someone else’s biases. Talk to your family, your doctor, your spiritual advisor, search your soul, search the Internet… meditate, pray, talk to God or a tree. Educate yourself about the process. There are some good videos out these days about death and dying– “Consider the Conversation,” “How to Die in Oregon,” “The Day I Died: The mind, the brain, and near-death experiences.” The more you know, the better decisions you can make about your own healthcare at the end of life.
April 16th is National Healthcare Decisions Day… think about it!
New England Journal of Medicine Article
I came across an article in the New England Journal of Medicine offering the scenario of a 72-year old man in the end stages of who asks his doctor about assisted dying. The question to the forum is: should it be permitted or not. They provided a professional pro and con opinion then opened it to comments.
Below are quotes from among over 200 comments from physicians, medical students and people like you and me from around the world who endeavor to keep up with the conversation on this issue. Please refer to the article for full details. I did not correct spelling or grammar. I grouped them here by U.S. states, other countries, and a group of unknown origin, after selecting those I found most interesting on both sides of the debate. I actually found a pretty even split among all the comments on the site, but my sample didn’t end up reflecting that same distribution. I color-coded the first word of each comment I posted to give a quick overview (PRO / CON). My comment is at the end.
Physician from Arizona: I was trained to heal and even though I understand the fact that a patient would like to end his/her life with “dignity,” I don’t think I could bring myself together and help them do it.
Physician from California: We have to remember that everybody is the master of his/her own body and choosing the option of dignified death should be the right of the patient and not the physician, lawyer or society at large.
Physician from California: Once the request for hastening dying is balanced against the depression that is intrinsic to the dying process, then the autonomy of the terminally ill cancer sufferer is at the top of the priority chain of ethical principles.
Medical student from California: It is high time that we have an alternative to our inevitable end. We must be entrusted to find a collaborative approach to death as we do with birth. Birth is joyous and assisted. We celebrate it. We welcome it. Death should have its rituals as well. It should be free of fear. It is a very personal choice and a difficult one. It should be honored.
Physician from California: Life is sacred and we must obey the natural law not to kill.
Physician from California: Physicians not only have a right to assist patients with suicide they have a moral duty to do so. The concept is complex and necessary restrictive guidelines need to be in place.
Elder law attorney from Washington, DC: It is the height of unethical behavior for a doctor or relative to substitute his or her opinion of what is best for a dying person’s well being for the patient’s. Using the “art of healing” as a reason to deny a dying person his or her wish is a paternalistic, self-referential shield that fails to engage the patient in his or her life decisions. Patients are not passive recipients of the wisdom of doctors.
Physician from Florida: Today, why are we not lord and masters of our own bodies? Do we belong to the state, or some religious organization? If we do not own and are therefore not able to control our own bodies, who does? Why, legally, does the state have the right to tell us what we can do with our own body, our most precious possession?
Physician from Florida: He is neither suffering nor is he in an unresponsive state (the two specific situations that he did not wish to be in). If by ‘prognosis’ you mean that he understands that there is no cure for his disease, then that realization, by itself, almost certainly does not qualify for life terminating drugs.
Widower from Hawaii: (After declining treatment for pancreatic cancer) With daily visits by an oncologist and surrounded by all 16 family members, aged 3 months to 86, my wife, mentally alert, phoned thanks and good-byes to relatives and close friends around the world. There was no bitterness, no hesitation, never a moment unattended, awake or asleep. She breathed her last in my arms on day 8 and I regard it as our ultimate expression of mutual love in a long life filled with love.
Professor (emerit.) of Surgery from Illinois: Once such a request for help comes from their patients to end their suffering, doctors cannot shy away by cynically claiming, “the last thing” is your problem-not mine. We are in this problem-together!
Physician from Illinois: I am a retired internist. The past 5 years I have had the privilege of being a volunteer at our local hospice. Hospice/palliative care is now able to provide caring and supportive care to the majority of our patients. There is, however, a small minority for whom assisted suicide would be the kindest choice.
Patient from Louisiana: If I experience a complication or progression of my illness that results in a terminal situation, I have made it clear I do not want extraordinary measures made to treat or resuscitate me. If I am suffering and in the terminal phase, I should have the option of physician-assisted suicide or some legal method of obtaining the necessary drugs to end my life. To deny patients this option is an unethical and cruel abuse of our humanity.
Surgeon from Maine: I have argued for assisted euthanasia for many years, including presenting a case at a meeting of the MMS, when they were discussing the issue many years ago, as a delegate from Plymouth, MA.
Physician from Massachusetts: The doctor should not be involved in providing the means. Why not ask the priest or the lawyer to help provide the means?
Physician from U.S.: 78-year old retired general/oncologic surgeon, currently in good health but well aware that a terminal illness like pancreatic cancer could arise at any time. I am the master of my own destiny, I should have the right to choose and would hope that my personal physician could assist me in my choice. I am disappointed that Massachusetts voted not to allow “Death with Dignity.” I have always felt that the concept of holding out “hope” for terminally ill patients is not only unrealistic but often cruel in not recognizing the reality of ultimate death.
Nurse from Massachusetts: …nurses are the ones who spend more time with them, have an explicit framework to specifically assess and diagnose spiritual distress, changes in role and family processes, and other critical aspects of quality of life, and are far more often present for individual and family at death. Similar polls of nurses are over whelmingly in favor of death with dignity initiatives. It is unfortunate that this debate is so often framed in terms of what physicians want to do. Far better that we all should do what patients ask of us; patient autonomy has always had primacy in nursing practice.
Physician from Michigan: Some physicians feel a heroic obligation to save a life against all odds, to the point not only of futility but absurdity, and in doing so they feel a rewarding sense of accomplishment. They force their beliefs against the wishes of the victim (pardon me, the patient).
Physician from Minnesota: Physicians are highly trained medical professionals who promote and restore human health by diagnosing and treating disease. When disease-associated pain is present, they alleviate it. Taking a patient’s life only creates pathology it doesn’t treat any disease. It is oxymoronic to see physician-assisted suicide as providing any form of health care. Indeed outside of the privileged doctor-patient relationship such behavior would simply be recognized as homicide.
Physician from Minnesota: No PAS should not be legalized. I don’t care what kind of consent process or how many behavioural science consultations or screenings you do. We are undoubtedly starting down a slippery slope, especially as we enter into an era of increased regulation and financial constraint.
Physician from New Jersey: As it is my desire to pass gently into the good night when my time is come, if I can assist a fellow human to leave this world gently and by choice when their time is nigh, then I believe it is the moral choice.
Physician from Ohio: When my terminally ill wife with colon cancer indicated she did not want to keep going, her message was conveyed to her hospice caretakers who ensured she would be comfortable. As a physician I personally did not feel comfortable managing a medical situation for which I was not prepared for.
Physician from Oklahoma: Is there a day in the future when people will be asked about their acts or not? In other words, is there “Allah” (God) or not? If you believe in Allah and that there is day of judgment where you will be asked about every single act, word you spoke or listened to, look… then you need to have good answer to why you helped someone kill himself.
Elderly woman from Oregon: I do not think we are puppets of some idea of a supreme being, we rather seem designed to learn and apply knowledge to our individual circumstances, and at near age 86, I hope to choose to end my earth time in dignity with euthanasia under specific circumstances and have outlined those in my directive.
Physician from Oregon: The greatest benefit of the law in Oregon has been its effect in enabling communication. This issue is not simple. The Oregon law does not give Oregonians the “right to die.” But it does give Oregon clinicians and family members the right to assist in their deaths, under carefully prescribed circumstances.
Physician from Pennsylvania: Individual vs Societal Rights. I have never understood how a society that prides itself on self-reliance, individual courage, free will, and the rights of the individual, feels justified in removing these rights from individuals at the end of their lives.
Physician from Pennsylvania: I respect the views, some very eloquently stated, of those selecting option 1. My vote is for option 2.
Physician from Tennessee: Why can’t we accept and recognize that patients have the right to decide when to end their lives with their pain controlled, their dignity preserved and with our support? Why do we abandon our patients and their families in such a difficult times? Properly screened patients (and families) should be allowed to make this decision with the support of a physician who can guide them through the process and relieve them from guilt and remorse.
Physician from Utah: If society deems carefully planned and supervised suicide as an option, why does it have to be PHYSICIAN-assisted? Anyone could be trained to perform this function – certainly it is not part of a physician’s training.
Physician from Albania: He always asked me whether I can do something else to make his misery go away. I never quite understood what he meant by that until I got a call from the medical examiner. They asked me whether I knew Mr. X and was he one of my patients. I said yes. They told me police had to break into his apartment that day. They found him dead on the floor. He had killed himself using a kitchen knife. He should have had a better option and I should have been a better physician.
Physician from Belgium: With good palliative and terminal care most of these cases can be handled without the need for euthanasia or assisted suicide. We have to introduce the ‘ars moriendi,’ the ‘art’ of dying, facing existential and spiritual problems.
Physician from Brazil: We are doctors not murders. I myself am a religious doctor and I know that lives belong to God. We are living a life that does not belong to us. We are here to proceed the evolution of our Espirits and so are our patients. We do not have the authorization to end someone’s life.
Physician from Brazil: I believe that our society must allow the final expression of free will once the individual is faced with the alternative of avoiding suffering and loss of all his dignity so let the choice for an “ending” according to his moral values be a real one.
Physician from Canada: They would prefer that the patient suffer rather than risk upsetting some abstract and totally subjective set of values. They would hold us all hostage for the sake of their morality. The hypocrisy and sanctimony of their argument is an infinitely greater risk to our freedom than any abstract notion they would force upon us.
Physician from Canada: Listening to a request for death but never carrying it out can be the height of hypocrisy. And individual autonomy is what this question is all about not your book learned ideas of other values and ethics for the collective.
Physician from Canada: This is a personal matter for the individual facing death and has nothing to do with a proper debate on the modern process of death. It is high time to drop the moral blackmail and use of loaded terms such as ‘therapeutic homicide’.
Physician from Canada: Religious dogma of “only God is giving life and only God can take away life” should not be the rational, the actual basis of laws.
Physician from Canada: people with advanced ALS or multiple sclerosis who cannot move more than their eyes often will chose to be disconnected from life support. Some of them would like to have the option of a well performed general anesthesia that would allow them to die comfortably before they reach this advanced stage. Why deny people this option is beyond understanding.
Physician from Canada: We have all watched people suffer and silently wished for the end. Many of us have provided opioids at doses needed for pain control, but that could cause respiratory depression. But we know very well that there is a clear difference between that, and deliberately bringing the end sooner. To raise my hand to kill… never for me, and never (I hope) for my profession.
Physician from Canada: We do not chose to be born. Life happens. I understand that suffering is difficult, distressing and terrible for both the patient and the family. But let’s face it, it’s part of life. NO ONE goes through life without suffering at some point. It is part of being human. Not accepting it seems to be annihilating the core fact of our humanity.
Woman from Canada: A person who dies meets his maker, or so believe most Americans. Our maker has something to say about willfully taking a human life. I do not belong to myself, being created by a higher power, and do not have any inalienable right to determine my death.
Physician from China: Physicians should not be the one to make decision to end a life. But morality is a basic human right and an individual choice. Patients with end stage disease should have the right to die with dignity.
Physician from Dominican Republic: A doctor is a healer not a killer. Death is not part of life because life ends when we died. Living is to watch the sun every morning and the moon every night. A doctor saves the life and the souls of his patients everyday no matter how difficult it is sometimes…
Physician from Egypt: Timing of death is related only to our God. I think we cannot go for helping patients to get suicide, the image of doctor is only to help patients to get better as to improve pain control, relieve symptoms. Practically speaking in this situation of advanced pancreatic cancer, we give strong narcotic with laxatives and usually the survival is very limited to a few weeks maximim.
80-year old man from France: The debate about end of life conditions is nowadays very hot in our country. I strongly believe that the respect of patient’s wishes will not deserve palliative cares, but on the contrary facilitate their development. As wrote Seneque in one of his letter to Lucilius : “the best death is the one I wish”.
Physician from Greece: A colleague once confided softly: “If I am ever in that state, please kill me mercifully.” Recently, Richard Lehman of the BMJ made a bitterly humorous request to be given a strong i.v. anaesthetic and a massive dose of potassium chloride, in case of a massive stroke. Do we as physicians dream of the right to a dignified death for ourselves, but refuse to consider it for our patients? Our ethics have not changed, but medicine has come to a point where we are prolonging wretched conditions of debilitation, humiliation, pain and misery.
Physician from Greece: What constitutes bad medicine, and also fuels the euthanasia argument, is the overaggressive management of advanced cancer with multiple toxic therapies that add only misery to the patient’s last few days/weeks/months. Providing death on request only erodes the status of the medical profession, and is beyond the jurisdiction of medicine.”
Physician from India: A right to die a dignified death by a patient who has fully intact faculties is not an issue to be brushed aside.
Physician from India: I believe life is a gift of God. We have no right to terminate it. We should continuously struggle to minimise the sufferings of our patients and not to indulge in practice of physician-assisted suicide.
Physician from India: The role of the Physician should be just saving life. The patient then has a choice whether to go to the Physician or not and next to the person who could assist him with ending his life (someone whose only training is this and not currently practising any other kind of curative medicine).
Physician from India: I have worked in oncology units and have experienced the pain and sufferings those terminally ill patients undergo. We can have euthanasia with proper regulations in place. We cannot provide any better life to them by any means, so why deny their peaceful termination of their own hopeless journey!
Physician from India: Death is inevitable and is not to be feared and dreaded. We are not in the normal course of life given the luxury of choice as to when and how we die. If given a choice between needless pain and suffering to both the patient and family; the obvious choice is assisted suicide.
Physician from India: I agree with the general principle of physician-assisted suicide. I think doctors who work hard to save a patients life, who have spent time with the patient and have the trust of the patient are in the best position to bear the moral responsibility of taking a patient’s life.
Physician from Italy: Please remember that the Nazi euthanasia program was the foundation of the destruction of the European Jews.
Physician from Italy: The only person who has the right to decide when and how to die is the patient. Religions have nothing to do with it. Our job as physicians does not end when the patient cannot be cured. We must take care of him/her to the end, and that entails also, if the patient so desires, assisting suicide.
