Showing posts with label Misdiagnosis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Misdiagnosis. Show all posts

Thursday, February 13, 2025

Misdiagnosis exposes a key flaw with assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The UK is debating the legalization of assisted suicide. An article by Peter Sefton-Williams that was published in the Spectator on February 11, 2025 concerns him being misdiagnosed with Motor Neurone Disease (MND) in January 2024.

Sefton-Williams tells his own story. He states:

Perhaps the strongest argument against the reintroduction of capital punishment is the possibility that mistakes, once made, cannot be rectified. In the 20th century, such errors – even with legal safeguards in place – were not uncommon. Infamous cases, such as those of Timothy Evans and George Kelly, are a testament to that. It is ironic, therefore, that MPs who would strongly oppose capital punishment can, at the same time, enthusiastically support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill brought before parliament by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater.

The same argument applies. If a mistake is made, and a person opts for assisted dying based on incorrect information, that mistake cannot later be rectified. Supporters of the Bill talk about the rigorous safeguards that would surround the decision-making process. But, as with the legal protections surrounding capital punishment, these can fail. It’s also deeply troubling to learn this morning that one of the key safeguards in the Assisted Dying Bill – that cases have to be signed off by the High Court – may no longer apply.

Sefton-Williams tells his personal story:

For me, this is no theoretical debate. In January 2024, I was diagnosed with suspected Motor Neurone Disease (MND). Three months later, this diagnosis was confirmed. I was suffering badly from fasciculations (or twitching and cramping) in my hands and arms, and I had noticeable weakness and muscle wastage in my right hand.

The first doctor who diagnosed my condition did so after a barrage of tests and said that, although he had written “suspected” in my report, he wanted me to know that there was no doubt about the diagnosis. He explained there was no single, definitive test for MND, so he would send me to a senior specialist at a London teaching hospital for a second opinion. He also told me there was no cure and that death usually came between eighteen months and four years after diagnosis, but that the end could come much more quickly. Finally, he advised me not to make any plans beyond six months.

The senior specialist to whom I was referred examined me at the start of April and confirmed the diagnosis. He told me that, while I could live for a further five years, he had known cases where people had died within two months of diagnosis. Both doctors also warned that the degree of muscle wastage in my hand suggested I had already lived with the condition for some considerable time. 

Upon first being diagnosed, I was struck by fear and panic. I knew broadly how the end would come with MND. Muscle strength gradually fades until speech, movement, swallowing and breathing become increasingly difficult. Although I have many good friends and a supportive family, I am single and live alone. I felt I was in an impossible position and would not be able to cope with such a decline. And so, on the day after my initial diagnosis, I filled in the forms to join the Swiss assisted suicide clinic, Dignitas. I also considered other ways of terminating my life, perhaps by throwing myself off a cliff.

The Dignitas literature stressed that patients needed to administer the fatal chemicals themselves. Where patients had conditions such as MND, I determined that the procedure could not be delayed until the disease had progressed to the point of debilitation. I therefore felt under pressure to act.

Sefton-Williams received good news when he learned that he had been misdiagnosed with MND and that he actually had a treatable condiiton:

Yet as spring turned into summer, it became clear that my health was not worsening as expected. I was sent for further nerve conduction studies. These revealed that my condition was much more likely to be Multifocal Motor Neuropathy, a mild condition that is not terminal and which, in most cases, is treatable.

If assisted suicide were legal, Sefton-Williams states that would have died needlessly. 

The Bill currently before Parliament requires that two doctors independently assess and confirm that a patient has a “terminal illness” and is “reasonably expected to die within six months”. It sounds fail-safe. But in my case, I was told by two eminent specialists that I had a terminal condition and that, in the worst scenario, death could come within months. If I had had a fixed intention to terminate my life, I would surely have been a candidate. After my suicide, friends and family would perhaps have talked about my bravery in opting for a dignified death. They would have known nothing of my misdiagnosis. They would have not been aware that my death had been needless.

The question is - how many people are being killed by euthanasia or assisted suicide who have been misdiagnosed or not diagnosed?

According to Brian Mastroianni who published an article in healthline.com on February 22, 2020 medical misdiagnosis is more common than you think. According to the data: 

In February 2022, Meredith Bond reported for CityTV news that:

After 17 years suffering from chronic pain, Jennifer Monaghan began researching medical assistance in dying (MAiD), but a miracle diagnosis saved her life.

Monaghan, a Canadian, was considering euthanasia but then learned after 17-years of chronic pain that she had “Small fiber sensory neuropathy,” which is a treatable condition. Monaghan is alive today because she was fortunate to have been diagnosed with a treatable condition.

Wednesday, January 31, 2024

EPC - USA Statement to the New York Legislature in opposition to Assisted Suicicde


RE: Euthanasia Prevention Coalition-USA Statement in STRONG OPPOSITION to A995A Assisted Suicide-also known as “Medical Aid in Dying”

Dear ...

