Better off Dead documentary is available to be viewed on youtube

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Liz Carr is an actress, comedian and disability rights activist, who produced a documentary titled - Better off Dead? that was aired on BBC1 on May 14. Carr may be best known for her role as Clarissa Mullery on the BBC series Silent Witness.

Liz Carr's Better off Dead? is available for you to watch on youtube (youtube link).

Anna Moore who wrote an article for the Guardian explains Better off Dead?

Better Off Dead? takes a deep dive into assisted dying and disability. Carr believes the two can’t be separated. It’s disturbing, of course, but also life-affirming and darkly funny, which isn’t surprising; Carr was a standup comic for years. In the opening shots, she and her disabled friends remember the times they have been told they would be better off dead. One, Jamie Hale, has even had someone offer to kill him. (“And this wasn’t someone I was particularly close to,” he says.)

The film is also intensely personal. Carr looks back at her childhood and the impact of having her life turned upside down by a rare autoimmune condition at seven. It’s something she has been reluctant to share in the past. “Our perception of disability is that it’s the greatest tragedy to befall you and I don’t want to compound that,” she says. “But I did want to show that I do know how your life changes so hugely when you join that camp – the most unsexy, unfun, unglamorous group. Who’d want that?”

One of the people that Carr interviews in her film was Dr Ellen Wiebe, Canada's most prolific euthanasia doctor. 

Wiebe told Carr that nobody is more grateful than the patients that she has killed. Emira Tanatarova reported in the Daily Mail on May 15 on some of the comments from the BBC documentary viewers:

Enjoying her job a little too much I felt,' one wrote.

'She was extremely scary and oddly cheerful,' another added. 'But it might have been defensiveness which made her so very strange indeed.'

'Her eagerness and her excitement over grateful patients was unsettling,' one poster penned.

'Really eerie,' one comment read. 'Her job should bring feelings of solemnity, profoundness, sadness... anything but the weird euphoric state she seems to be in.'

Previous articles about Liz Carr:

• Better off Dead? documentary to be aired on BBC1 on May 14 (Link).
  
• Laws against assisted suicide provide equal protection (Link).
• Liz Carr address to Victoria Australia parliament on assisted suicide (Link).
• Disability activists say no to euthanasia bill (Link).

Urge Delaware Governor John Carney to veto assisted suicide Bill HB 140.

Governor John Carney

Everyone needs to contact Delaware Governor John Carney and urge him to veto assisted suicide Bill HB 140.

On June 25, 2024, the Delaware Senate passed assisted suicide bill HB 140 by a vote of 11 to 10.

In a 2022 interview, Governor Carney stated that he opposed assisted suicide. He stated:

“Ultimately, though, I believe enabling physicians to facilitate suicide crosses a boundary that I’m just not comfortable crossing.”

In the past, Alex Schadenberg called Governor Carney's office and was told that the assisted suicide bill was not on his desk yet.

We are not sure why the assisted suicide bill was delayed in getting to Governor Carney's desk but it has reached his desk and it must be vetoed.

Call Governor Carney at: 302-744-4101 or email him at: john.carney@delaware.gov

You can also contact him at his Wilmington Office at: 302-577-3210 

Stick to the basic talking points. Don't mix the issues. Assisted suicide is never a solution. It is never a good idea to give physicians the right in law to assist the suicide of their patients. We believe in caring for people, not killing.

More information:

• Delaware Governor Carney needs to veto assisted suicide Bill HB 140 to protect citizens in need of real care (Link).
• Delaware Governor John Carney needs to veto assisted suicide Bill HB 140 (Link)

UK "citizens jury" supported legalizing euthanasia, has ties to the euthanasia lobby.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Alex Schadenberg

Keir Starmer, the UK Prime Minister,  announced that he may fast-track the legalization of euthanasia in the UK. This response came after the release of a pro-euthanasia report from a "citizens jury" that called for the legization of euthanasia.

On September 12 I published a criticism of the citizens jury report by the Care Not Killing Alliance. One of the criticisms stated (Link to CNK article):

Disappointingly, we note that the Director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics was formerly Director of Compassion in Dying, the charitable arm of Dignity in Dying which campaigns for assisted suicide. Additionally, a leading Council member was previously chair of Compassion in Dying, and the project was funded by a group which has also funded another leading pro-assisted suicide campaign organisation.

It is significant that Danielle Hamm, the director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics is a former director of Compassion in Dying, which is the charitable arm of the Dignity in Dying the leading euthanasia lobby group in the UK.

It is also significant that A B Charitable Trust which, in the past, funded a Humanist Association euthanasia campaign was the same group to cover the cost of the "citizens jury."

It is also significant that the "citizens jury" supported child euthanasia.