Physician from Italy: The choice to kill oneself is the paradigm of a personal choice. As such, it should not involve other persons either relatives or kin. For the same reason physician-assisted suicide should not be done in patients like that described in this case vignette.
Physician from Lebanon: We doctors are born to help those who want to live and not to euthanize those who want to die, that is the dignity of our profession.
Physician from The Netherlands: Discussing the possibility should be legally and professionally obligatory to be one of the “treatment options” right from the first diagnosis! And as such part of palliative care.
Physician from The Netherlands: Banning euthanasia and physician assisted suicide doesn’t mean it never happens. It just means you don’t know how often it happens.
Physician from Pakistan: I understand and accept both points of view. As an oncologist I have spent many a nights fretting and being upset about unnecessary suffering and not being able to make them as comfortable as they should be, but at the same time I do not think I have the courage to knowingly help patients for euthanasia.
Physician from Pakistan: Help patients relieve their sufferings. Dr assisted suicide should be permitted
Student from Peru: When a patient is in the terminal stage in any disease and you as his physician can not give him quality of life then why you have to make him suffer? “Primum non nocere” always… and in this case making him suffer is harming him in spirit.
Physician from Portugal: Medicine is about “healing.” Decisions about suicide at will are not and should never be medicine. If considered a “right” and allowed by society, please create a “legal executioner or hangman” for the job.
Physician from Portugal: The issue of assisted suicide is not a purely medical issue: it involves legal, anthropological, spiritual and ethical issues, which largely exceeds the medical problem. The balance between the safeguarding of life, and mercy and compassion for the suffering often creates gray areas of difficult decision.
Physician from Russian Federation: There is a risk of an abuse of authority if the physician is a maniac or physicians are associated with criminals. Ethical and moral aspects of this issue are very complicated and open to questions.
Physician from Saudi Arabia: Patients with major depressive disorder with suicidal thought and intention are considered in critical state and urgent action is needed to protect them and prevent them from suicidal attempts — so why would we facilitate death in a patient with terminal illness?
Physician from South Africa: Where it is legally authorized, the physician may help those who are in despair to end their lives, if any medical intervention has become futile.
Physician from Spain: Thou shall not kill. Sometimes being a doctor is very difficult. Of course we have to better help the patients when dying and to alleviate them is an essential part of our professional caring. But I strongly feel that to allow killing is a terrible mistake.
Woman from UK: You can privately, quietly, ensure the right dose of the right medication is given with no questions asked. Before you respond from your positions of power and control, please consider what it is like for ordinary people.
Student from UK: Indeed the very idea of a killing doctor almost presents as an oxymoron, however with the training and in-depth understanding that all doctors must possess it seems to me that a doctor is the only humane and realistic choice of assistant to suicide.
Physician: When you kill someone you forever remove the virtue of hope, which is so inherent in the work of a physician. When all our drugs and all our armenmentaria are gone, we can always give hope as long as there is life.
Physician: We are doing this everyday through Hospice. We just don’t call it assisted suicide. Terminally ill patients should have the right to choose their end. And helping a patient walk through death’s door with everyone’s consent should be a privilege not denied to their physicians.
Patient: My husband and I have plans to take our lives when we become unable to care for ourselves, mentally or physically. We don’t want to burden our children with our care and believe that the money we would spend on hiring caregivers would be better served paying for our grand children’s education. We are living too long now and the cost/benefit ratio is too low to sustain.
Physician: I favor physician-assisted suicide. It is the ultimate compassionate act in the . To deny it would be to abandon the patient.
Physician: I would hope, that under such or other similar circumstances, I would be given the choice to end the misery. I do not think that anyone else should be able to enforce his/her convictions of prolonging my ordeal for me.
Physician: My father died free of pain (from a recurrent cancer) with the help of a generous dose of morphine from his primary care physician. My mother and I were grateful that he could say goodbye in peace.
Medical student: …listen to what they are saying, analyze if it’s logical. Every case is different. As a doctor, my first duty is to listen to my patient, only he knows his pain and mental anguish. Mr Wallace … fears that such a day would come and wants to opt out of experiencing that condition. I completely understand his fear and respect his wishes. I am okay with assisting him as per his wishes. And I won’t be a murderer if I do so, not in my eyes at least.
Physician: I believe if a person has a terminal illness that causes him/her to suffer, to live an uncomfortable life, the person that is stable should have a decision of life or death … as long as the procedure is assisted by a doctor.
PhD: A person, no matter the age, who is terminally ill should have the right to Death With Dignity and this includes euthanasia
Physician: After practicing as a critical care physician for over 30 years, I am still puzzled as to why is it wrong to assist those who wish to die while in our care? If changes in the practice of medicine now give us the additional responsibility to walk with those on their way to end, we should respectfully perform that task. Not everything we do in medicine is to our liking or edifying. Assisting in a peaceful death may be one of those unpleasant tasks we need to accept reluctantly. I think that is a service to the society.
Physician: Few of us are prepared to swear with a straight face to Apollo, Asclepius, Hygieia, and Panacea, and the ancient oath not only proscribes assisted suicide but also abortion. Likewise some commenters have hearkened to a simplistic version of Judeo-Christian morality and vitalist belief that mere human beings should never weigh in on quality of life or take actions that hasten death. Bottom line is that we must learn more and engage in a more substantive debate of this subject.
Following is my comment– Someone here wrote: We do not choose to be born. Is that a scientific fact?
What if we DO chose to be born… into this body at this time in history on this planet in this country in this community to these parents, into this dysfunctional society, but instead of dying at the end this body’s ability to function we are transformed into our true essence and return home filled with new adventures to tell our loved ones about and lessons learned for the growth of our eternal souls? Then part of healing involves facilitating the soul to exit the body in as peaceful a way as possible by practicing the art of conscious dying, which does not preclude assisted-dying or euthanasia.
This is my understanding of the process after having died and come back to tell about it, and spending the last 40 years studying about it. Actually, we do chose to be born, it’s a great honor and privilege, and when it’s over, it’s great to be going home again. Talk about a paradigm shift!! Hello! The earth is not flat. The planets revolve around the sun. Time to wake up 🙂
End-of-Life discussions about Assisted Dying/Suicide/Euthanasia in news articles, blogs, videos from the left, right and center during the month of August 2012. This is a place to find out what’s being talked about around the world as we sort out this highly emotional and controversial issue.
Become informed, open your mind, join in the discussions. Don’t be swayed by emotional euphenisms or dysphemisms, or religious dogma. Our leaders need to know what people are thinking and we need to know what our leaders are considering in terms of laws. These are conversations we all need to have! The end result should be reasonable laws that protect the vulnerable yet allow self-determination at the end of life for those who want the option of assistance.
Care Not Killing
Committee Against Physician-Assisted Suicide
Compassion & Choices
Death with Dignity
Dying with Dignity
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Final Exit Network
Not Dead Yet
Patient Rights Council
Laws Should Reflect Diversity of Opinions by Melissa Barber, Death With Dignity National Center (6/28/12)
Allow doctors to support patient wishes by Melissa Barber, Death With Dignity National Center (8/10/12)
Huge crackdown on fake drug production in China – Assisted-Dying Blog of Derek Humphry (8/6/12) -If you buy drugs from China, please check out this article and exercise caution.
Bad News for anti-euthanasia campaigners – Udo Schuklenk’s Ethx Blog (8/12/12)
New laws allowing physician-assisted suicide opposed by doctors and Catholic Church – Why Evolution Is True (8/12/12)
Unitarian Debate – Issue of the Moment: Assisted Dying – Does the law need to change?
A Theological Look at Suicide – Pastor Zach’s Blog
Death With Dignity: Positive data on why it works… – Jan’s Stinkin Blog
Assisted Suicide, The Courts and the ECHR by Tobias Thienel – Invisible College Blog – School of Human Right, The Netherlands
Euthanasia is a Cultural Addiction – Secondhand Smoke by Wesley J. Smith (8/16/12)
UK Paralyzed Man Loses Euthanasia Court Request – Secondhand Smoke by Wesley J. Smith, (8/16/12)
The case for assisted dying – New Humanist Blog
The Browser: The Case for Assisted Dying by Raymond Tallis (8/17/12)
Crisp: Dr. Kervorkian had it right about assisted suicide (8/20/12)
Crisp: Assisted suicide as an option (8/21/12)
LeisureGuy: Later On – The case for assisted dying (8/21/12)
LeisureGuy: Later On – Assisted Dying (Tony Prachett Video) (8/22/12)
Compassion & Choices – The Psychology of Aging and End-of-Life Planning by Jason E. Schillerstrom,MD – ABC News (8/22/12)
On assisted suicide Free Thought Blogs by Christina (8/22/12)
US, UK medical journals increasingly tout euthanasia – Catholic World News (8/23/12)
Man who fought for his own assisted suicide dies – SNS Post (8/23/12)
Worrying about “Our Neurotic Fear of Suffering” Secondhand Smoke by Wesley J. Smith (8/24/12)
Tony Nicklinson: Can law change on assisted dying and protect vulnerable – One News Page (8/24/12)
Truth and Charity Forum – Do No Harm?: Medical Journals Show increasing Support for Euthanasia by Denise J. Hunnell, MD (8/24/12)
Choice in Dying: Why can’t opponents (or very tentative supporters?) of assisted dying get it right? by Eric MacDonald (8/25/12)
Jack Kervorkian comes to town, Opinion of Tom Keane in boston.com (8/26/12)
Why assisted suicide is the right answer, for some by John M. Grohol, PSYD – PsychCentral.com: World of Psychology (8/27/12)
Shortage of helium worldwide – Assisted-Dying Blog (8/27/12)
Compassion & Choices – The Conversation Project: It’s time to start talking about end of life by Joseph Nowinski (8/29/12)
HuffPost 50 – The Conversation Project: It’s time to start talking about end of life by Joseph Nowinski, PhD (8/29/12)
Physicians’ emotional, institutional barriers propping medical futility at end of life by Sarah Guy, medwireNews Reporter (8/29/12)
Dreaming of Call Bells – Is there such a thing as a “good” death? (8/29/12)
The Amateur’s Guide to Death & Dying by Richard Wagner
In Search of Gentle Death: the Fight for Your Right to Die With Dignity by Richard N. Cote
How to Die Consciously: Secrets from Beyond the Veil by Diane Goble
ACLU Podcast: Death with Dignity (8/15/12)
Reason why physicians do not have discussions about poor prognosis, why it matters, and what can be improved by Jennifer W. Mack and Thomas J. Smith in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Assisted Suicide: Court Rules That Locked-in Syndrome Sufferer Does Not Have Right to Die – RELEVANTMagazine.com (8/21/12)
Physician-Assisted Suicide – behavenet.com
Los Angeles Times chat: Columnist Steve Lopez on death with dignity in California
Dying with Dignity: Respecting choices with end of life care – WKBT LaCrosse, Wisconsin
The Last Chapter – End of Life Decisions – West Virginia PBS
Fixing to Die – 60 Minutes
(News this month from California, Colorado, Connecticut, DC, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin)
Steve Lopez: After a ‘barbaric death,’ a call for change – LA Times (8/6/12 ) – My Sunday column on the “barbaric death” of a terminally ill man near Sacramento, and his wife’s plea for an Oregon-like Death With Dignity law in California, brought responses from those wanting to know how to join such a cause.
As I’ve reported before, there is no current campaign for such a change. The best place to get involved in the greater movement, though, and to check on legal developments around the country that could one day have an impact in California, is to visit www.compassionandchoices.org. The no-profit advocates for more end-of-life options and alternatives to often-futile, budget-busting medical procedures that can end up doing little more than prolonging the dying process.
Steve Lopez: End of life case in New Mexico may affect California – LA Times (8/14/12) – There’s no way to predict when or if California will offer what’s known in Oregon and Washington as Death with Dignity, or physician-assisted aid in dying, but I’ll keep you posted on a case in New Mexico that could have implications here.
In the New Mexico case, said Kathryn Tucker, legal affairs director for a nonprofit advocacy group called Compassion & Choices, “We hope to clarify … that a vague statute that makes a crime of ‘assisting suicide’ does not reach the conduct of a physician providing aid in dying, because of course the choice of a dying patient for a peaceful death is not, and ought not be conflated with, ‘suicide.'”
Tucker said the case in question involves a woman with advanced uterine cancer who has said she would like to have, as one option, the right to avoid prolonged suffering by obtaining doctor-prescribed medication she could ingest to bring about a peaceful death if she finds her dying process unbearable.
Husband won’t be charged in wife’s suicide by Tony Perry– LA Times (8/23/12) – Criminal charges will not be filed against an 88-year-old San Marcos man who sat beside his ailing wife as she committed suicide, the San Diego County district attorney’s office announced Wednesday.
After a thorough review, the office decided that it could not meet “the ethical and legal burden” of proving a charge of “assisted suicide” against Alan Purdy, according to a spokesman for Dist. Atty. Bonnie Dumanis.
Purdy, a semiretired engineer, did not try to stop his wife as she swallowed apple sauce mixed with sleeping pills and put a plastic bag over her head.
“Yes, I sat beside her as she died,” Purdy told The Times weeks after the death. “I didn’t want her to feel abandoned. I wanted her to know that I loved her.”
Assisted suicide: The last frontier of civil rights? by Logan Jenkins UT San Diego (8/28/12) – There’s no courtroom in the country, for example, that would have found Alan Purdy, 88, guilty of a felony for tearfully witnessing the suicide of Jo, his 84-year-old wife who suffered crippling pain from a variety of ailments.
In a sense, it would have been a crime against nature not to stand by her as she ate the sedative-laced apple sauce and placed a plastic bag over her head.
She had informed her husband and children of her decision, a course they opposed. She received counseling from health professionals. After listening to the pro-life argument, “Jo simply told them, after a bit, to buzz off,” Alan told a U-T San Diego reporter.
“Yes, I sat beside her as she died,” Purdy told The Times weeks after the death. “I didn’t want her to feel abandoned. I wanted her to know that I loved her.”