Please let A995A die this session. Assisted suicide proponents are trying to sell you a "pig in a poke". It's not about pain or a quick, peaceful death. It spawns more suicides and provides less healthcare. EPC-USA's physicians and disability advocates express strong opposition to assisted suicide.

“Medical aid in dying" is not healthcare and will exacerbate systemic inequities faced by people with disabilities and people from other marginalized communities. Assisted suicide combined with a broken healthcare and home care system is a deadly mix for people who are economically poor, lonely, vulnerable, elderly, disabled, and historically marginalized in the healthcare system.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA supports public policy that promotes positive measures to improve the quality of life of people living with a terminal illness and their families; we oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide. We are disability advocates, lawyers, doctors, nurses and politicians.

Any safeguards are part of a deliberate bait-and-switch tactic by assisted suicide advocates to get a bill passed and then come back to amend it by gutting those safeguards.
  • Amy Pauline recently stated. At an event promoting A995A and S2445A , “We've been criticized by some organizations that actually want an expansion …. but we've held firm because we want to get this passed first.” (starting at 18:40).(1)
  • J.M. Sorrell, Executive Director of Massachusetts Death with Dignity, who was quoted on a similar bill saying, “Once you get something passed, you can always work on amendments later.”(2)
Since 2020, there have been seven amendments to such laws across five states: in Oregon in 2020 and 2023; in Vermont 2022, and 2023; in California in 2022; in Washington in 2023; and in Hawaii in 2023 and an amendment has been introduced in New Jersey. All these changes expand access, for example, waive waiting times, allow nurses to prescribe the lethal medication, or drop residency requirements.(3)

It’s Not about Pain 

Dr. Lonny Shavelson, a California assisted suicide provider says promoting “aid in dying” as avoiding pain is a political sales pitch. See webinar(4) minutes 25:24-27:53. He says people choose assisted suicide because they are low energy or afraid of losing control.

It’s Not about a Peaceful or Quick Death 

Dr. Shavelson says the idea that assisted suicide creates a peaceful beautiful death is another myth. See webinar(5) minutes 37:35-41:00. Some people may suffer prolonged and difficult deaths from the experimental lethal drug cocktails.

Insurance Companies Use Assisted Suicide to Deny Curative Life-Saving Treatment 

Assisted suicide exacerbates the systemic problems patients face when seeking care for terminal illnesses. Dr. Brian Callister(6) of Nevada says he was stunned when insurance would not cover life saving treatment for his patients who were transferring to California and Oregon, but offered to pay for Assisted Suicide instead.

Assisted Suicide Spawns More Suicides and Attempted Suicides. 

Assisted suicide advocacy has already exacerbated the suicide crisis among people with disabilities. Disabled people have a higher rate of suicide than the general population and people are more likely to approve of suicide if the victim is disabled.(7) Worse, in 2023, the American Association of Suicidology (AAS) had to retract its 2017 statement that “Medical Aid in Dying” was not suicide, after it was used to justify expanding assisted suicide and euthanasia to disabled Canadians over the objection of the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention.(8)

Moreover, a 2019 report found teen suicides in California increased by 34%(9)  since that state legalized Assisted Suicide in 2016. Oregon’s youth suicides increased 79.3% from 2000 to 2018.(10) Research about completed suicides in four states that legalized Assisted Suicide (Oregon, Washington, Vermont and Montana) found it was associated with at least a 6.3% increase in the rate of all suicide deaths.(11)

The Marginalized understand this will be used to provide them with poorer care. Even with insurance, people of color get poorer hospital care and pain relief. According to a New York Times article,(12) people of color disproportionately died of COVID-19. (article)Medical prejudices and neglect result in racial disparities in diagnosis and treatment of diabetes, cancer, and heart trouble. COVID-19 has killed Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) at a much higher rate than Whites.(13)

There Are Very Clear Cases of Abuse 

The Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) has cataloged a long list of abuse cases.(14) Moreover, a doctor suggested assisted suicide to her anorexic patients and helped them carry it out. Compassion and Choices has acknowledged this abuse of the law, yet repeatedly asserts that the law has never been abused.(15)(16)

EPC-USA's physicians remind us that Assisted Suicide laws exacerbate systematic inequalities that disabled people experience in the medical sphere. A "Federal study found that the nation's assisted suicide laws are rife with dangers to people with disabilities".(17)

EPC-USA’s physicians remind us that Physicians, clinicians, insurance companies, and healthcare systems are fallible. Misdiagnoses and unreliable terminal prognoses are documented by the cases of: Jeanette Hall,(18) John Norton,(19) and Rahamim Melamed-Cohen.(20) More and more diagnoses qualify for Assisted Suicide. As mentioned, the latest effort to stretch “terminally ill” treats anorexia as a qualifying terminal disease.