This is a set-up. Instead of marching our the same old faces offering the same old rhetoric, choose a "jury" of "average" citizens and them to agree to the same old rhetoric.

Will the media let the response of 28 people who were picked by a pro-euthanasia campaign team change the course of history in the UK?

A recent UK poll found that UK citizens believe that there are - too many complicating factors to safely implement a euthansasia law (Link).

Join the Zoom event with Amanda Achtman (September 25) - Dying To Meet You.

Amanda Achtman

Register for the Zoom event with Amanda Achtman who has been studying, travelling and speaking about re-humanizing the culture and preventing euthanasia.

Amanda will share her mission and her goals and relate them with stories and experiences to how we can change the culture.

The Zoom event is on Wednesday, September 25 at 2 pm (Eastern Time).

Register in advance for the meeting: (Registration Link)
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

Amanda states:

Now we do not so much have a culture of death as we have death without culture.

That's why we need a better cultural conversation - one that explores death as an occasion for discovering who and what we truly are.

I am convinced that artistic beauty, humanizing storytelling, and edifying examples are critical to restoring our cultural health when it comes to our experiences of death and dying.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition encourages people to become active in their community, with friends and family and to share hope. EPC opposes euthanasia and assisted suicide, as we oppose killing people. We support a culture of care, such as Compassionate Community Care and Dying To Meet You initiatives.

Pro-assisted suicide committee (UK) publishes report.

Care Not Killing responds to Nuffield Council on Bioethics disappointing project on assisted suicide and euthanasia

Responding to the news that England’s first Citizens’ Jury on so-called assisted dying will report tomorrow, Dr Gordon Macdonald, CEO for Care Not Killing commented: 

“Disappointingly, we note that the Director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics was formerly Director of Compassion in Dying, the charitable arm of Dignity in Dying which campaigns for assisted suicide. Additionally, a leading Council member was previously chair of Compassion in Dying, and the project was funded by a group which has also funded another leading pro-assisted suicide campaign organisation.

“That’s before we get to the selection criteria. A jury in a court of law must be rigorously impartial with no strong views about the case they are judging. This does not appear to be the case with this exercise, indeed, from the methodology which is being published today, two thirds of the panel (65 per cent) were either in favour or strongly in favour of changing the law on assisted suicide and euthanasia before taking any evidence. So, what could have been a serious contribution to this important debate seemingly fails the impartiality test.

“Perhaps this is why the results also run contrary to recent polling carried out under British Polling Council guidelines which concluded that a clear majority (56 per cent) of the public who expressed a view supporting assisted dying/assisted suicide in principle do not believe that the current laws preventing assisted suicide or euthanasia can be implemented safely.”

Dr Gordon Macdonald

The polling, carried out earlier this year by Whitestone Insight also found:

• A majority feel that if assisted dying is legalised in the UK, patients should have the legal right to choose to be treated by doctors and other health professionals who have opted out of participating in it.
• Legalising assisted dying/assisted suicide is not a political priority for most people. Legalising assisted dying/assisted suicide ranked 23 out of 24 of issues that need attention, with “regulating AI” and “international trade deals” ranking higher. Only four per cent thought it should be a priority for politicians. 
• 60 per cent of those surveyed worried that legalising AD/AS would fundamentally change the relationship between doctor and patient, including more than half (51 per cent) of those who support AD/AD. 
• Seven in 10 (70 per cent) said that assistance in dying in countries like Canada and the Netherlands, where young people with no terminal illness are helped to die, has gone too far. This rose to more than eight in 10 (84 per cent) when those who answered ‘don’t know’ were discounted. 
• Young people reject assisted dying/assisted suicide more than do any other age group. Fewer than half (44 per cent) of 18–24-year-olds supported legalising assisted dying/assisted suicide. 
• A clear majority – 56 per cent – voiced fears that legalising assisted suicide would lead to a culture where suicide becomes more normalised than it is today. This rose to 67 per cent when those who answered “don’t know” were omitted. 
• Similarly, 43 per cent fear that introducing assisted suicide when the NHS and Social Care budget is under such pressure would inevitably place an incentive on health professionals to encourage some people to end their lives early.
  

Dr Macdonald concluded: 

“At a time when we see how quickly the safeguards in countries like Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands have been eroded so disabled people and those with mental health problems, even eating disorders are now being euthanised, I would strongly urge the Government to focus on fixing our broken palliative care system that sees up to one in four Brits who would benefit from this type of care being unable to access it, rather than discussing again this dangerous and ideological policy. With suicides in the UK being at record levels financial worries and the NHS in crisis, now is not the time to encourage or facilitate more suicides by legalising assisted suicide and euthanasia.” 