** ** **
Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) – Sisters of Charity Health System – Physician-Assisted Suicide refers to the unethical practice of physicians providing the means of death at a patient’s request. Usually, this will be by supplying or writing a lethal prescription for medications. The patient, however, and not the physician, ultimately administers these drugs. This differs from Euthanasia, because the physician does not act directly by, for example, actually administering a lethal injection in order to end the patient’s life. Both euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are unethical, and neither can be permitted in a Catholic health care facility. It is never ethical to take the life of an innocent person, even at his or her request, or to help a person take his or her own life.
** ** **
UK man who failed to overturn euthanasia law diesby Maria Cheng – The Hour Online (8/23/12) – Tony Nicklinson, paralyzed and unable to speak, found life so unbearable he wanted to die. On Wednesday, the 58-year-old Briton got his wish.
His family said he died of pneumonia at home.
In January, Nicklinson asked the High Court to declare that any doctor who killed him with his consent would not be charged with murder. Last week, the court rejected his request, a decision that Nicklinson said had left him “devastated and heartbroken.”
Experts weren’t sure what impact, if any, his death might have on the ongoing euthanasia debate in Britain.
Penney Lewis, a law professor at King’s College London, said previous deaths of euthanasia advocates didn’t have any effect on changing laws to allow the practice.
** ** **
Medical journals show increasing support for euthanasia – by Denise Hunnell, MD – LifeNews.com (8/24/12) – The British Medical Journal (BMJ), a publication distributed to the members of the British Medical Association, devoted much of its June 14, 2012, issue to endorsing voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Raymond Tallis, emeritus professor of geriatric medicine at the University of Manchester, argues in this issue that respect for patient desires and autonomy renders irrelevant any opinion on the matter by the Royal College of Physicians or the British Medical Association. Therefore, all opposition to euthanasia is merely inappropriate paternalism and should be dropped.
In this same issue, Tess McPherson relates the difficult last days of her mother, Ann McPherson, and uses this painful experience as a call for legalized physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. Rather than seeking better pain control, she argues that death is the best option for those suffering at the end of their lives.
Finally, Fiona Goodlee, editor in chief of the BMJ, rounds out the arguments by declaring that legalization of assisted dying is not a medical decision, but rather a societal question. She argues that the role of the physician is compatible with providing euthanasia or assisted suicide and if society wants it, they should get it.
Amid these scholarly endorsements of euthanasia come the claims of British physician Patrick Pullicino that the National Health Service (NHS) is effectively killing 130,000 patients every year when doctors place these patients on the Liverpool Care Protocol (LCP) and deny them nutrition and hydration.
The medical literature from the United States also shows an increasing acceptance of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. The July 12, 2012, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) included an article by Dr. Lisa Soleymani Lehmann and Julian Prokopetz that suggested physician opposition to assisted dying was an unreasonable barrier to patients seeking lethal medications. They recommended that all patients who met the legal criteria for assisted suicide as outlined in the state laws of Oregon, Washington, and Montana should be able to obtain the drugs necessary for suicide without a physician’s prescription or approval.
Perhaps the most chilling example is the enthusiastic endorsement in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) for the book Death, Dying, and Organ Transplantation: Reconstructing Medical Ethics at the End of Life, by Drs. Franklin Miller and Robert Truog. This book seeks to do away with two core principles of medical care. The first is that a physician cannot intentionally cause the death of his patient. The second is that donors of vital organs for transplantation must be dead before the organs are harvested.
** ** **
Pro: When he is near death, this man wants the choice to kill himself by Tom O’Hara – jacksonville.com (8/21/12) – I would much prefer to spend a few weeks getting things organized and saying my goodbyes. Then I want to take control.
It’s my life.
It’s my body.
If I want to spare myself and those I love months of useless pain and sadness, then I should be allowed to kill myself without a lot of legal debate and secrecy.
And I’ll get the satisfaction of knowing that I’ve saved the taxpayers a nice piece of change.
** ** **
Join Juggie – My Life. My Death. My Choice. Compassion & Choices – Former State Representative Ernest “Juggie” Heen, cancer patient and aid-in-dying advocate. He believes every Hawai’i citizen with terminal illness should have the legal right to choose a dignified death
Compassion & Choices – Spotlight: Hawaii -8/13/12) – We have identified a core group of physicians willing to practice aid in dying and speak out for patient choice. Courageous, skilled and respected medical practitioners lead our growing Physician Advisory Council.
Our Hawaii Executive Council, composed of highly respected caregivers, community leaders and legal experts, will serve as educators and spokespeople for patient choice.
We will prepare a legislative contingency plan and organize constituent visits to educate lawmakers about current law and how patients suffer when their choices go unrecognized. We will also assess lawmakers’ views on end-of-life choice so we can move quickly to mobilize supporters.
In January, Compassion & Choices released a poll of Hawaii voters’ opinions. The results:
77% favor allowing those who are dying of a terminal disease the choice to request and receive medication from their physician to bring about a peaceful death.
90% agree the decision about aid in dying is a personal one between patient and doctor.
** ** **
Louisiana: Key Pro-Life Bulls on Abortion, Euthanasia Take Effect by Seven Ertelt, LifeNews.com (8/1/12) – Four key pro-life bills take effect today that protect vulnerable people at both the beginning and end of life. The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, the Hear the Heartbeat Bill, the Criminal Abortion Dismemberment Act, and the Additional Protections Against Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Act took effect at midnight.
“Louisiana is ranked as the top pro-life state in the nation, and I commend our Senators and Representatives, our Governor, and the great citizens of Louisiana for their support in enacting these new pro-life laws,” Clapper said.
Finally, the Additional Protections Against Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Act better protects the disabled and ill from euthanasia and assisted suicide.
** ** **
Man dies after losing fight for assisted suicide – KMBZ.com (8/22/12) – “I thought that if the court saw me as I am, utterly miserable with my life, powerless to do anything about it because of my disability, then the judges would accept my reasoning that I do not want to carry on and should be able to have a dignified death,” the former corporate manager from Wiltshire said in a statement issued by his lawyer.
But on Aug. 16, the court upheld the law barring Nicklinson from dying with a doctor’s help.
“It is not for the court to decide whether the law about assisted dying should be changed and, if so, what safeguards should be put in place,” Lord Justice Roger Toulson said in his ruling. “Under our system of government, these are matters for parliament to decide, representing society as a whole, after parliamentary scrutiny, and not for the court on the facts of an individual case or cases.”
A spokesman for British anti-euthanasia group Care Not Killing applauded the ruling, saying, “it confirms the simple truth that the current law exists to protect those without a voice: the disabled, terminally ill and elderly, who might otherwise feel pressured into ending their lives.”
For Nicklinson, the decision was devastating.
“I am saddened that the law wants to condemn me to a life of increasing indignity and misery,” he said in a statement.
Nicklinson planned to appeal the court ruling, but his health quickly deteriorated. He “died peacefully this morning of natural causes,” according to a tweet posted by his wife, Jane, and daughters Lauren and Beth.
** ** **
Physician-assisted suicide– time to reconsider by Dr. Erik Steele, The Bangor Daily News/Health (8/16/12) – One night several years ago, my terminally ill patient David chose the time of his own death by shooting himself in the chest. I believe he picked that method because he knew I would be angry if he chose to end his life more peacefully by simply taking an overdose of the pills I prescribed him. I have been angry at myself ever since for having given him good reason to think so.
The upshot of that gunshot was that it’s echo has been banging around my head since it rang out, often when I am trying to fall asleep at night. It has led me to rethink what I had always thought about physician-assisted suicide: that the price to be paid for the liberty of some to choose it carefully and appropriately would be others who chose it prematurely and unnecessarily, a price too steep to be paid. Several years later, I think what I thought was wrong, and I figured I owed it to David to say so.
New data — evidence from actual experience delineated in careful medical studies — can be such an element leading to change. In the case of physician-assisted suicide it comes from the growing experience of states such as Oregon and Washington, where it is legal. Evidence from both states suggest that physician-assisted suicide is used less often than was feared, with fewer than 600 in Oregon over 15 years, and only 156 in Washington since it became legal there in 2009.
Both states have found that the liberty can be carefully overseen by the medical profession so patients are not using it for the wrong reasons (depression, lack of support, etc.), and that one in three patients who have their physician’s support for dying that way choose not to use it.
The data suggests much of what I and others feared would result from the legalizing of physician-assisted suicide does not happen when the medical profession works with the political profession to craft, implement and oversee a good law that makes a reasonable liberty available to an intelligent public. Go figure.
** ** **
Why Assisted Suicide is the Right Choice, for Some by John M. Grohol, PsyD, Founder & Editor in Chief, World of Psychology – Assisted suicide is a simple, reasonable and dignified choice that individuals at the end of their lives should be allowed greater access to. The only reason to withhold such access is the belief that government knows better than you what’s best for you at the end of your life.
I believe that few of us would agree that government knows what’s best for us in our personal health decisions. With all things being equal at the end of your life, would you rather gain a few weeks of life living in a hospital bed, heavily medicated, with tubes running from you, with machines helping you “live,” or would you rather die in a place and at a time of your own choosing?
Even if you choose, “hospital bed,” shouldn’t that choice be yours, and yours alone?
“Death With Dignity Act” Ballot Initiative by Rabbi Liberman in Rabbi’s Thoughts (8/16/12)
Priest-physician brings unique perspective to suicide debate by Christopher S. Pineo, PilotCatholicNews.com (8/17/12) – “I think it is very clear, in that, indeed we have a profound responsibility to provide excellent care for those who are facing the end of life, and that to move on to assisted suicide represents a failure for individuals and for our larger society,” he said.
Father Sheehan said fear contributes strongly to attitudes that push people to choose to end their own lives.
“The major thing is that people are very frightened, and they are frightened about facing the end of life, their fear of being in pain or being a burden on others, or being alone when they die. So, as a consequence these fears and worries, maybe driven by the media or perhaps by the experience of someone in their family or a friend, lead them to think that assisted suicide would be a good option,” he said.
** ** **
Northampton woman, plagued with terminal illness, supports ‘Death with Dignity’ option on the Massachusetts ballot by Dan Ring, The Repubican (8/20/12) – Myra P. Berzoff said she doesn’t know if she would take life-ending medications, but said she would like the choice.
At 91, she needs oxygen virtually 100 percent of the time, or else she would suffocate. She said she was diagnosed with emphysema three years ago and lives with the fear she could die from breathlessness.
Berzoff said she is a strong supporter of a ballot question on Nov. 6 that if approved by voters would allow adults to self-administer lethal drugs after requesting a prescription.
“I think I should have the right if tomorrow I decide I want to do myself in,” she says bluntly. “I’m using up resources. I feel very strongly about that.”
James F. Driscoll, executive director of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, the public policy arm for the Roman Catholic bishops in Massachusetts, said the church values life from conception to death. He said the church is a big supporter of hospice and palliative care. McDonnell also emphasizes hospice and palliative care in his upcoming column.
Driscoll said the ballot question would set a dangerous precedent. “The church is against this initiative and thinks it is a dangerous path to take a human life before natural death,” Driscoll said.
Taught by nuns at Catholic school, Myra Berzoff scoffs at the argument that the ballot question is dangerous because it advocates taking a human life before natural death. She said she should have the option offered by the ballot question.
“That’s absurd,” she said. “If you’re suffering, it’s your life. It isn’t the life of the Catholic church. It’s mine.”
** ** **
Beware Death with Dignity Bill – LowellSun – Opinion (8/21/12)
Opposing Euthanasia in pro-life (A call to Massachusetts activists!) by Thomas Peters – Live Action News – Opinion (8/21/12)
Majority of Massachusetts Voters Support Death with Dignity by Melissa Barber – Living with Dying: Death with Dignity National Center (8/22/12) – The poll question had the same wording as what will appear on the November ballot:
Question 2 would allow a physician licensed in Massachusetts to prescribe medication, at the request of a terminally ill patient meeting certain conditions, to end that person’s life. If the election was today, would you vote yes or no on Question 2?
No ………………………………….. 24%
** ** **
UK man who failed to overturn euthanasia law dies by Maria Cheng, boston.com (8/22/12) – Tony Nicklinson, paralyzed and unable to speak, found life so unbearable he wanted to die. On Wednesday, the 58-year-old Briton got his wish.
His family said he died of pneumonia at home.
In January, Nicklinson asked the High Court to declare that any doctor who killed him with his consent would not be charged with murder. Last week, the court rejected his request, a decision that Nicklinson said had left him ‘‘devastated and heartbroken.’’
** ** **
Jack Kervorkian comes to town by Tom Keane – boston.com (8/26/12) – The late Jack Kevorkian, a saint to some and a demon to others, was the controversial proponent of physician-assisted suicide for the dying and ill. This November, Kevorkian comes to the Commonwealth, or the spirit of the man at least, in the form of Question 2. The ballot measure, neutrally titled “Prescribing Medication to End Life,” would allow doctors to help the terminally ill kill themselves.
Massachusetts is thus somewhat of a test case: Is legalized suicide a trend?
Should we have state-sanctioned suicide? Libertarians argue that your body is your own, to do with as you wish. Some major religions disagree, but nothing in the proposed law requires the faithful to commit suicide. It simply permits it.
Parishes oppose proposal on doctor-aided death by Tom Dalton – The Salem News (8/27/12) – The Catholic parishes of Salem are campaigning to defeat a question on the November ballot that would allow doctors to assist terminally ill patients who want to end their lives.
“The church is very much opposed to it,” said the Rev. Timothy Murphy, pastor of Immaculate Conception Church.
The so-called “death with dignity” ballot question began with an initiative petition filed with the state attorney general’s office by a group of citizens that included Dr. Paul Spiers of Danvers.
State Rep. John Keenan, whose mother died of lung cancer, said he supports the measure as a way to lessen suffering. Keenan, of Salem, said he believes anyone who has watched a parent or child die from a terminal illness would also support it.
Members of the local pro-life committee, however, are taking a strong stand against a question they say is misunderstood and open to abuse.
Campaign Aims to Spur End-of-Life Conversations Within Familiesby Kay Lazar – The Boston Globe (8/29/12 ) – Compassion & Choices – “I knew what he wanted,” said his wife, Nancy. “I had had this discussion many times with him, but the kids hadn’t and they weren’t ready to let go.”