In 2021, the NY based United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights of People with Disabilities asserted that all assisted suicide laws violate its Convention On The Rights of People with Disabilities.(21)

As the cheapest state-sponsored “treatment,” assisted suicide diminishes patient choice and takes away patient autonomy. Assisted suicide combined with a broken health care and home care system is a deadly mix for people who are economically poor, lonely, vulnerable, elderly, disabled, and historically marginalized in the US healthcare system.

We urge you to allow A995A to die this session because exacerbating systemic social inequalities so that the proponents can plan their deaths is unwise and unjust.

Sincerely,

Colleen E. Barry, Chairperson
Josephine L.A. Glaser, MD.,FAAFP
Meghan Schrader
Kenneth Stevens, MD
William Toffler, MD
Gordon Friesen
Alex Schadenberg

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition USA, EPC_USA@yahoo.com


End Notes

1. Amy Pauline recently stated. At an event promoting A995A and S2445A , “We've been criticized by some organizations that actually want an expansion …. but we've held firm because we want to get this passed first.” (starting at 18:40) (Link).

2. Comerford to reintroduce medical aid-in-dying bill in wake of court decision (Link).

3. Journal of Medical Ethics. Twenty five years (Link).

4. COMPLETED LIFE APRIL 2021 LUNCH HOUR WITH LONNY SHAVELSON (Link).

5. COMPLETED LIFE APRIL 2021 LUNCH HOUR WITH LONNY SHAVELSON (Link).

6. Insurance companies denied treatment to patients, offered to pay for assisted suicide, doctor claims - Washington Times (Link).

7. Is suicide an option?: The impact of disability on suicide acceptability in the context of depression, suicidality, and demographic factors. (Link).

8. Statement on recent MAiD Developments. (Link) (Link).  

9. New health report for California shows 34% increase in teen suicide (Link).

10. National Vital Statistics Report. Suicide Rates Among... (Link).

11. How Does Legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide Affect Rates of Suicide? (Link).

12. The Never-Ending Mistreatment of Black Patients (Link).

13. One Man's COVID-19 Death Raises The Worst Fears Of Many People With Disabilities (Link).

14. Some Oregon and Washington State Assisted Suicide Abuses and Complications (Link).

15. Terminal Anorexia Is Dangerous Justification for Aid in Dying (Link).

16. (Link).

17. The impact of disability on suicide acceptability (Link).

18. Jeannette Hall on dying well (Link).

19. Affidavit of John Norton (Link).

20. Twelve years after contracting Lou Gehrigs disease, Dr. Rahamim Melamed-Cohen (Link).

21. Disability is not a reason to sanction medically assisted dying – UN experts (Link).

Monday, February 28, 2022

Woman considering euthanasia changed her mind after being diagnosed with a treatable condition

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A Canadian woman, and mother of 3, who lived for 17-years with an undiagnosed chronic pain condition was considering MAiD but changed her mind after being diagnosed with a treatable medical condition.

This is a case of medical misdiagnoses in the sense that she had a treatable but undiagnosed medical condition.

A February 26 news story by Meredith Bond for CityTV News reported:
After 17 years suffering from chronic pain, Jennifer Monaghan (picture) began researching medical assistance in dying (MAiD), but a miracle diagnosis saved her life.

The 43-year-old has suffered from narcolepsy since she was 13 years old, but it wasn’t until years later that the pain started.

Narcolepsy is a neurological condition where a chemical is missing in the brain that controls if you’re awake or asleep. “Dealing with narcolepsy really didn’t bug me. I just worked around it. I managed it,” said Monaghan.

However, when she started feeling a shooting pain down her leg, that’s when everything changed. “It was really overwhelming because all of a sudden, life had to stop. And I was going to the doctors and trying to figure out what was wrong. And I didn’t know what was wrong.”

Bond explains that Monaghan began researching MAiD after 17 years of living with chronic pain:

Doctor’s visits weren’t a form of relief as they couldn’t tell Monaghan what was causing her pain. “Even many times throughout my journey of 17 years, I really did believe it was in my head. And that’s a really scary thing because I’m like, why am I creating all this pain and anger?”

Finally 17 years into her pain journey, she started researching medical assistance in dying. “By that point, I was stuck in bed and I’d really had quite a low point where I just felt like I had tried everything, tested every product on the market, went to all the extra things like a chiropractor, a naturopath,” describes Monaghan. “I just tried everything I could and I just couldn’t get there and so that’s when I decided to consider medically assisted [death]”

“So I just focused most of my energy studying things, but then also studying the MAiD programme and medically assisted death and seeing what my options were,” said Monaghan.
Monaghan may be alive today because she had hope that she would recover.
Monaghan said despite her research into MAiD, she did always want to get better and held out hope. “No matter how dark it got, it was still there. And I thank God for it every day that I was still able to have that hope in a real place of darkness.”