For more information please contact Alistair Thompson of Team Britannia PR on: 07970 162225 or by email: alistair@teambritanniapr.com

Australian Coroner's report after man dies from his wife's assisted suicide drugs.

Man died ingesting his wife's lethal assisted suicide drugs.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Julius Dennis reported for ABC News Australia that:

A coroner has found Queensland's voluntary assisted dying laws are not "well-considered" after an elderly man took his own life using drugs prescribed for his partner.

Coroner David O'Connell has recommended a health professional be present every time a deadly substance is administered.

Dennis reported that Coroner O'Connell criticized the assisted suicide law after a man died taking the assisted suicide poison that was prescribed for his wife. The news article states that the man's wife was approved for assisted suicide and had received the lethal poison but on May 8 she went to the hospital where she passed away before taking the lethal substance. Her husband was required to return the medication within 14 days but he died on May 16 after ingesting it.

Dennis reported the findings by Coroner O'Connell:

Mr O'Connell said the inquest established a person underwent fewer identity checks to become a contact person than he did entering a Brisbane nightclub.

"The fact that ABC had been medically diagnosed with depression and took medication was not something the VAD authorities considered, or even enquired on, when approving them to be a Contact Person. Indeed, there are simply no checks or enquiries of the Contact Person's suitability," he said.

O'Connell found further problems with the law. Dennis reported:

Mr O'Connell said the inquest heard evidence of "a number of 'near misses' … where various people have required the intervention of a health practitioner administer a supplementary IV VAD dosage to ensure a patient's death".

This included one patient who had alcohol before taking the drug and threw up some of the substance.

O'Connell concluded that there should always be a health professional present when a person takes lethal assisted suicide drugs.

Dennis concluded the article by stating:

Health Minister Shannon Fentiman said the government would consider the coroner's recommendations.

The better response is to prohibit assisted suicide. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition has always warned that these laws lack effective oversight. Once a person has received the lethal poison, anyone could die taking it. Also, what happens to the lethal poison when a person dies without ingesting the lethal poison?

I wonder how often this same scenario has happened in the US? Not one of the American assisted suicide laws require oversight of the law. 

Anita Cameron: I Still Wouldn’t Want Assisted Suicide

This article was published by Not Dead Yet on September 4, 2024.

Anita Cameron (center)

By Anita Cameron
Directory of Minority Outreach, Not Dead Yet

Two weeks ago I went to the ER in extreme pain. Normally, I live with level ten pain. I’ve gotten used to it. In a flare, I’ve learned not to moan or cry out.

But this pain, which started out as a small annoyance, spread and went down my spine, then, into my chest and abdomen, became unbearable. I had to go to the ER.

I’m usually treated as a drug seeker when I go in, even though I’m allergic to all opioids and opiates. But blood tests showed cardiac enzymes in my blood and they admitted me.

While in hospital, I experienced a frightening event. My pain level was so high that it caused my blood pressure to skyrocket to 240/120. The pain was so bad that it was literally putting stress on my heart and my heart was about to give out. There were at least 10 doctors and nurses in the room, working to get my pain level, and thus, my blood pressure, down. In desperation, doctors decided to give me Dilaudid, a medication that I am allergic to, and Benadryl, than risk me having a heart attack.

I didn’t realize pain could do that to one’s body.

Even with the unrelenting pain that I have been going through, I still don’t want to die. I want my doctors to think outside the box, as they did that day. They tried other pain meds, which did nothing, then, made the decision to give me a pain medicine that I’m allergic to because they could deal with the allergic reaction; they could not deal with me having a heart attack.

If people are afraid of dying in pain, why not fight for better access to pain management and palliative care so that this won’t happen? This tells me that it’s not about dying in pain, it’s about the right to die, itself, and the proponents are so into themselves that they cannot recognize that assisted suicide laws put people in danger. The right to die becomes the duty to die, especially if you are from a marginalized community.

Now, having experienced pain that can take my life, I’m on a mission to keep that pain at bay. But, in doing so, I’m exposing myself to the racist practices of pain clinics that refuse to prescribe opioid and opiates to their patients. Black women, especially, are not given correct amounts of effective pain medications to manage our pain. I asked my doctor to indicate in my records that I live with pain, and what happened when the pain got too bad. It was explained to me that until I’m assigned a doctor, no one will see that information, meaning that as usual, because I’m Black, I’ll be treated as a drug seeker even though I’m allergic to almost everything. 

Why do assisted suicide proponents fight for assisted suicide while saying that they support palliative care and pain management? Because once again, it’s not about pain or the fear of it. It about the right to die. They use fear of pain as the catch, to bring you in because nobody wants to die in pain, but it’s really about them not wanting to be disabled because they feel that is undignified. They don’t want to live the life of being disabled, so they use pain as an excuse to push their right to die agenda.