With death and dying, most Americans engage in a conspiracy of silence, surveys show, failing to discuss their final wishes until it is too late. A new Massachusetts-based coalition aims to change that.
Called The Conversation Project, the national campaign encourages open and honest discussions among families and friends about how they want to live life at the end, so that their wishes will be followed.
Death with Dignity: Doctor-prescribed suicide for terminally ill may soon be a way to die in Massachusetts – AllVoices.com (8/31/12) – Living — and dying — according to one’s own desires and personal beliefs is possibly the greatest freedom a human being can have. But what happens when the autonomy and, potentially, the peace of mind of choosing one’s time and place of death conflicts with qualms about a physician’s role as a healer and, ultimately, the value of human life?
Massachusetts residents will contemplate those questions in November, when the Bay State will become the third in the nation to consider a ballot initiative that would allow terminally ill people to end their lives through the self-administration of medications prescribed for that purpose.
Assisted Suicide: “Whose Choice?” – Montanans Against Assisted Suicide and for Living With Dignity (8/12/12) – Have you been solicited to engage in “aid-in-dying?” Were you told that “aid-in-dying” is legal? Did something about what you were told seem not quite right?
“Aid-in-dying” is a euphemism for assisted suicide and euthanasia.
“Aid-in-dying” is, regardless, not legal in Montana. Baxter did not legalize the practice. Moreover, a bill that would have legalized the practice was defeated in the last legislative session.
Assisted suicide is not legal in Montana – Mass Against Assisted Suicide (8/31/12) – I am a Montana State Senator. I disagree with your article, “Redefining Physicians’ Role in Assisted Dying,” claiming that assisted suicide is legal in Montana. At the very least, Montana law is unclear.
At the end of life, talk helps bridge a racial divide by Joseph Sacco, MD (8/6/12) – The New York Times – Our findings, published on July 9 in The American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, upend the conventional view of preferences for care among blacks. Sixty-five percent of black patients who were given palliative care consultation elected DNR, and 32 percent chose hospice — rates significantly higher than those previously demonstrated.
Richard Wesley: Ill doctor sheds light on who chooses physician-assisted suicide– The Inquisitor (8/12/12) – When Dr. Richard Wesley voted to approve Washington State’s Death With Dignity Act in 2009, he had no idea that just one month later he would be diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis — or Lou Gehrig’s Disease — just one month later.
Despite the prospect of living, and dying, with an incurable disease that eats muscles, yet leaves the mind intact, Dr. Wesley is at peace knowing there is a prescription of barbiturates waiting at the pharmacy should he choose to end his life on his own terms. (video)
Dr. Kervorkian had it right about assisted suicide by John M. Crisp – Newsday.com (8/20/12) – My uncle got a lucky break last week — literally. He got up in the middle of the night and, enfeebled at 81 years of age, he fell, hitting his head on a desk and breaking his skull. Later the next night he died, having never regained consciousness.
Why am I calling this gruesome mishap lucky? Because a few months earlier he had been diagnosed with lung cancer, and a couple of days before he died he had gone into hospice care. He was facing several months of increasing discomfort, disability and undignified decline, and then real pain and finally a smothering death. With a misstep in the middle of the night, he managed to avoid all of that.
Barbara Wise wasn’t quite so “lucky.” She suffered a stroke recently and was bedridden in a Cleveland hospital, unable to move or speak. John Wise, her husband of 45 years, smuggled a pistol into her hospital room and fired a single round into her head. She died the next day. Even though Wise and his wife had agreed long ago that neither of them wished to live in a bedridden, disabled state, prosecutors have charged the 66-year-old Wise with aggravated murder.
Tony Nicklinson, who lost “assisted-suicide” case, dies by Victoria Cavaliere – NY Daily News (8/22/12) – A paralyzed man who lost a landmark assisted suicide case in England died Wednesday from natural causes.
Tony Nicklinson died at his home in Melksham after suffering complications from pneumonia, his family said on Twitter. He was 58.
Nicklinson had described his life as “a living nightmare” since suffering a stroke in 2005 that left him with locked-in syndrome, a total paralysis of all the muscles.
The former corporate manager and rugby player was unable to speak or move, but his mind remained intact and he was not terminally ill.
Overtreatment is taking a harmful toll by Tara Parker-Pope – NYTimes.com (8/27/12) – When it comes to medical care, many patients and doctors believe more is better.
But an epidemic of overtreatment — too many scans, too many blood tests, too many procedures — is costing the nation’s health care system at least $210 billion a year, according to the Institute of Medicine, and taking a human toll in pain, emotional suffering, severe complications and even death.
“Sometimes the test leads you down a path, a therapeutic cascade, where you start to tumble downstream to more and more testing, and more and more invasive testing, and possibly even treatment for things that should be left well enough alone.”
Some complained that when they switch doctors they are required to undergo duplicate blood work, scans or other tests that their previous doctor had only recently ordered. Others told of being caught in a unending maze of testing and specialists who seem to forget the patient’s original complaint. I heard from doctors and nurses, too — health professionals frustrated by a system that encourages these excesses.
Hospital shooting fuels euthanasia debate – news24.com (8/13/12) – The shooting leaves authorities in a dilemma some experts say will happen with greater frequency in coming years as the baby boom generation ages — what is the appropriate punishment when a relative kills a loved one to end their suffering?
More often than not, a husband who kills an ailing wife never goes to trial and lands a plea deal with a sentence that carries no more than a few years in prison, research has shown. In some instances, there are no charges.
Assisted suicide most often chosen by affluent white by Katie Hafner – bendbulletin.com (8/12/12) – Washington followed Oregon in allowing terminally ill patients to get a prescription for drugs that will hasten death. Critics of such laws feared that poor people would be pressured to kill themselves because they or their families could not afford end-of-life care. But the demographics of patients who have gotten the prescriptions are surprisingly different than expected, according to data collected by Oregon and Washington through 2011.
They are overwhelmingly white, well-educated and financially comfortable. And they are making the choice not because they are in pain but because they want to have the same control over their deaths that they have had over their lives.
While preparing advance medical directives and choosing hospice and palliative care over aggressive treatment have become mainstream options, physician-assisted dying remains taboo for many people. Voters in Massachusetts will consider a ballot initiative in November on a law nearly identical to those in the Pacific Northwest, but high-profile legalization efforts have failed in California, Hawaii and Maine.
Oregon put its Death With Dignity Act in place in 1997, and Washington’s law went into effect in 2009. Some officials worried that thousands of people would migrate to both states for the drugs.
“There was a lot of fear that the elderly would be lined up in their RVs at the Oregon border,” said Barbara Glidewell, an assistant professor at Oregon Health & Science University.
That has not happened, although the number of people who have taken advantage of the law has risen over time. In the first years, Oregon residents who died using drugs they received under the law accounted for one in 1,000 deaths. The number is now roughly one in 500 deaths. At least 596 Oregonians have died that way since 1997. In Washington, 157 such deaths have been reported, roughly one in 1,000.
In Oregon, the number of men and women who have died that way is roughly equal, and their median age is 71. Eighty-one percent have had cancer, and 7 percent ALS, which is also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. The rest have had a variety of illnesses, including lung and heart disease. The statistics are similar in Washington.
There were fears of a “slippery slope” — that the law would gradually expand to include those with nonterminal illnesses or that it would permit physicians to take a more active role in the dying process itself. But those worries have not been borne out, experts say.
BackyardChickens.com – What do you all think about Euthanasia? – opinions
Oregon Death with Dignity – More Educated About Issues More You Understand About End of Life Care by Anthony Cirillo – about.com Assisted Living (8/20/12) – The data show Death with Dignity is a rarely used option for a small number of terminally ill Oregonians. The report indicates the process was implemented, in every instance, under the strict guidelines written into Oregon law and the established medical standard of care that has evolved since implementation.
During the 13 months covered by the report, 114 qualified patients received a prescription under the provisions of the law. Approximately 62%, or 71 terminally ill individuals, died as a result of ingesting medication prescribed under the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. Sixty-two different physicians wrote prescriptions under the law. According to the Health Division’s report, in the 14 year history of implementation, 935 prescriptions have been written and 596 individuals have ingested medication and died using the standards spelled out in Oregon law.
** ** **
British man’s death adds fuel to fire in assisted suicide debateby John F. Burns – post-gazette.com (8/23/12) – A 58-year-old British man suffering from so-called locked-in syndrome died Wednesday, six days after the nation’s High Court rejected his request for help in ending his life.
His death is certain to galvanize already-contentious debate about assisted suicide in Britain.
** ** **
Are our lives our own? The ethics of ‘elective death’ by Bill Thompson 8/5/12 – Given the choice, few would want to end their lives in nursing homes, hospices or in hospitals, however caring the professionals, but rather in their own home in the embrace of family and friends.
Yet many who are terminally ill and/or suffering excruciating pain that palliative care cannot balm spend their last days in clinical settings hooked to life support equipment they do not want. Others are compelled to go on living in ruined bodies or in advanced old age when they have no wish to do so, often beset with emotional or psychological pain that has become unbearable.
When all medical and counseling measures have been taken, and proven unsuccessful, should an individual have the right to end his or her own life? It is a debate with profound ethical, religious and human rights implications.
“Life should not be a sentence. The freedom to die in the manner of our own choosing is the ultimate civil liberty,” argues Mount Pleasant social historian Richard N. Cote, author of “In Search of Gentle Death.” “There is rising criticism that keeping dying people alive against their will is a violation of their civil rights.”
** ** **
We should reconsider assisted suicide laws by John Crisp San Angelo Standard Times (8/22/12) – My uncle got a lucky break last week — literally. He got up in the middle of the night and, enfeebled at 81 years of age, he fell, hitting his head on a desk and breaking his skull. Later the next night he died, having never regained consciousness.
Why am I calling this gruesome mishap lucky? Because a few months earlier he had been diagnosed with lung cancer, and a couple of days before he died he had gone into hospice care. He was facing several months of increasing discomfort, disability and undignified decline, and then real pain and finally a smothering death.
With a misstep in the middle of the night, he managed to avoid all of that.
Barbara Wise wasn’t quite so “lucky.” She suffered a stroke recently and was bedridden in a Cleveland hospital, unable to move or speak. John Wise, her husband of 45 years, smuggled a pistol into her hospital room and fired a single round into her head. She died the next day.
** ** **
Hospice: Celebrating the end of lifeby William C. Boinest and SR. Victoria Segura – Richmond Times-Dispatch (8/30/12) – No one likes to talk about the end of life. It seems more natural to celebrate its beginning. But, death is a part of life, and when it comes, most of us want to be at home, at peace, surrounded by our loved ones.
For some, that’s not possible. For some, a higher level of medical care is needed. Many families think they can handle caregiving duties at home, but most find they are overwhelmed and unable to spend precious, focused time with their loved one.
Most communities the size of Richmond have an answer to this problem, a place where patients can receive a higher level of medical care in a home-like environment, and families can be present for their loved ones, unencumbered by caregiving duties.
Richmond does not. Surprisingly, freestanding palliative and hospice care is not available within a 55-mile radius of our city.
** ** **
Death with Dignity Act ensures control, not pain – The Seattle Times – Letters (8/18/12)
Who chooses assisted suicide? Data reveal surprising answersby Katie Harner in The Seattle Times (8/12/12) – Dr. Richard Wesley has amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, the incurable disease that lays waste to muscles while leaving the mind intact. He lives with the knowledge that an untimely death is chasing him down, but takes solace in knowing that he can decide exactly when, where and how he will die.
Under Washington state’s Death With Dignity Act, his physician has given him a prescription for a lethal dose of barbiturates. He would prefer to die naturally, but if dying becomes protracted and difficult, he plans to take the drugs and die peacefully within minutes.
“It’s like the definition of pornography,” Wesley, 67, said at his home here in Seattle, with Mount Rainier in the distance. “I’ll know it’s time to go when I see it.”
Physician-assisted suicide: A chance for dignity in death by John Culver– The Gonzaga Online Bulletin (8/22/12) – In 1997, Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act came into effect, hearkening in a new era of end of life care in the United States. The bill was created in response to the suffering of individuals experiencing end-stage terminal illnesses in which physical deterioration and pain coupled to bring about an unacceptably low quality of life. The law signaled a growing recognition that palliative care could not always prevent dying individuals from reaching a state of existence that they found degrading and unacceptable. Rather than suffer for days, weeks or months during an inevitable decline toward death, terminally ill patients could request that their physician prescribe them a lethal dose of barbiturates. They would bring about a merciful, dignified death.
Since its inception, the law has allowed more than 600 terminally ill Oregonians to die on their own terms, rather than suffer through the natural progression of their diseases. The law’s utility extends far beyond its potential to directly alleviate physical suffering; it provides tremendous mental comfort to terminally ill Oregonians.
** ** **
Seeing death in a new light by Bruce Wilson, The Journal Sentinel (8/13/12) – Death has become a taboo subject, but it hasn’t always been so. It seems to be feared mostly because as a society we have become so unfamiliar with death. Medical science has evolved very rapidly, and over the past 50 years we have become so good at treating illnesses that we somehow have come to view death as an option. Before heart surgery and angioplasty and antibiotics and chemotherapy, people often died when they got sick.
In earlier agrarian times, Grandpa dropped over of a heart attack while harvesting the corn or milking the cows. Doctors couldn’t get to the patients and had little to offer when they did. The family called the undertaker, who helped get Grandpa into his dark suit and they laid him out on the dining room table. Friends and family were summoned, everyone drank some whiskey and they buried him. Children and adults alike saw this cycle of life over and over. There was sadness, but it was familiar, and a fact of life.
In more modern times, Grandpa is in the ICU at the hospital. Children are frequently not allowed to visit.
Physicians have spent years learning how to fight off almost any condition, and have become unfamiliar with death themselves, so much so that internally they may have a sense of failure when death finally comes, often after a long siege of warfare against nature.
In addition, there has been almost no training for doctors in how to speak about death or prepare patients and families for this when the picture becomes clear.
This is almost a uniquely American phenomenon. The reason is simple: Most other countries do not have enough money to spend on “health care” at the end of life, when many of the measures that we view as routine are often futile.