She said throughout her pain journey, she visited several neurologists as Monaghan was convinced her pain had something to do with her nervous system.

“At the very end of that 17 years, I asked for one more neurologist appointment. I really wasn’t expecting much when I went there because everything else was always a dud.”
Monaghan received a diagnosis after 17 years of chronic pain:
Once she described all her symptoms to the neurologist, she said he knew exactly what it was.

“Small fiber sensory neuropathy,” said Monaghan. “Basically, my brain is sending signals to different areas of my body, like shocking pain or cold water. It’s my brain reading the signals wrong, [the] pain signals wrong. So my brain thinks there’s all this pain going on, but my brain technically is creating it.”

“I was elated that I hadn’t lost my mind. I was so happy that this thing had a name and I didn’t give up. And I asked for that one more appointment.”

With a diagnosis and treatment in hand, Monaghan said her pain started getting less and less, until “the pain sensations started disappearing.”

Monaghan is happy to be alive. Her pain began to disappear and she became a grandma at about the same time. She said:

“I think the biggest thing is as soon as I got better, our children became parents and so I became a grandma. And it’s the best thing that’s ever happened to me. It is so nice to be able to spend time with them. Now, their children, I just feel so blessed, I feel super blessed that I got this opportunity and to this day, I won’t waste a minute of it.”

She is now helping others who are living with chronic pain:

“When someone says, ‘How are you feeling?’ I can say I feel great and mean it. And I love my life now and I appreciate it in a completely different way.”
Monaghan said she will continue to help others dealing with chronic conditions, regardless of what choices they decide to make.
“My mission now is just to support people, regardless of whatever choices they’re making. For me, it doesn’t matter. They just need like acceptance in someone that listens. Listening is a really important tool to help anyone with a disease while they’re dying or in chronic pain.”

The article is missing the fact that had she been diagnosed many years earlier, that she would not have lived with chronic pain for 17 years and she would not have sought MAiD (euthanasia).

The question is - how many people are being killed by euthanasia who have been misdiagnosed or not diagnosed?

According to Brian Mastroianni who published an article in healthline.com on February 22, 2020 medical misdiagnosis is more common than you think. According to the data: 

More life and death stories related to medical misdiagnosis.

In October 2016 Mya DeRyan (picture) survived a suicide attempt. While recovering DeRyan learned that the terminal diagnosis that she was trying to escape from was in fact a wrong diagnosis.

In April 2013, Pietro D’Amico, a 62-year-old magistrate from Calabria Italy, died by assisted suicide at a Swiss assisted suicide clinic. His autopsy found that he was misdiagnosed.

Considering the data, it is dangerous and irresponsible to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide. Many people, such as Jennifer Monaghan, live with undiagnosed chronic pain for many years. We need to change the healthcare system not kill the misdiagnosed patient.

Tuesday, February 1, 2022

Vermont Bill S74 would permit assisted suicide by telemedicine.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The assisted suicide lobby is focusing on expanding assisted suicide in states where it is legal.

Vermont assisted suicide bill S74 expands assisted suicide by allowing assisted suicide by telemedicine, which permits a doctor to prescribe a lethal assisted suicide drugs without ever meeting the person, eliminating the 48 hour waiting period before prescribing the lethal drugs and defining assisted suicide as "healthcare service."

For several years, the assisted suicide lobby has promoted the use of telemedicine for approving and prescribing lethal assisted suicide drugs. Assisted suicide by telemedicine eliminates the chance to discover that the person asking for assisted usicide was misdiagnosed. If the doctor does not examine the person who requests assisted suicide then they are basing their assisted suicide approval solely on the person's medical record.

Permitting assisted suicide by telemedicine in states where assisted suicide is legal may enable doctors to approve and prescribe out-of-state assisted suicides. Telemedicine approvals enables the assisted suicide lobby to set-up a national assisted suicide approval and prescribing center to permit assisted suicide nationally.


There are several other concerns with S74 but I am really concerned that S74 defines assisted suicide as a "healthcare service." Defining assisted suicide as a healthcare service leads to a right to assisted suicide.

Further to that, if assisted suicide is defined as a healthcare service, doctors who refuse to participate in assisted suicide may be forced to refer patients for assisted suicide. A physician who does not provide certain healthcare services is expected to refer patients to physicians who will provide the healthcare service.

Vermont Bill S74 concerns the normalizing of assisted suicide and permitting doctors to prescribe lethal assisted suicide drugs to someone who they have never met. 

Assisted suicide is not a healthcare service, in fact it is antithetical to healthcare.