Even as I was going through this incredible pain, I wasn’t thinking, “let me die”. I was thinking, “stop this pain so I don’t die”! I was literally thinking, “I don’t want assisted suicide, I want pain-free, or at least, manageable pain that can be addressed.”

When whole communities of marginalized people aren’t getting the healthcare we need, access to pain treatment that isn’t steeped in racism, and cardiac, diabetes, cancer and other treatments that aren’t steeped in racism, how can you support assisted suicide?

As this is normalized, meaning more and more states pass assisted suicide laws, we’re going to see a frightening trend of marginalized people requesting assisted suicide because they were “convinced” that it’s a good thing by family members or doctors.

As long as there are marginalized communities who deal with healthcare disparities, there is no place for assisted suicide anywhere in this country.

Previous articles related to Anita Cameron (Articles Link).

Assisted suicide has hidden harms.

Dr Kion Hoffman wrote this opinion article for the Duluth News Tribune who published it on September 7, 2024.

Dr Kion Hoffman

As a family practice physician with 35 years of experience, I’ve had many conversations with patients about their fears as they approach the ends of their lives. A common concern is they don't want to be a burden to their families. This is a natural fear, but it is one that should be met with compassion, not with the option of physician-assisted suicide.

The legalization of physician-assisted suicide in Minnesota would be a dangerous step. It would quickly move from being an option to an obligation for many vulnerable individuals. The pressure to choose physician-assisted suicide could come from the fear of being a burden, the desire to avoid the high costs of long-term care, or the perceived expectation from others that physician-assisted suicide is the right thing to do. This could create a dangerous environment where those who are most vulnerable are given the impression their lives are no longer worth living.

Families, in my experience, rarely see their loved ones as burdens. On the contrary, caring for a family member at the end of life often becomes a deeply meaningful experience. It is a time for expressing love, for forgiveness, and for reconciling relationships that may have been strained. These moments of care and connection are precious and irreplaceable, and they should not be cut short by a premature decision to end life.

I can speak to this from personal experience. My father, a man who lived an active life well into his 80s, struggled deeply when he lost his physical abilities. In his frustration, he asked several doctors to help him end his life. If physician-assisted suicide had been legal, I fear someone might have complied with his request. Instead, we had three more years with him. During that time, my youngest brother and my father had some time together that they needed. My father continued to bring joy to those around him, even while living in a nursing home. His life was still valuable and still full of moments that mattered. His pain was managed, and he died naturally at the age of 92, with me holding his hand.

Legalizing physician-assisted suicide would rob families of these precious, final moments. It would send a message to those who are suffering that their lives are not worth living.

There are many ways to make the end of life more comfortable and even meaningful. Physician-assisted suicide is not the answer. For the sake of our elders, our families, and our community, when this issue comes up again at the Minnesota Legislature, please let your representative and state senator know how you feel.

Dr. Kion Hoffman is a family-practice physician in Cohasset. He wrote this for the News Tribune.

Quebec Approves Euthanasia by Advanced Request as of October 30.

Dear colleagues and friends,

You probably heard on Saturday, September 7 that as of October 30, Quebec will allow medical assistance in dying by advance request for people diagnosed with an illness leading to incapacity.

The fear of living with a neurocognitive disorder, in a health care system that is already failing to address the needs of seniors, has brought Quebec to the point where people’s lives will be ended without their requesting it and without their consent. Advance consent to MAiD at the time of diagnosis has very little in common with the free and informed consent that medical ethics requires.

Consent, the pillar of the campaign for MAiD ten years ago, is being flouted in the case of our most vulnerable citizens, seniors with impaired cognition. They should not be euthanized when they are most in need of protection. There is so much that can be done to allow them a dignified and happy end of life; what we lack are the resources to do it.

Which doctors will advise a patient newly diagnosed with neurocognitive disorder to advance their death, pretending that they can foresee their future and know what they will want?

Which doctors will lethally inject patients who can neither request nor refuse it, because of a document they signed years earlier, driven by fear and with who knows what degree of understanding?

We will not. We can do better.

***

The media coverage of the news is largely ignoring the voices of prudence, just as the National Assembly ignored them when the law was adopted last year.

Here are two exceptions: Dr. Félix Pageau, geriatrician, and Nicole Poirier, founder and director of Maison Carpe Diem in Trois-Rivières.

Please make your voice heard, by articles and letters to media, and in your professional environment.

Feel free to write to us if you need ideas or help.

Sincerely, Catherine Ferrier, MD

Physicians’ Alliance against euthanasia
61, avenue de Vimy
Montréal QC H3S 2P9
info@collectifmedecins.org