(News updates from Australia, Canada, Fiji, Germany, India, Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Russia, Scotland, Switzerland, United Kingdom)
Euthanasia: tackling the ‘wicked’ policy problem by Scott Prasser – onlineopinion.com.au (8/7/12) – There are three basic requirements for dealing with ‘wicked’ policy problems like euthanasia.
First, there needs to be time to engage the public in open, depoliticised, iterative discussion of the many dimensions of the problem. This is an absolute necessity for complex social issues with a strong moral dimension like euthanasia, in order to make different perspectives understood and create a shared understanding of the issue to address.
Second, there needs to be reliable evidence and data so as to inform the debate and avoid distortion of the facts, but this alone it is not sufficient when conflicting values and perspectives are at stake. Euthanasia is not an issue where ‘evidence’ based policy development alone can resolve the matter, but we certainly need to clarify the ‘evidence.’
Third, it is essential to have appropriate mechanisms (more than one) for public engagement in informed debate, to explore the range of arguments and to encourage the consideration of wider social implications if an agreed policy solution for the common good is to emerge.
Engaging the public in this kind of policy process would be a welcome new feature in the Australian political process.
Mother wins six-year fight for right to let brain-dead son die by Jordanna Schriever, The Herald Sun (8/10/12) – Mrs Dunn will meet doctors on August 22 to seek a decision that he no longer be fed.
Mr Leigep, 37, has been unresponsive and in a vegetative state since March 2006 after a car crash in Adelaide’s north.
Ms Dunn would prefer her son die in a more humane way and be euthanased with drugs. She said the laws must be changed to allow families in her position to have access to euthanasia.
“I’m starving my son to death, and I’ve got no other choice but to leave him as he is,” she said.
“If I starved my dog, I would be locked up. But I’m allowed to starve my son.
“I can’t let him suffer any more. I wish there was another choice. I’m so devastated. It’s not just about euthanasia, we want him to die with respect … families have got to have that right.”
Philip Nitschke says Exit International has seen a surge in demand for help to die peacefully by Steve Rice, heraldsun.com.au (8/16/12) – Dr Nitschke says the $690 kit allows for a peaceful death.
HIs voluntary euthanasia group, Exit International, has sold 50 of the kits and ordered another 100 – most of which have already been pre-ordered – at a cost of about $345.
He said there had been a surge in demand from people wanting the gas.
“If people really want an anonymous death, that is one that will never be detected, (this) is really your only option,” he said.
“It’s the only undetectable method of death.
Euthanasia Campaigner Philip Nitschke Meets His Match in Debate by Paul Russell, a leading campaigner against euthanasia (8/17/12) – Here’s the text of my talk:
St Vincent offers peace to dying by Hamish Broome (8/20/12) – The team at St Vincent’s Hospital palliative care unit have been recognised as one of the best in the country, with a recent report ranking their services as second in NSW and fifth in Australia.
As part of a national program to benchmark patient outcomes, St Vincent’s unit was found to provide exceptional care in clinical outcomes and symptoms relief.
“Dying is one of the most critical things that happens to us,” said clinical nurse specialist Alan Hickey, who’s spent more than a decade in palliative care.
Only person ever convicted in Qld for assisting suicide, Merin Nielsen, released from jail – Herald Sun (8/20/12) – Merin Nielsen, 50, was freed last week after serving six months of a three-year jail sentence for assisting the suicide of an elderly man in 2009.
Euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke on Monday said he’d spoken to Mr Nielsen, who was utterly relieved to be out of jail and hoped the laws around euthanasia would change.
Euthanasia decision – 4BC.com.au (broadcast) (8/23/12) – South Australian mother, Joanne Dunn, yesterday made the heartbreaking decision to ask doctors to stop feeding her 37-year-old son, Mark, who has been in a vegetative state since 2006 after a car crash.
Australian euthanasia advocate wants Fiji death clinic– Google News (8/23/12) – Prominent Australian right-to-die campaigner Philip Nitschke said Friday he wants to set up an assisted suicide clinic in Fiji, but the government in Suva downplayed the idea.
Nitschke, a doctor who has campaigned on euthanasia issues for more than a decade, wants it to operate like the Dignitas centre in Switzerland, where 144 people ended their lives in 2011, virtually all of them foreigners.
Nitschke, head of Exit International, told the Sydney Morning Herald it would make it easier for people from the Asia-Pacific who wanted to end their lives to do so, rather than having to travel to Europe.
“Given the logistical problems faced by those in the Asia-Pacific travelling to Europe when seriously ill, Exit would suggest that a mirror clinic is well warranted in this region of the world,” he said.
He said he had written to Fiji’s attorney-general who had asked for more details, and hopes his organisation can go to the Pacific nation to discuss the idea.
Fiji eyes proposal for assisted suicide by Julia Medew – The Syndey Morning Herald (8/24/12) – A 58-year-old British man suffering from so-called locked-in syndrome died Wednesday, six days after the nation’s High Court rejected his request for help in ending his life.
His death is certain to galvanize already-contentious debate about assisted suicide in Britain.
by Julia Medew The Canberra Times (8/24/12) – THE Fijian government is considering a proposal to open an assisted-suicide clinic where seriously ill Australians and others could go to die.
The Australian euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke has proposed a ”hastened death service” in Nandi which would operate like the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland, where about 1000 foreigners have died since 1998.
While a handful of European countries and two US states have legalised euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, the Dignitas clinic is the only one in the world that allows foreigners to use its service.
Fiji says No to suicide clinic – BioEdge.org (8/24/12) – Australian euthanasia activist Dr Philip Nitschke seems to have jumped the gun by telling the media that the South Pacific island of Fiji was considering his plans for establishing a suicide clinic in the city of Nadi.
Tony Nicklinson: Can law change on assisted dying and protect vulnerable? by Isra Black – International Business Times (8/24/12) – In this post, I attempt to clarify what the vulnerability objection is, that is, what concerns it raises against the legalisation of assisted dying, and who the ‘vulnerable’ are. This post also presents an overview of the safeguards designed to ensure that assisted dying is implemented without diluting the protections afforded to certain members of society. It ends by challenging the basis for assisted dying chosen by campaigners for a change in the law.
A detailed study of the safeguards present in the laws and practices of jurisdictions where assisted dying is lawful can be found in the briefing paper Professor Penney Lewis and I wrote for Demos and the Commission on Assisted Dying.
Australians must have death with dignity – Herald Sun (8/28/12) – A Herald Sun investigation has found thousands of terminally ill people are unable to make their lives easier because of unduly restrictive regulations.
** ** **
Suggestions for slipping a mortal coil: The important questions make dying livableby Gordon Sinclair Jr. – winnepegfreepress.com (8/4/12) – “But nobody had actually gone to dying patients and asked them what dignity was about,” Chochinov recalled. “What it meant to them.”
So he began asking palliative care patients in Winnipeg the dignity questions.
What Chochinov discovered was dignity for those who needed it most had more to do with emotional well-being, than physical requirements.
He found people lost their sense of dignity when they felt their life had lost meaning and purpose in its final stages.
Or, as Chochinov told me: “We looked at pain, we looked at physical symptoms, spiritual issues, psychological issues. The single most important predictor of people’s dignity was, in fact, how people perceived they were seen. How people saw themselves to be appreciated or seen by others.”
DWD newsletter accuses the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition of lying by Alex Schadenberg, LifeSiteNews.com (8/6/12) – In the June 2012 edition of the Dying with Dignity newsletter (p.10), Wanda Morris, the executive director of Dying with Dignity states that EPC bases its arguments on Lies, Damn Lies and fear mongering.
Morris ought to look in the mirror when she accuses EPC of lying or fear mongering.
I knew that I was doing well in the debate when Morris stated that I lacked compassion because I opposed euthanasia and assisted suicide in all circumstances. Low blow Wanda, too bad it proved to the audience that you were getting desperate.
Ottawa appeals B.C. assisted suicide ruling by Paul Tuns, TheInterim.com (8/7/12) – Waiting until the second-last business day to file, Canada’s federal government appealed the June 15 decision of B.C. Supreme Court Justice Lynn Smith overturning Canada’s ban on euthanasia and assisted suicide. Smith claimed that Canada’s Criminal Code prohibiting euthanasia and assisted suicide violated the Charter rights of those seeking assistance killing themselves and those who help them carry out their lethal wishes. The justice also argued the Criminal Code provisions violated disabled persons Section 7 rights of life, liberty, and security of the person.
On July 13, the Friday before the July 16 deadline to appeal Smith’s decision, federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced the Conservative government sought to stay the ruling which urges Parliament to change the law to allow euthanasia and assisted suicide within the next 12 months and gives an immediate exemption to Gloria Taylor, an ALS sufferer who is challenging the assisted suicide law.
‘One-sided and misleading’: Anti-euthanasia leader slams upcoming Canadian ‘expert panel’ event by Peter Baklinski – LifeSiteNews.com (8/7/12) – A pro-euthanasia group has teamed up with an atheist group to present what they call an “expert panel” to inform Canadians about recent legal developments in the country regarding medically assisted suicide.
Meanwhile, the country’s top advocate for the right-to-life of the elderly has slammed the expert panel event, calling it “one-sided and misleading”.
“Canada does not need anybody promoting laws that allow one person to kill another person, whether they are terminally ill or not,” said Alex Schadenberg, director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, to LifeSiteNews.
Canadian attitudes skewed in favor of physician-assisted suicide by Michael Swan, The Catholic Register (8/9/12) – Canadians and Britons are more open to physician-assisted suicide than Americans, a recent poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion has found.
Eighty per cent of Canadians and 77 per cent of the English said that doctors should be allowed to assist terminally ill, fully informed and competent patients to kill themselves. But only 56 per cent of Americans agreed.
The poll found 10 per cent of Canadians and nine per cent of Britons firmly opposed to physician-assisted suicide no matter who asks for it. Nearly one third — 29 per cent — of Americans said it should never be allowed. On the flip side, three-quarters of Canadians and Britons said physician-assisted suicide should always be allowed under specific circumstances, whereas only half of Americans thought so.
“So far as the UK is concerned, in terms of opinion surveys this doesn’t surprise me,” he said. “What we’re seeing here to a degree is an instinctive, compassionate response from a society that prizes individual autonomy very highly.”
The Angus-Reid survey found 86 per cent of Canadians, 84 per cent of Britons and 69 per cent of Americans agree with the statement that “Legalizing doctor-assisted suicide would give people who are suffering an opportunity to ease their pain.”
People who believe laws against assisted suicide protect the vulnerable from social, economic and medical pressure to commit suicide face a major education challenge, said Wookey.
“It means there’s a very, very clear job for the Church to do, particularly in secular society,” he said.
British bishops have teamed up with disability rights organizations and palliative care professionals to form an alliance called Care Not Killing — a purely secular platform to engage the public policy debate.
Gloria Taylor regains right to die in peace by Cathryn Wellner (8/13/12) – Unless the federal government intervenes yet again, Gloria Taylor can decide in peace when her life with ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s disease) has become unbearable. At that point she can ask a physician to ease her death. British Columbia’s highest court has granted Taylor a personal exemption.
Canadian Judge upholds decision giving woman “right” to die by euthanasia or assisted suicide by Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life News Today (8/10/12) – The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC) said today that it is troubled by the decision of the British Columbia court not to stay the constitutional exemption granted to Gloria Taylor to die by euthanasia or assisted suicide. Alex Schadenberg, executive director, said EPC urges the Government to appeal the court order issued by Justice Jo-Ann Prowse.
“EPC is concerned that this court order may prompt other people with similar conditions to apply for a constitutional exemption to die by euthanasia before the Supreme Court and Parliament have ruled on the matter,” he said.
New lease on life for assisted suicide debate– Sun News (8/11/12) – An appeals court ruling Friday that would let Gloria Taylor get help from a doctor to commit suicide doesn’t pass muster with the federal justice minister.
The B.C. woman is suffering from Lou Gehrig’s disease, has lost the ability to walk and is confined to a power chair.
“We are disappointed with this decision and are currently reviewing it,” said Julie DiMambro, a spokeswoman for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Ill Doctor Puts Spotlight on Euthanasia by Marcel Simmer, Akgulian.com (8/13/12) – Dr. Richard Wesley suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis an incurable disease that ruins the body’s muscles while allowing the mind to remain intact. However, he know that he can make the decision when, where and by what form he can die.
He lives in Washington, which has the Death With Dignity Act and his physician has prescribed for him a dose of barbiturates that is lethal. Wesley would prefer if he could die naturally, but because of his condition, it could become both difficult and protracted. His plan is to take the drugs and within minutes, die peacefully.
Assisted suicide ruling right move by Charlie Hodge, kelownacapnews.com (8/17/12) – Until one has truly faced death in the face, it is hard to judge, or even begin to comprehend, how complex such a decision is.
Until one has truly come to grips with a debilitating, cruel, lingering, fatal illness, it really is impossible to comprehend the emotions and desires of someone in such a situation.
With death, theory is easy. Grasping it by the throat and actually dealing with it is a whole other ball game.
When one truly comprehends that their life form (as we know it) is dwindling due to a cruel terminal illness, all the theory goes out the window.
Right-to-Die debate rages on – The Oxbow Herald (8/24/12) – This debate is contentious on both sides. People in support of assisted suicide argue the laws must be changed to allow terminally ill patients to die with dignity. When illness makes it impossible to support any quality of life, and the inevitable end is a slow and painful death, people should have the right to choose when to end their lives.
Opponents argue assisted suicide is wrong.
Fighting for the right to die by Pam Frampton – The Weekend Telegram (8/25/12) – In Canada, assisted suicide is still illegal, but gains are being made in the fight by those who argue we should have that right.
In British Columbia in June, that province’s Supreme Court declared invalid a section of the Criminal Code that prohibits physician-assisted suicide.
That doesn’t mean the service is immediately available in B.C., but as The Globe and Mail’s Sunny Dhillon reported on June 15, according to Queen’s University research fellow and lawyer Ricardo Smalling, “if the government does not do something about (the court ruling), or if the B.C. Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of Canada does not grant an injunction to stay the implementation of the decision, then assisted suicide will automatically become legal.”
The article also noted that a panel of experts of the Royal Society of Canada that studied end-of-life decision-making said “in a report released last year, that informed Canadians should have the right to choose death within a regulated system, even if they have not been diagnosed with a terminal illness.”