Monday, October 18, 2021

New South Wales euthanasia bill temporarily stopped.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

This article was also published by Mercatornet on October 19, 2021.

NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet

The Australian state of New South Wales has just dodged a euthanasia bullet. It is the only state in the country where euthanasia is illegal. An independent MP, Alex Greenwich, last week tabled a bill in the lower house to change that.

Euthanasia lobbyists have run a thoroughly professional campaign. A petition has been signed by 100,000 supporters. The bill is backed by a record 28 MPs, including members of the government, crossbench and the Labor opposition – which is said to be the highest number of co-sponsors to a bill in the history of any Australian parliament and many doctors have signed a letter of support.

But today the euthanasia juggernaut suddenly ran bang! over a speed bump. And stopped. (Link to news article).

The government and the opposition have agreed to send it to the upper house for an inquiry. Its law and justice committee must report back to the parliament on the first sitting day in February. The bill will then be debated in the upper house.

This by no means guarantees the failure of the bill. But the aura of inevitability has evaporated. The delay will give an opportunity for both sides of the debate to present their best arguments and evidence.

According to an article published by the Conversation on October 12, Premier Dominic Perrottet, Deputy premier Paul Toole and Labor leader Chris Minns, all oppose the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide (assisted dying) in New South Wales.

Perhaps this is the moment to recall an article written by then-Treasurer Dominic Perrottet, in November 2017, published in the Sydney Morning Herald opposing the legalization of assisted suicide. You will notice that the Sydney Morning Herald peppered Perrottet's article with links to pro-assisted suicide stories, nonetheless, Perrottet's article in November 2017 remains insightful in 2021.

Perrottet begins by commenting on how suicide news stories always include links to Australian suicide prevention organizations, such as:

call Lifeline 131 114 or beyondblue 1300 224 636 or visit lifeline.org.au or beyondblue.org.au
He then states:
It's a dark, stark dissonance, and a confronting illustration of former prime minister Paul Keating's observation that, if we make assisted suicide legal, "there will be people whose lives we honour and those we believe are better off dead"...

It's got me wondering: if NSW or Victoria did cross that threshold, would news organisations continue to include the same potentially life-saving referral to suicide-prevention services in their reports? Or will that footnote need to be updated, with one message for those whose deaths the publishers wish to avert, and another for the people whose deaths they are happy to facilitate?

And what about the suicide prevention hotlines themselves? Will they screen out people whose wish to die sounds rational, and who may qualify under the relevant legislation, distinguishing them from the thousands of callers desperately seeking help to avoid the tragedy of suicide? Will those hotlines be asked to refer people who can legally end their own lives to places where they can get more information on how to go about it? Will the hotlines acquiesce in such requests?

Perrottet then brough up the issue of medical mistakes:

And what about mistakes? Our legal system prizes its cornerstone principle of "innocent until proven guilty". The great jurist Lord Blackstone said, "Better that 10 guilty persons go free than that one innocent party suffer". And yet, despite this, innocent people go to jail. Lawyers, juries, judges, police and witnesses all make mistakes, because the fact is, no human system of safeguards is infallible.

So with assisted suicide laws. Doctors will make mistakes. Victims will be pressured. Judgments will be clouded, and among all the arbitrary rules and safeguards, only one thing is absolutely certain: innocent people will die at the hands of these laws if they pass. At least the falsely imprisoned can be exonerated and freed years after the fact. For the innocent victims of assisted suicide laws there can be no long-awaited justice, just the silence of the grave.

This is the dark, dangerous void of confusion and contradiction that we are steering our society into if we back these bills.
He concluded his article by calling on legislators to oppose assisted suicide and support excellent end-of-life care.
We need to help those among us suffering through their darkest hour, not push them deeper into the ultimate darkness.

We need more and better palliative care – something we have significantly boosted in this year's NSW state budget, and something that as Treasurer I will continue to push as a matter of priority.

We must not create a two-tier society of the worst possible kind: where there are those whose lives we desperately work to preserve, and those to whom we really will be saying, "You are better off dead". I will be voting against the NSW legislation, and I call on all people of goodwill here in NSW and in Victoria to consider these issues and make their voices heard.
New South Wales is the only Australian state to not have legalised assisted suicide. I hope they resist the "easy answer for people who want to avoid suffering" and defeat the assisted suicide bill.

Monday, September 20, 2021

Push for assisted suicide raises questions over disability rights

This letter was published by the Boston Globe and Not Dead Yet on September 7, 2021

John Kelly
In response to an essay on the Victorian fantasy of a peaceful death, two letter writers (“Beyond the fantasy of a gentle death,” Aug. 29) called on the state Legislature to pass the proposed assisted suicide bill.

Paula Bacon and Molly DeHaas Walsh describe the circumstances of difficult deaths and believe that assisted suicide would bring them control, choice, and dignity when their pain and suffering become unbearable.

But when doctors misdiagnose people as terminal, the possibility of real choice disappears. Studies show that 12 percent to 15 percent of people outlive hospice, but in Oregon, with its Death With Dignity Act, only about 4 percent of people have lived past six months. This suggests that as many as 1 in 10 people ended their life prematurely. No one would tolerate any other elective treatment this deadly.

The Oregon reports show that the main “end-of-life concerns” stem not from physical pain but from “existential distress” over the disabling aspects of serious illness, such as dependence, status loss (“dignity”), incontinence, and feeling like a burden on others.

As someone paralyzed below the shoulders, I am terrified of the prospect of a state law sponsoring people’s suicides as rational responses to disability. Massachusetts should instead fully fund home care and provide world-class palliative care. Equality under the law depends on it.

John B. Kelly
Boston

Previous articles on assisted suicide by John Kelly (Link). 


Monday, July 5, 2021

Euthanasia by telehealth is being pushed in Australia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition


An article by Charles Corke, Associate Professor of Medicine at Deakin University and the Deputy Chair of the Victorian Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board, that was published in the Conversation states that (Assisted Dying) euthanasia has been legal in the Australian State of Victoria since June 2019 but the law does not permit euthanasia approvals by telehealth. Corke writes:
Unfortunately, while Victorians have the right to request voluntary assisted dying under Victorian law, a Commonwealth legal impediment makes it unduly difficult to access this service.

Commonwealth law makes it a crime to use a “carriage service” for the purposes of conveying “suicide related material”.
Corke explains that the law prohibiting the conveying of suicide related material via a carriage service was passed in 2005 to prevent things such as incitement to commit suicide by cyber bullies or the promotion of suicide methods to those who are vulnerable and depressed. 

Corke is not completely accurate. The 2005 law was also to prevent Dr Philip Nitschke from promoting assisted suicide via the internet. Nonetheless Corke states:
But in relation to voluntary assisted dying, the practical effect is that using modern communication to respond to a patient who requests voluntary assisted dying is a potential Commonwealth crime — even though it may be legal under state law. When laws conflict, federal legislation trumps state law.
Based on these issues Corke wants the Commonwealth law either overturned or ignored. He writes:
It seems clear the Commonwealth Criminal Code needs to be amended, but this will take time. In the interim the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions needs to issue a guideline that, where a person is acting in accordance with state voluntary assisted dying legislation, offences in the Commonwealth Criminal Code will not be prosecuted. To date, requests by Victoria that this assurance be provided have proved unsuccessful.
The problem with approving euthanasia (assisted death) by telehealth is that the physician approves death by lethal drugs for a person the doctor has never examined and likely never met.
 
Considering the problem of medical misdiagnosis and the fact the some people experience suicidal ideation, the facts are that allowing euthanasia by telehealth undermines the supposed safeguards that claim to prevent abuse of the law.

Whether the law concerning the delivery of suicidal material is amended or not, euthanasia should never be approved via telehealth.

Saturday, May 22, 2021

Mental health expert opposes euthanasia for mental illness. Based on personal experience, misdiagnosis is a problem.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A mental health expert told the Québec committee hearings on the Evolution of the Act respecting end-of-life care on Friday May 21 that based on her personal experience (MAiD) euthanasia should not be extended to people with mental illness alone.

A Global News report by Raquel Fletcher reported that Dr. Georgia Vrakas, a psychologist and mental health researcher who was diagnosed with bipolar type-2 disorder two weeks ago told the Quebec committee that extending euthanasia to people with mental illness alone is a very bad idea. Fletcher reported:

For more than 20 years, she was mistakenly treated for depression. At one point, things got so bad she called a suicide prevention hotline: “I was that low,” she said.

This is why she said she is against offering medical assistance in dying to patients where mental illness is the sole underlying condition.
Dr Georgina Vrakas
Vrakas told the committee that she is the prime example, that not enough is known about mental illness and situations can turn around. Vrakas hopes that her concerns will be reflected within future legislation. Fletcher reports:
Dr. Vrakas said extending the option to people with severe mental illness would send a message of despair.

“The message we would be sending, the message the government would be sending to people like me, is that there’s no hope,”

The Quebec government and the federal government have both established committee's to examine the further expansion of Canada's euthanasia law.

More articles on this topic:

Wednesday, April 7, 2021

France debates legalizing euthanasia.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The French media is reporting that a bill to legalize euthanasia will be debated on Thursday April 8.

The Local news reported that Olivier Falorni, deputy for the parliamentary splinter group Libertes et Territoires (“Freedom and Territories”), has introduced a euthanasia bill that will be debated during the time allotted to the party.