On March 22 in Quebec, a Select Committee on Dying with Dignity released a report which found similarly, recommending, among other things, “that relevant legislation be amended to recognize medical aid in dying as appropriate end-of-life care if the request made by the person meets (certain criteria) as assessed by the physician. …”
Physician-assisted suicide poisons the mission of medicine by J. Donald Boudreau – The Globe and Mail (8/28/12) – Nothing would prevent society from mandating responsibilities to a new profession; I have called it euthanatrics.
Its practitioners – euthanologists – could ensure that society-sanctioned suicides are carried out expertly, with transparency and accountability. It would provide a mechanism to meet new legislative demands while protecting the medical profession so that it can continue to fulfill its ancient mandate of healing.
Euthanasia discussion event will be one-sided, opponent says by Jessica Smith– MetroNews.ca (8/29/12) – The head of a group opposed to euthanasia says an upcoming panel discussion on “medically assisted death” in Ottawa won’t reflect the views of people opposed to the idea.
Executive Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Alex Schadenberg said he was invited to the panel discussion, but will be out of the county and the organizers did not find someone to fill his anti-decriminalization position.
Two Eastern Ontario professors and a Quebec politician will be speaking in Ottawa about legalizing euthanasia in a panel dubbed “Medically Assisted Death Coming to Canada: How, Why, When??”
“It’s a one-sided event,” Schadenberg said. “I would say this is not really a panel of information it’s a pro-euthanasia event promoting the legalization.”
Dying with Dignity chapter formed on Salt Spring by Elizabeth Nolan -GulfIslandsDriftwood.com (8/29/12) – Salt Springers concerned about having the same ability to make personal choices while dying as they enjoy in everyday life have created the first local chapter of an organization dedicated to the right to die.
The group’s aim is to change Canadian law to allow people in palliative care to end their lives, with a doctor’s assistance, at the time of their own choosing. The issue has been likened to the debate on abortion: although the ethical question can be thorny, advocates aren’t trying to make a universal case.
One of the participants at the meeting said his interest in dying with dignity began many years ago, when someone he knew of tried to end his own life before his debilitating disease did.
“But he did it with a shotgun and he didn’t do it right. It was terrible for the family,” he said.
Starvation has been suggested as an easy and mostly painless method: a person in care can simply refuse to take in any more food or water. But two other participants at the meeting recalled how their mother had done that very thing, and took 10 days to pass away.
Hoarding medication is also not advised, as overdoses often lead to brain damage and other lost functions, but may not be enough to end a life.
A Forum Research survey conducted in December 2011 found that 67 per cent of Canadian polled favoured legalizing doctor-assisted death for terminally ill patients. Hogan believes it’s now time for Canadians to make their beliefs known to ease the way toward legal changes. Joining groups such as Dying with Dignity and writing letters to political representatives will be key.
Death without dignity by Barb Ritchie – Calgary Herald (8/29/12) – I thank God that she has reached the point of oblivion now, so she has some measure of peace in her life. Those who oppose the right-to-die legislation should be sitting on this bed next to me.
Legalise enthanasia– The Fiji Times Online (8/15/12) – CALLS have been made to legalise euthanasia in Fiji to be included in the next constitution.
Doctor Etika Vuniyabola highlighted this as part of his submissions to the Constitution Commission.
Euthanasia refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.
In his submission, Dr Vuniyabola proposed that this subject be earnestly considered and accepted for the sake of the people in need of its role as a solution to their silent sufferings and helplessness when mental and physical incapacitation had no available cure and solution.
State rejects death clinic by Nasik Swami – The Fiji Times (8/25/12) – A PROPOSAL sent to the government to open an euthanasia clinic in the country by Australian euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke has been rejected.
Confirming this to The Fiji Times, Ministry for Information permanent secretary Sharon Smith-Johns said the Attorney-General’s Chambers received a submission from Dr Nitschke in August last year.
“As with all submissions received by the chambers, details of the proposals were requested but there is no plan to establish such a facility,” Ms Smith-Johns said.
However, The Sydney Morning Herald reported that Dr Nitschke had proposed a “hastened death service” in Nadi which would operate like the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland, where about 1000 foreigners have died since 1998.
Dr Nitschke is the owner of Exit International, a leading end-of-life choices (voluntary euthanasia/ assisted suicide) information and advocacy organisation.
Fiji eyes proposal for assisted suicide by Richard Dawkins, Foundation for Reason and Science (8/26/12) – Australian euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke has proposed a “hastened death service” in Nadi which would operate like the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland, where about 1000 foreigners have died since 1998.
While a handful of European countries and two US states have legalised euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide, the Dignitas clinic is the only one in the world that allows foreigners to use its service.
In a proposal sent to Fiji’s Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum last year, Dr Nitschke said the developing country could generate “considerable income” from a similar clinic with demand expected to come from people in Australia, New Zealand, Asia and India who do not have access to physician-assisted suicide.
Church welcomes rejection of euthanasia clinic in FIJI– Radio Australia (8/27/12) – One man that’s welcomed the news is Reverend Tevita Banivanua, the deputy general secretary of Fiji’s Methodist Church, who’s speaking to correspondent Bruce Hill
** ** **
Assisted suicide law split government – TheLocal.de (8/1/12) – A row has blown up within the government about possible changes to German assisted suicide laws, after the justice minister said she wanted to enable not just relatives but also doctors and friends to help people to die.
All sides say commercial assisted suicide should be banned, as set out in the government’s coalition agreement – but disagreement has arisen over where the line should be drawn.
Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger wants to restrict the ban to organisations with commercial interests – leaving those who offer profit-free suicide advice to terminally ill people free to do so without fear of prosecution.
The Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung newspaper reported on Tuesday that Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger had drafted a law which would lift the threat of prosecution friends and long-term housemates, as well as doctors and carers – if during treatment “a close personal relationship”.
Health spokesman for Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, Jens Spahn told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper on Wednesday, it was not acceptable that commercial operations should be threatened with up to three years in jail, while relatives and friends would excepted.
Central Council of Muslims criticizes draft law on euthanasia – Euro-Islan.info (8/3/12) – The Central Council of Muslims has issued a press release relatively to a new draft law on euthanasia. The draft law, proposed by Minister of Justice Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger (FDP), would legalize private euthanasia also when disposed by close relatives, allowing them to do so without legal consequences. The Council expressed the message that Muslims in Germany should not be abiding by this law. The medical doctor Dr. Houaida Taraji said that “Life is worth to be protected at any stage and no side doors should be opened for murder”.
Half of Germans approve of euthanasia businesses – TheLocal.de (8/6/12) – Nearly half of Germans are in favour of legalising euthanasia businesses, a recent survey revealed. The German parliament is still divided over proposed changes to assisted suicide laws.
Germany seeks to clarify euthanasia laws – DW-World.de (8/8/12) – Many in Germany are unhappy with current euthanasia legislation, according to a study conducted by pollsters Emnid. The poll found that almost 50 percent of Germans say they want professionals to be able to help people who wish to die.
But that’s not what Berlin wants. The Justice Ministry has warned in a paper of a scenario where professional companies would be permitted to offer assistance in “a quick and efficient form of suicide.” Means in which companies could do this would be offering medication or a room for the suicide to take place. Under a planned bill though, this though would be punished by a fine or a prison sentence.
** ** **
Court says woman’s life cannot be ended– UPI.com – India’s Supreme Court Monday declined a plea to end the life of a woman in a “vegetative state” for 37 years after a sexual assault.
The plea by activist Pinki Virani sought to stop the feeding of Aruna Shanbaug, a former nurse at Mumbai’s KEM Hospital and a victim of a sexual attack by a hospital janitor.
The petition said the victim can no longer see or speak properly and keeping her alive in this “persistent vegetative state” violates her right to life with dignity, The Times of India reported.
The case of Shanbaug, 60, has become a huge controversy with opinions widely divided.
Death with Dignity bills heading toward Diet by Natsuko Fukue – The Japan Times Online (8/25/12) – “We’ve been holding discussions for seven years already. We shouldn’t rush, but I think it’s time to get our thoughts into shape,” the group’s chairman, Teruhiko Mashiko of the Democratic Party of Japan, told The Japan Times. “It’ll be great if the public starts discussing the issue as we submit the bills.”
The group drafted two versions and plans to let Diet members vote based on their own judgement. One version stipulates that doctors can’t start life-prolonging treatment on patients in a terminal stage, defined as “a condition in which patients have no possibility of recovery even with appropriate medical care,” and the other states that cancellation of such treatment would also be allowed.
Under both bills, more than two doctors would have to decide whether a patient is in a terminal stage and they would not be “held liable under the criminal, civil and administrative codes.”
** ** **
Dutch would have stopped treating Prince Friso– Radio Netherlands Worldwide (8/3/12) – An influential Dutch ethicist has said that if Queen Beatrix’s son, Prince Johan Friso, had been hospitalised in the Netherlands after his ski accident, doctors would have already stopped his treatment.
Heleen Dupuis, who is a member of the Dutch Upper House for the ruling Liberal Party (VVD), said, “it’s questionable whether the prince will ever have a normal life again. I understand that the chances are extremely small.” According to the ethicist, “had the prince been sent to a Dutch hospital, doctors would have probably turned off the life support system because there is such a slim possibility that he will ever recover.”
Prince Friso suffered severe brain damage after he was trapped in an avalanche, while skiing in Austria in February. He is in a coma at Wellington Hospital in London. Doctors say the chances he will recover are minimal.
There’s a growing debate in the Netherlands about how far doctors should go in treating patients. Health care is becoming unaffordable for two reasons. On the one hand, people are ageing and need more medical care, and on the other extremely expensive drugs are being developed for very rare diseases that used to be fatal. The Dutch are asking whether society should pay 50,000 euros to extend a cancer patient’s life by six months. The discussion is likely to play a role in the political campaigns for the general elections on September 12.
Controversy over assisted suicide in The Netherlands by Wim Jansen, Radio Netherlands Worldwide (8/15/12) – A special website has been launched in the Netherlands for people who assist family or friends to commit suicide and want to tell their stories anonymously, or simply ask questions. Assisted suicide carried out by lay people is currently punishable by law.
In the Netherlands, only doctors can carry out assisted suicides, and they can do so only if they follow strict protocols. According to Right-to-Die-Netherlands (NVVE), physicians frequently refuse requests for assisted suicide, leaving patients unable to carry out their wishes in a humane way. One case recently made headlines: a man who helped his 99-year-old mother to die by giving her the lethal medication she requested. The Ministry of Justice is considering bringing charges against the man.
The NVVE says people are often unwilling to help their friends and loved ones because they fear prosecution. So they’re left witnessing their loved ones dying or committing suicide and have to live with those memories. The organisation hopes that the anonymous testimonies will provoke discussion in the Netherlands and ultimately to the scrapping of the law against lay people helping in cases of assisted suicide.
Doctors and chemists agree joint euthanasia guidelines – DutchNews.nl (8/28/12) – Doctors and dispensing chemists have agreed a joint guideline on euthanasia, doctors’ federation KNMG and dispensing chemists’ organisation KNMP said on Tuesday.
The new guidelines will replace those drawn up five years ago by dispensing chemists and underline the cooperation between the two sets of medical professionals on the subject.
‘The guidelines not only contain technical information about, for instance, the amount of a drug to be administered, but also explain for the first time why a certain method has been chosen,’ a KNMG spokesman told website nu.nl.
Euthanasia guides adopted in Netherlands– UPI.com (8/29/12) – An agreement on joint guidelines on euthanasia was reached between the associations representing doctors and pharmacists in the Netherlands, officials said.
The new guidelines, agreed to Tuesday, replace those developed five years ago by the pharmacists, DutchNews.nl reported.
Euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands under strict conditions, such as a patient “suffering unbearably” and the attending doctor must be convinced the patient is making an informed choice. A second opinion also is required.
** ** **
The peace of assisted dying by Sean Davidson – peoplemagazine.co.za (8/3/12) – If your loved one was dying a long, painful death, would you wish there was some other way out? Soon there might be.
Davison founded an organisation called DignitySA which seeks to legalise assisted dying of the terminally ill under precisely defined circumstances. DignitySA proposes a legal procedure in which those wanting to be euthanised will apply to an independent panel that would look at each case individually.
“It will be a kind, compassionate process with a panel that includes doctors, legal advisers and counsellors,” Davison explained.Opponents of assisted dying suggest that should a system be introduced in which death can be legalised, then that system would be open to abuse. The other common reason given for not legalising euthansia would be the appeal to the ‘sanctity of life’, in which opponents claim that life itself is too precious to be ended, under any circumstances.
Hospice organising public meeting on euthanasia by Lindsay Shelton – Wellington.Scoop.co.nz (8/6/12) – Hospice New Zealand is pleased to announce a public meeting on euthanasia to be held in Wellington on Thursday, August 16, titled “Euthanasia, an ethical and legal crossroad”.
“Dying is a fact of life and should be discussed openly and often,” says Hospice New Zealand CEO, Mary Schumacher. “We have organized this public meeting to enable discussion on euthanasia outside of any individual case. It’s a subject that needs more understanding in many parts of the world and New Zealand is no different. We want to provoke discussion among New Zealanders and we hope the public meeting will generate questions that will allow people to form their own opinions.”
Australian & NZ Society of Palliative Medicine on Euthanasia– Scoop.co.nz (8/6/12) – “We should focus on excellence of hospice and palliative care not euthanasia”
The Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine Inc., (ANZSPM), believes that the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide are outside the discipline of Palliative Medicine. The Society endorses the New Zealand Medical Association’s Position Statement on Euthanasia, and similarly the World Medial Association’s which state that euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide are unethical. This position is not dependent on euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide remaining unlawful. Even if they were to become legal, or decriminalised, the NZMA would continue to regard them as unethical.
Dangers of euthanasia spelt out by John Gibb, Otago Daily Times (8/15/12) – Many older people could be subjected to subtle pressures to end their lives prematurely if voluntary euthanasia was made lawful in this country, Baroness Prof Ilora Finlay warned in Dunedin yesterday.