MP's who oppose euthanasia have filed 3000 amendments to the bill. The Local reported:
MPs hostile to euthanasia have filed 3,000 amendments ahead of the debate which will slow down Thursday’s proceedings to the point of making any vote in the allotted timeframe impossible.
France considers itself to be an egalitarian society. Legalizing euthanasia is not about equality but rather it gives physicians the power to cause another person's death. Further to that, there is abuse of the law and deaths based on misdiagnosis.

Before France votes on the euthansia bill they need to consider what has happened in Canada. Less than five years after legalizing euthanasia, Canada has extended the law to people who are not terminally ill, to people with mental illness alone and to people who are not competent at the time of death.

Don't follow Canada's lead.

Tuesday, February 23, 2021

Swiss assisted suicide deaths increase. Problems continue.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Swiss Exit suicide organization reported that they assisted 1282 suicide deaths in 2020 up from 1218 in 2019.

Swissinfo reported that:
EXIT Deutsche Schweiz, which covers the German and Italian-speaking parts of the country, saw a rise of 51 assisted suicides as it helped 913 people terminate their lives in 2020. More people living in French-speaking Switzerland also ended their lives last year, as 369 people used the services of EXIT Suisse Romande.
The article states that fewer people died by assisted suicide from March to May 2020 due to COVID -19. It is estimated that 1.5% of all deaths in Switzerland are by assisted suicide.

Swiss assisted suicide problems

In February 2020, the Swiss Cantonal Departments of Justice and Police approved assisted suicide for prisoners after a Swiss prisoner convicted of sexual assault and rape of girls and woman was considered for death by assisted suicide. An AFP news article reported that Peter Vogt (69), a dangerous offender, who was diagnosed with several psychological disorders and reportedly lives with health issues related to his kidney and heart, contacted the assisted suicide group Exit, and was being considered for assisted suicide.

Dr Pierre Beck
In October 2019, a 
Geneva court gave a suspended sentence to the regional vice-president of EXIT, Pierre Beck, for assisting the suicide of an 86-year-old woman who was not sick.  According to Swissinfo, Beck admitted to acting beyond the criteria of the law but he said that he didn't regret his action and faced with a similar situation he would likely do it again.

In February 2014, Oriella Cazzanello, an 85 year-old healthy woman died at a Swiss suicide clinic. The letter she sent her family stated that she was unhappy about how she looked.

Pietro D'Amico
In April 2013, Pietro D’Amico, a 62-year-old magistrate from Calabria Italy, died by assisted suicide at a suicide clinic in Basel Switzerland. His autopsy showed that he had 
a wrong diagnosis.

A Swiss assisted suicide study found that 16% of the people who died at Swiss assisted suicide clinics, in 2014, had no underlying illness.

The Swiss assisted suicide experience proves that when assisted death becomes accepted, deaths by assisted suicide will increase and the reasons for it will expand.
 
 

Thursday, August 13, 2020

Older, ill and disabled people deserve choice-promoting services, not assisted death.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

 
John Kelly
John Kelly, the director of the disability rights group, Second Thoughts.


On August 12, Kelly wrote an excellent response to Joan Milnes article "Making a final choice about quality-of-life,” published on July 28.

Kelly wrote:
Milnes’s example is her cousin Tony with cystic fibrosis who, at his doctors’ suggestion, had his life-sustaining ventilator turned off because he couldn’t speak or eat. But whereas Tony had the long-established privacy right — regardless of reason — to discontinue any bodily intervention, assisted suicide denies choice and endangers everyone. That’s because real choice resides with insurers, whose profit-maximizing denials of prescribed treatments can make you terminal.

Assisted suicide becomes the cheapest “medical treatment,” a “benefit” to be extended to evermore people. Choice belongs to abusive family and caregivers, who can bully you into requesting the drugs, witness the request, fetch the drugs, and even administer them without worry.

The bill grants complete immunity to anyone involved in the suicide. Doctor misdiagnosis puts 6 million people yearly at risk of severe harm, and 12% to 15% of people with a terminal diagnosis are not really dying. Hundreds of people have needlessly lost years of life to these mistakes. No choice there!

Quality-of-life judgments have fueled proposed state policies to deny disabled people ventilators if there is a shortage, and to deny treatment to people like disabled Texan Michael Hickson, whose hospital denied his family’s request for COVID-19 treatment and allowed him to die.

As someone commonly described as “paralyzed from the neck down,” I am constantly exposed to prejudicial messages that I would be better off dead. In our current crisis, we should be doing all we can to promote mutual aid and interdependence.
Kelly concluded, 
Older, ill and disabled people deserve choice-promoting services and supports like funded home care, not death on the quick and easy.

John B. Kelly is a long-time disability rights advocate and writer in Boston and director of the disability rights group Second Thoughts MA.
Previous articles by John Kelly:

Tuesday, June 9, 2020

Stop Massachusetts Assisted Suicide Bill

By William Gallerizzo

Sign the petition: Reject Massachusetts Assisted Suicide bill S.1208/H.1926 (Link).