Prof Finlay, a Welsh palliative care specialist, said legalising medically assisted euthanasia and assisted suicide was likely to have significant unintended consequences.
Maggie Barry: Euthanasia not the answer by Issac Davison, nzherald.co.nz (8/16/12) – National Party MP Maggie Barry says the standard of healthcare for New Zealanders with terminal and chronic illnesses is so high euthanasia should not be considered as an alternative.
Ms Barry’s All Party Parliamentary Group on Palliative Care will meet for the first time today and aims to improve MPs’ understanding of the care available.
Palliative care focuses on relieving the suffering of patients with chronic or life-threatening illnesses.
Ms Barry was partly inspired to form the group after witnessing the high-quality care her parents received before their deaths.
Palliative care vs assisted dying: A false dichotomy – frogblog by Kevin Hague (8/16/12) – When I arrived at the meeting today it was to a room full of perhaps 70 people from outside Parliament and the full range of parliamentary media. We were given several different presentations, compered by Maggie. While there was some content on palliative care, the absolute focus of the meeting was on mounting arguments against voluntary euthanasia and assisted dying.
Now I believe there should be a very active public debate about Maryan Street’s Bill. I will both participate and listen with considerable interest, but I believe this needs to occur independent of debate over palliative care. It is just nonsensical to present palliative care and assisted dying as some sort of dichotomy between which society must choose. I personally believe in really great palliative care services. I also believe in assisted dying services. I resent the conflation of the two issues.
I also resent very considerably being lured to a harangue against assisted dying (not even a discussion) under false pretences. I believe it was deceitful of Maggie to invite MPs to a meeting about palliative care, but then to have different agenda, particularly in an environment where challenging or leaving would appear churlish and destructive.
Euthanasia debate starts up again by Adrien Taylor, 3news.co.nz (8/16/12) – The debate on whether euthanasia should be legalised in New Zealand is once again heating up as local and international campaigners gather in Wellington for a conference on the issue.
It’s an argument that provokes strong reactions and is bound to create fault lines in Parliament if Labour MP Maryan Street has her Private Member’s Bill to legalise drawn from the ballot.
“I think there are more people who want to be as self-determining at their end point as they have been during their life and I for one, don’t think they can be told they can’t be,” she says.
She says her End-of-Life Choice Bill would make it legal for those who are terminally ill, or have an irreversible medical condition, but are still mentally fit, the right to choose to die, and for assisting clinicians or family members to be protected from liability.
And she’s confident she’ll have the support of other MPs, if the bill gets drawn.
Barry denies undercover bid to derail suicide bill by Issac Davison, nzherald.co.nz (8/17/12) – National MP Maggie Barry has defended her new cross-party parliamentary group against accusations it was created solely to kill off a Labour MP’s bill to legalise assisted suicide.
Opposition MPs were furious that Ms Barry’s discussion group for palliative care focused only on arguments against euthanasia at its first meeting yesterday.
She was accused of using the all-parliamentary group on palliative care to derail Labour Party MP Maryan Street’s End of Life Choice Bill.
Palliative Care and Euthanasia – Kiwiblog (8/17/12) – So palliative care is not an alternative to euthanasia in all cases. And where it is an alternative – it should be a choice for the dying person. I do not think it is the role of the state to tell people they can not end their lives if they are in agony. The role of the state should be to put in place rigorous safeguards around those decisions.
Comfort in the option of a dignified death by Kathryn Powley and Susan Edmunds – nzherald.co.nz (8/19/12) – As the country debates the rights and wrongs of assisted suicide, Kathryn Powley remembers the death of her mother – and asks how it might have been different – while Susan Edmunds looks at the proposed euthanasia bill.
I stroked him as he lay there calmly. I held his little paw as the needle went in, and I kept holding it as he closed his eyes for the last time. And that was that.
I felt relief and was surprised that Huckle seemed to feel nothing. He just went to sleep.
There was no dying gasp. No nothing. Just there one minute, gone the next. It was one of the best decisions I’ve ever made, and whenever I think of that moment I wonder why my lovely Mum couldn’t have had the luxury of such a calm, peaceful passing.
Mum died in North Haven Hospice, in Whangarei, 3 months after a sudden, out-of-the-blue diagnosis of terminal bowel cancer. It had spread to her liver and nothing could be done.
She had so much to do, so many plans, so many trips overseas she had yet to take. She’d worked and saved so hard. Now this? “Just knock me on the head,” she’d say. And she meant it. “I could drive the car off a cliff,” she’d say. And she meant that, too.
Although she hated what she’d been reduced to, she never made peace with the fact she was dying. She simply didn’t want to leave us. Her will to stay was battling with her desire to go.
Mum breathed her final, laboured breath on January 11, 2005, in the wee hours in North Haven Hospice with me, Sarah and Andrew beside her.
It was sad, but it was a relief. But I will always wish that her passing, with her blessing, could have been as peaceful and dignified as her beloved Huckle’s.
Editorial: Euthanasia bill under fire – Waikato Times (8/20/12) – The group would have created no fuss (and might have attracted little attention) except that Ms Barry’s primary motivation was reported to be opposition to assisted suicide as an alternative for seriously ill patients. Euthanasia should not be considered as an alternative, she said, because the standard of healthcare for New Zealanders with terminal and chronic illnesses is so high.
Ms Barry, too, denounced Ms Street’s measure as a terrible bill that failed to protect vulnerable patients.
Perhaps it is. But euthanasia is not being promoted to replace palliative care. The purpose is to allow a dying person to make that choice under strict conditions. That’s consistent with National Party principles. Among them, National aims to build a society based on values that include individual freedom and choice and personal responsibility. Ms Barry should brush up on them.
Bigmouth Maggie strikes again: An Auckland minute by Richard Boock – AucklandNow (8/21/12) – May I just say I’m pleased Maggie Barry’s parents received top-class palliative care before their deaths. That’s a good outcome. But for the National Party MP to use the experience as the basis for her stand against voluntary euthanasia inflates an already well-established sense of conceit to startling new levels. According to Barry, since her folks escaped a nightmarish end to their lives, there’s no reason why everyone else can’t as well.
Or, in other words, there’s no need for euthanasia.
Euthanasia already happening in hospitals– PM by Michael Forbes – stuff.co.nz (8/21/12) – Prime Minister John Key says euthanasia already happens in our hospitals – and if he was terminally ill, he would consider it.
Doctors disagreed with him last night, saying his view of the situation was too simplistic.
Mr Key said yesterday that he could understand the argument that legalising euthanasia might put pressure on the elderly to end their lives early, in the face of “rapacious grandkids”, but “I don’t really buy that argument”.
“I think there’s a lot of euthanasia that effectively happens in our hospitals,” he told Newstalk ZB.
“. . . If I had terminal cancer, I had a few weeks to live, I was in tremendous amount of pain – if they just effectively wanted to turn off the switch and legalise that by legalising euthanasia, I’d want that.”
Labour MP Maryan Street is drafting a member’s bill to legalise euthanasia – and the emotive subject is already sparking debate even before it is in the ballot.
Mr Key signalled his broad support for euthanasia, but said he was not sure if he could support Ms Street’s bill, which looked likely to have some “quirks” that he did not agree with.
“So I may or may not vote for that bill, [but] the broader principle I support.”
Patient’s wishes paramount– Opinion: Otago Daily Times (8/21/12) – As admirable as palliative care practitioners are, I find there is something disturbing in their zealous obsession that a patient whose life philosophy is different from their own, needs re-education on their deathbed.
Such a patient must, according to Prof Ilora Finlay, be a “control freak” or they must have been subtly coerced by family and society to consider themselves “burdensome”.
They now need to learn that they are valued – as proven by disregarding their wishes. If only palliative care practitioners could accept their patients as they are, they could do even more good than the considerable good they already do.
John Key ‘broadly supports’ voluntary euthanasia by John Key (8/23/12) – …director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, Ian Powell, did not think euthanasia was occurring the way Mr Key made out.
“The situation is much more complex than that,” he told local media.
“Sometimes continuing a treatment can prolong the agony for a patient, and not even keep the patient alive.
“By not prolonging the agony . . . even though the intent is not for the patient to die, it is sometimes a consequence.”
PM’s ‘misguided’ euthanasia views anger palliative care specialists by Claire Trevett – nzherald.co.nz (8/24/12) -The comments have angered hospice and palliative care specialists. Sinead Donnelly, New Zealand chairwoman of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine, said Mr Key had misrepresented the care of terminal patients.
“His personal opinion given as Prime Minister has serious negative consequences in the trust people have in hospital care of the seriously ill.”
She said it was not considered euthanasia to abide by a patient’s right to refuse treatment or if treatment to alleviate symptoms had the unintended consequence of hastening death.
She said the society agreed with the Medical Association’s position on euthanasia, which was that doctor-assisted suicide or euthanasia was unethical – and even if it was legalised it would continue to be unethical.
Euthanasia claim sparks anger by Bronwyn Torrie (8/24/12) – Angry doctors are appalled at Prime Minister John Key’s claims that euthanasia already happens in hospitals.
“We never practise euthanasia; euthanasia is the deliberate ending of life, and is illegal and unethical,” Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine chairwoman Sinead Donnelly said.
Mr Key’s comments could seriously damage the trust people had in hospital care of the seriously ill, the Wellington doctor said.
Mr Key signalled his broad support for euthanasia – medical assistance to die – during a stint on Newstalk ZB this week.
Euthanasia clinic touted for Fiji by Michael Field – stuff.co.nz (8/24/12) – Fiji is considering opening a euthanasia clinic where seriously ill Australians and New Zealanders can fly to for assisted suicides, Australian euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke says.
He has told the Age in Melbourne that the centre he proposes in the tourist city of Nadi would be like a similar clinic in Switzerland, where about 1000 foreigners have died since 1998.
In a proposal sent to military regime appointed attorney-general, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, Dr Nitschke said Fiji could generate “considerable income” with demand expected to come from people in Australia, New Zealand, Asia and India, who do not have access to physician-assisted suicide.
Key euthanasia claim ‘wrong’ by Alexia Johnston – stuff.co.nz (8/24/12) – Ms Ligtenberg, who is also a Green Party spokesperson, said her comments were based on her own views, not those of her nursing colleagues.
She said she understood that, in some palliative care cases, it was possible that patients were given extra pain medication “to make them less aware” of how ill they were in their final days. However, she did not regard that practice to be euthanasia.
“Euthanasia … is not happening because it’s illegal, but what goes on when you look at palliative care is that possibly people are getting [an increase in pain] medication, so they don’t feel the pain.
“You increase the medication – it’s not the medication as such that causes death.”
Key’s euthanasia view ill-informed: doctor by Eileen Goodwin – Otago Daily times (8/26/12) – Those wishing to shorten their lives with euthanasia are trying to control what should be a natural process, Otago Community Hospice palliative care registrar Dr Louise Bremer says.
She said Prime Minister John Key’s view aired this week was “simplistic” and “ill-informed”.
Dr Bremer, who also works at Dunedin Hospital as a physician in medical oncology, said euthanasia was not performed in either hospices or hospitals in New Zealand.
Doctors never caused or hastened death, she said.
Through working closely with the patient, clinicians did not extend life unduly, which did not constitute any form of hastened death, she said.
Communication with the patient was critical.
While some patients requested an end to their pain and suffering, this generally was a call for some form of relief, rather than death itself.
She believed people had become used to controlling every aspect of their lives, and this was behind calls for legalising euthanasia.
Key admits euthanasia comments ‘sloppy’ by Danya Levy – TheDominion Post (8/27/12) – Prime Minister John Key has backed away from his comments about euthanasia, saying his language on the sensitive issue was “a bit sloppy”.
Key last week said euthanasia already happened in our hospitals – and if he was terminally ill, he would consider it.
The comment angered doctors who said euthanasia was never practised as it was the deliberate ending of life, and was illegal and unethical.
The suggestion could seriously damage the trust people had in hospital care of the terminally ill, doctors said.
Rodney on Euthanasia – Kiwiblog (8/27/12) – Up until reading this account some years ago, I had been slightly anti-euthanasia. Coming from a medical family I did not like the idea of doctors ever having a role in ending life rather than preserving it. But I realised how selfish that preference was, when I read the awful choice the current law forced on people like Martin. No one should ever have been forced into having to make the choice he did.
Skill levels better in palliative care by Teuila Fuatai – Bay of Plenty Times (8/29/12) – Legalising euthanasia could cut short people’s lives who may be unaware of advances in palliative care, a Tauranga doctor warns.
Waipuna Hospice chief executive Dr Richard Thurlow told the Bay of Plenty Times patients sometimes wished they had the option of physician-assisted suicide. But that was before they realised the options available with palliative care.
“The level of palliative care in the last seven years alone has developed hugely.
“The skills of the medics and the understanding and the knowledge of all the associated disciplines … has meant the level of care has improved dramatically.”
Dr Thurlow’s comments follow remarks by prime minister John Key on Newstalk ZB last week.
Debate clouding hospice role by Imran Ali – The Northern Advocate (8/31/12) – The importance of easing the suffering of dying Northlanders is being lost in the debate on euthanasia, Northland hospice staff say.
Their comments followed remarks by Prime Minister John Key that a lot of euthanasia happened in hospitals and that if he was terminally ill he would want euthanasia legalised so doctors could “turn off the switch”.
Palliative care, for those affected by a life-limiting condition, can be provided by specialists or non-specialist staff such as GPs and community health teams.
Peter Bassett, general manager of Whangarei’s North Haven Hospice, said euthanasia was not happening in New Zealand hospitals but good palliative care was.
** ** **
Euthanasia – luxury for the wealthy– pravada.ru (8/18/12) – The topic of euthanasia does not leave anyone indifferent. Voluntary withdrawal from life due to serious illness for some people is a grievous sin, for others – the only escape from suffering.
It should be noted that many critics of the law referred to its social injustice. Euthanasia is not cheap, which means that patients from poor families will not be able to die quickly and painlessly. However, it became clear that less wealthy Americans are not particularly inclined to interrupt their tortures with drugs. Euthanasia, according to recent studies in the U.S., attracts financially sound white people with good education.
According to The New York Times, the supporters of euthanasia do not choose it because of the pain, but because they want to control their death as well as they can control their lives.
“Likely, the practice of euthanasia in some form will be implemented in the world. In Russia euthanasia is illegal, and I now fully agree with that, and not on logistical grounds, but because the meaning of medical practice is to provide life and the patient’s health, and the killing as a way to treat the pain may not be acceptable. There is no pain that cannot be managed. This practice may cause psychological pressure on the elderly, for example, because of financial reasons.
But since there is an issue, and the question arises about its implementation, it should not be the issue of the medical community. This may be a special procedure performed by some social workers. Of course, I would caution to call euthanasia of a seriously ill person a murder, because there is no offense if all procedures are followed.”
** ** **
It is time for politicians to take a more enlightened view of assisted dying– heraldscotland.com (8/25/12) – In June 2012, a significant development took place in Vancouver, when the Supreme Court ruled that the Canadian criminal code, which prohibits physician-assisted death, violated fundamental rights of equality, life and liberty. The wisdom lying behind that judgment is profound. Terminally ill individuals who experience intolerable suffering now have the opportunity to bring that legally and humanely to an end. The court was satisfied that commonly-advanced reasons for denying them relief, including the protection of the vulnerable and damage to the trust patients invest in doctors, could be properly answered, if that was allowed in highly constrained circumstances.
While it is widely recognised that Switzerland permits doctors to practise euthanasia and extends this to foreign nationals with the financial means (about £10,000) to avail themselves of that option, it is less well known that other jurisdictions, including Oregon and Washington in the US and the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg in Europe, also take a more enlightened view of assisted dying than we do.
In 2011 MSPs in Holyrood rejected any change to the law concerning assistance at the end of life. However, in the near future Margo MacDonald will introduce a Bill again seeking to amend the legislation.
** ** **
Assisted suicide firm Dignitas to sue Swiss police for reviving terminally ill woman who fell asleep during procedure by Martin Robinson in MailOnline (8/16/12) – The world’s foremost euthanasia clinic, Dignitas, is to sue the Swiss police after their officers tried to revive a terminally ill woman who fell asleep during an assisted suicide.
Police stopped the procedure near Zurich after the patient lost consciousness after only consuming half the drugs meant to kill her, and therefore officers assumed that her suicide attempt had failed.
The unnamed woman was meant to finish the lethal cocktail of barbiturates and police say their rules state that if a patient is still alive two hours after taking the drugs they will call an ambulance.
Following the intervention the woman in her 60s, who was suffering from a genetic disease and weighed only five stone, was rushed to hospital were she later died.
Under Swiss law, a state official – usually a police officer – must be present to monitor proceedings when an assisted suicide is being conducted.
And Dignitas now want the police to be prosecuted for ‘interfering in a legal assisted suicide’ and ‘abducting a patient’ during the incident on August 2.
** ** **
Euthanasia and the Death Penalty: a dilemma by Andre Langlois – HuffPost Lifestyle UK (8/1/12) – I don’t believe the dilemma is inescapable. A similar argument can be made against other laws, such as motoring laws, and assisted dying is certainly about facilitating individual freedom. But when it comes to the state facilitating death, my opposition to the death penalty strikes an uneasy contrast with my support for assisted dying.
Assisted dying debate: promoting patient choice – Kennedy-law.com article (8/8/12) – On 3 July 2012 the All Party Parliamentary Group on Choice at the End of Life (the APPG) in partnership with the charity, Dignity in Dying, published a consultation on a draft Bill entitled “Safeguarding Choice: A draft Assisted Dying Bill”. Whilst this draft Bill is not written (or sponsored) by a government department and is, therefore, unlikely to be taken forward as draft legislation in the near future, its publication provides the opportunity to engage in the assisted dying debate.
There’ll be no happy ending for us… please just let my father die in peace by Sophie Goodchild, London Evening Standard (8/15/12) – The daughter of a man with “locked in” syndrome today made an emotional final plea for him to end his life peacefully.
Lauren Nicklinson, 25, said her severely disabled father Tony will have to starve himself to death unless doctors are allowed to help him die.
The High Court will reveal tomorrow whether the stroke victim, 58, has won his bid to challenge Britain’s euthanasia laws. He wants doctors to be able to end his life without fear of being sent to jail.
Assisted suicide comment: euthanasia puts vulnerable at risk, argues Rev Dr Brendan McCarthy in The Telegraph (8/16/12) – It is a tragedy that Mr Nicklinson has suffered a stroke, resulting in ‘locked in syndrome’, but it would also be a tragedy if, in a desire to address his needs, others were placed at unjustifiable risk. Sometimes, even with a heavy heart, it is necessary to make a tough decision in order to protect those who most need protection.
That is, in part, the role of the state and the role of the law.
Rev Dr Brendan McCarthy is the National Adviser on medical ethics and health and social care policy to the Church of England’s Archbishops’ Council.
Assisted suicide comment: the dying should have advice from professionals – The Telegraph (8/16/12) – Two cases of patients with locked-in syndrome, AM and Tony Nicklinson, were heard in the High Court in June, and the court will rule on both today. While these cases may appear similar on the surface; they are actually very different, and in fact challenge different laws.
Should AM succeed, doctors and patients will be clearer about what discussions they can and can’t have about end of life choices, and should Nicklinson win his case the current inflexibility of murder law will have to be addressed.
UK denies right-to-die legal challenge by Maria Cheng, HuffPost Tech (8/16/12) – Britain’s High Court on Thursday rejected an attempt by a man who has locked-in syndrome to overturn the country’s euthanasia law by refusing to legally allow doctors to end his life.
“Locked-in” sufferer’s challenge to ban on voluntary euthanasia fails in high court by Rosalind English, UK Human Rights Blog (8/16/12) – Lord Justice Toulson, sitting with Mrs Justice Royce and Mrs Justice Macur, has handed down judgment in the case of Tony Nicklinson and that of another “locked-in” syndrome sufferer, “Martin”. On all the issues, they have deferred to parliament to take the necessary steps to address the problems created by the current law of murder and assisted suicide.
U.K. court denies euthanasia requests from two men with locked-in syndrome,CBS News (8/16/12) – Tony Nicklinson, a man with “locked-in syndrome,” has been denied by a British court his wish to die from physician-assisted euthanasia.
Britain’s High Court on Thursday rejected Nicklinson’s and another man’s attempts to overturn the country’s euthanasia law by refusing to legally allow doctors to end his life.
UK doctors ‘perform euthanasia’– top Dutch medic by Anna Holligan, BBC News Europe (8/16/12) – In the Netherlands euthanasia has been legal for a decade. Some Dutch medical experts say Tony Nicklinson’s case is a “textbook example” of why people should be given the right to decide when they die.
According to Dr Kruseman, “if the only possibility is death by euthanasia it’s the responsibility you have for your patient when they are experiencing unbearable suffering”.
Commenting on the doctor’s claim, a spokesperson for the British Medical Association (BMA) said: “We are opposed to the legalisation of assisted dying and we are not lobbying for any change in the law in the UK.
“Assisted dying is illegal in the UK, so doctors are not permitted to carry out euthanasia.”
The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) says that in the absence of an open debate the practice will go on, but in a covert and unregulated manner.
RCP comment on assisted dying case (8/16/12) – Commenting on today’s judgment in the Tony Nicklinson assisted dying case, Professor John Saunders, Chair of the RCP’s Ethics Committee, said:
‘The Royal College of Physicians does not support a change in the law on assisted dying. It remains illegal for doctors to intentionally and deliberately terminate the life of someone who is not terminally ill. A survey of RCP fellows and members in 2006 showed that doctors were not in favour of a change in the law to allow them to do this.
‘A change in the law would also have severe implications for the way society views disabled people.’
Assisted dying: the harm in helping by Sarah Wollaston, guardian.co.uk (8/17/12) – t isn’t just the religious lobby that is opposed to a change in the law to allow assisted suicide. I have no faith banner to raise, and as a former doctor I know there are conditions for which I might at some point wish to end my life. Despite this, I don’t believe I should have a right to make a doctor complicit in that decision.
I wasn’t shocked that thoughts of assisted suicide had floated into her mind. Because it floats into my mind every time there’s another heartbreak landmark legal battle trumpeting through the newspaper. Nor was I shocked that she’d addressed her thoughts to me. We are both of an age where assisted suicide is something you have to take a view on, like early retirement or selling up and trading down.
Analysis: Britain’s options for legalizing euthanasia by Louise Bazalgette, politics.co.uk (8/20/12) – In their ruling, the judges were clear that: “It is not for the court to decide whether the law about assisted dying should be changed and, if so, what safeguards should be put in place. Under our system of government these are matters for parliament to decide, representing society as a whole, after parliamentary scrutiny, and not for the court on the facts of an individual case or cases.”
This is not surprising as previous legal precedents, such as Diane Pretty’s case at the European court of human rights (ECHR) in 2002, have confirmed that the legal position of assisted dying is a matter for national law and cannot simply be overturned on the basis that it infringes an individual’s human rights.
Locked-in man devastated at ruling– Cambridge-news.co.uk (8/20/12) – Lord Justice Toulson, Mr Justice Royce and Mrs Justice Macur, while expressing deep sympathy for their plight, unanimously agreed that it would be wrong for the court to depart from the long-established legal position that “voluntary euthanasia is murder, however understandable the motives may be”.
Refusing the stricken men judicial review, they agreed that the current law did not breach human rights and it was for Parliament, not the courts, to decide whether it should be changed. Any changes would need “the most carefully structured safeguards which only Parliament can deliver”.
Assisted dying: simple, neat – and wrong – spked-online.com (8/20/12) – At first, Tony Nicklinson’s case seems obvious. Having suffered a massive stroke in 2005, Nicklinson – a former civil engineer who once enjoyed an active lifestyle – was left almost completely paralysed, in a state referred to as ‘locked-in syndrome’. He can only communicate by blinking or using limited head movement. He refers to his life now as ‘dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable’. Nicklinson would like the courts to offer immunity from prosecution if, in the future, he asked a doctor to kill him. Last week, the High Court in London ruled against his request.
As many observers agreed, it is his life and who are we – or the courts or parliament – to tell him what to do with it? We all have the right to commit suicide but those with locked-in syndrome need assistance. Nicklinson is quite visibly suffering and has been consistent in his wish to die, so why not allow him to do so?
Sympathy for one man must not change Britain’s law on assisted dying by Sameer Mallick – opendemocracy.net (8/20/12) – Assisted dying is illegal in the UK – a stance supported by the majority of the medical profession. In the face of harrowing cases such as that of Tony Nicklinson, it is important to remember that unwillingness to deviate from this law is not the symptom of a narrow prejudice but the result of a long and informed debate.
Perhaps a good starting point is to clarify the jargon, as the terms assisted dying, euthanasia and assisted suicide seem to be used interchangeably by mainstream media. The term assisted suicide describes the participation of an individual (usually a healthcare professional) helping a patient end their life. However the onus is on the patient to perform the final act of killing, such as self administering a lethal injection. This differs from euthanasia in which the ‘assistant’ performs the final act which ends a patient’s life. Both actions come under the overarching term known as assisted dying. Whilst the focus of lobby groups has been to legalise assisted suicide in the UK, the case of Tony Nicklinson is one in which, if successful, would have gone one step further and legalised euthanasia.
Coffee House Chat (UK) – Assisted suicide – your thoughts – thoughts from everyday people
Practical Ethics – Euthanasia and Human Rights – University of Oxford (8/21/12)
Locked in to euthanasia – mercatornet.com (8/21/12) – There can be no more difficult case for dispassionate discussion than the fate of Tony Nicklinson, a totally paralysed British man who wants to end his life. Last week the UK High Court denied his request for euthanasia. (video)
In Britain, ongoing struggles over laws regarding euthanasia by Simon Caldwell, Catholic News Service (8/22/12) – The Catholic Church, not wishing to see the debate presented as a struggle between faith and “progress,” is generally taking a back seat, but is listed as one among dozens of medical, disabled rights and religious charities that form the broad coalition of the Care Not Killing alliance.
Catholic doctors are more outspoken than church leaders, however, and in recent months some have taken huge risks with their careers to warn the public that a system designed to care for people in their final hours is operating effectively as a euthanasia pathway.
But if I went into the Nicklinsons’ specially adapted bungalow in the Wiltshire town of Melksham fundamentally opposed to any concessions on euthanasia, I emerged with my arguments demolished. And this by a man who had lost the power of speech.
Tony Nicklinson with wife Jane and daughters Beth and Lauren after the court decision.
Labour peer Lord Joel Joffe has joined other assisted dying campaigners in praising Melksham locked-in syndrome sufferer Tony Nicklinson.
Lord Joffe said his ‘incredible courage’ would eventually lead to a change in the law, under which those who help people end their lives currently face prosecution for murder.
“I think Tony Nicklinson’s incredible courage and determination has persuaded society the law must be changed to prevent terrible suffering,” said the peer.
“Tony correctly felt there needed to be a change in the law to permit him to end his life, and it is clear we do need a change in the law – the law must seek to find such a solution.
“MPs are not listening to society, their job is to take account of the views of their constituents and 80 per cent of the public is in favour of a change in the law.”
I subscribe to Google Alerts for articles about a number of topics including:
- advance healthcare directives
- assisted dying
- assisted suicide
- compassion in dying
- conscious dying
- death and dying
- death with dignity
- end of life
- near-death experiences
- physician assisted dying
- physician assisted suicide
These are the subjects I will be blogging about under Talking about Death and Dying. I started this section with a list of Articles, Books and Videos I thought would be of interest and I’m open to suggestions to add to it.
For those who wonder what the difference is between “assisted dying” and “assisted suicide,” the former is used by proponents of the Death With Dignity law, the latter by those who oppose it.
“A May 2005 Gallup Poll indicated that 75% of Americans support “euthanasia” for certain patients but only 58% support “doctor-assisted suicide” for the same patients. Use of the term “suicide” was the only difference in the question asked. The Gallup Poll conclusion was that the use of the word caused the apparent conflict in values. Opponents count on the negative emotional impact of the term. Calling it “suicide” or “murder” conjures up issues with religious beliefs and legalities that have nothing to do with personal choice at the end of life.” –from How to Die Consciously