There has been an amended assisted suicide bill introduced in Massachusetts. S.2745 / S.1208.


The Death With Dignity lobby blatantly refuses to accept or to discuss documented evidence from other states and countries showing how legalizing assisted suicide has jeopardized inherent rights of so many others, all in the name of Freedom of Choice. The data that they do present is either nonfactual or inaccurate; as the past and current laws condone inaccuracy and falsification of death certificates. Mathematically data under those conditions cannot be validated. Likewise, they have condoned and supported using social media and other means to slander opponents and silence the truth, in crude and similar fashion to the tactics used by deficient national leadership.

Isn’t this what America is essentially marching about in the streets right now: transparency in government and laws, that no one’s life needs to be jeopardized; that all lives matter without regard to racial difference, religious difference, disability, socio-economic level, or any other man-made political divide. The value of lives should not concern how much money someone has, their status, or how much influence they peddle. Truthfully, the fallacy counter to this fact has existed for some time; but the past three years have seen it to a greater degree during the COVID-19 pandemic.

My own research and that of others have shown at least 8 major issues that make this legislation abusive to the public interest of social justice. Others exist, but these are the most highly impacting. All of these contentions are documented from reliable sources, but DWD considers them insignificant or will not address.

1. The outcome of Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide is to kill other human beings whose lives are not fit to live. The whole basis of eugenics, whether ancient or the present age, is that some people do not deserve to live for no other reason than their very existence.

2. Safeguards are to protect physicians, but offer no safety valves or control for the vulnerable. Even in Netherlands and Oregon where euthanasia has been legal for decades, those most adversely affected and abused are people of color, the disabled, the economically challenged, and the elderly.

3. Assisted suicide is incompatible with the physician’s role as healer. The physician is put in the position of being an executioner, a promoter of death, not a sustainer of health.

4. Advancements in medical technology, elder care, advanced medical care are deemed no longer as necessary. The State of Oregon, once the national leader in hospice and palliative care, now ranks as the 7th worst in the nation.

5. Assisted suicide laws create cultural pressure on doctors who in turn pressure patients, especially when a viable treatment is not locally available. Current laws in Canada prevent conscientious objection on the part of medical personnel and force them to give in to euthanasia and assisted suicide as a standard not an option.

6. Doctors are fallible human beings. Misdiagnosis and faulty analysis for any number of reasons can result in patient premature death. My own disabilities occurred from misdiagnosed injuries, and my own life was saved by a very conscientious and observant physician. Assisted suicide laws increase the probability of unintended mistakes significantly. The end result, more often than not, is premature and needless death.

7. The vocabulary that is often used by advocates of euthanasia uses altered meanings from its common forms. This adds to confusion among the public about the meaning of what these words mean. Although most people have no problem agreeing that they want a peaceful and tranquil death, most find it abhorrent that what they are agreeing to involves a doctor or someone else killing a patient. By definition, compassionate action does not involve acts of overt or covert violence. When patients are influenced, options are reduced. Hence, what they propose is not congruent with reality conditions surrounding end-of-life care. Therefore, what C&C/DWD promote are lies and inaccurate vocabulary which cloud reality from public view.

8. There are no drugs effective to do what advocates claim. Several independent studies in both United States and Great Britain examining all drugs and cocktails used for either Euthanasia and/or Capital Punishment have shown that all have significant failure rates ranging from about 24% to just under 75%. Failure can range from painfully long lingering for hours or even days, to convulsions and severe vomiting. The drugs usually promoted by DWD, secobarbital and pentobarbital, are deemed unsuitable for capital punishment due to excessive and painful failure. More so, it has been shown that dosages of drugs used in anesthesiology require enormously high dosages if used for euthanasia and have significantly higher failure rates above their usual norm in anesthesia. It has also been shown that the use of morphine as pain relief goes through a titration of dosage tolerance in the body, and although it may require increasing dosages to relieve pain, the pain relief is significant and the risk of death caused by the morphine is lower than other drugs. Thus current use of morphine for pain relief does exactly what it is supposed to do; it enables a more pain free and peaceful death from the disease, not an induced death, and little failure leading to prolonged agony.

Sign the petition: Reject Massachusetts Assisted Suicide bill S.1208/H.1926. (Link).

William Orazio Gallerizzo taught Sciences for over 35 years and holds advanced degrees in Education and Natural Sciences (University of Maryland, College Park, MD) and Bioethics (Athenaeum Pontificium Regina Apostolorum, Rome, Italy). Specialized in educational multi-disciplinary integration and critical thinking processes, he has conducted interactive instructional research projects both in the United States and Italy. His primary research work in Bioethics is titled, Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Trends in the United States.