Euthanasia leader sentenced to three years (house arrest) in South Africa.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sean Davison is a euthanasia activist who was previously convicted in the death of his mother in New Zealand in 2010.

Davison who was the President of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies and a leader of Dignity South Africa was convicted in the deaths of Anrich Burger (in 2013), Justin Varian (in 2015), and Richard Holland (in 2015).
 
Shamiela Fisher, reporting for Eyewitness news, stated that Davidson was sentenced to three years correctional supervision in the deaths. Fisher stated:

The Western Cape High Court also sentenced him to eight years behind bars which has been wholly suspended for five years on condition he is not convicted of murder, attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder over this period.

The first charge relates to the death of Anrich Burger in 2013. Burger was a quadriplegic following a car accident in 2005. Davison administered a lethal dose of drugs to Burger.

The two other murder charges, which Davison has also pleaded guilty to, relate to the deaths of Justin Varian and Richard Holland.

He entered into a plea and sentencing agreement in the High Court on Wednesday in connection with cases in which he helped three Cape Town patients take their own lives.

Fisher reported that:

Professor Davison has been placed under house arrest for the full duration of his correctional supervision. He may, however, go to work, to a place of worship or visit a doctor.

I understand that this is a plea bargain deal but Davidson, the former President of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies, has essentially received no sentence in the deaths of three people. 

Being sentenced to 8 years behind bars but then being allowed to serve it as three years house arrest, but then be able to go to work, church and the doctor, is not a sentence at all.

Davidson does show the world how euthanasia activists become killers. He is known to have killed his mother and now three others.

Years ago, when I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies conference, I met a group of people who spent their time discussing over lunch the deaths that they had participated in.

This is a death cult not a human rights lobby.

Euthanasia activist charged with a third murder.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sean Davison who has been a euthanasia activist since he was arrested and convicted in the death of his mother, in New Zealand in 2010, he has now been charged in the 2015 death of Justin Varian. 

In September 2018 Davison was arrested in the 2103 death of Anrich Burger. 

According to IOL news:

The latest charge was added after Davison allegedly “assisted” Varian, who had motor neuron disease, to end his life on July 25, 2015.

According to the charge sheet, he "administered a lethal amount of drugs to the quadriplegic deceased" at or near the Radisson Hotel in Granger Bay on November 2, 2015.

Davison reportedly filmed Varian requesting help to be killed.

Davison was a leader of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies and he is a leader of Dignity South Africa.

When Davison was charged with murder in the death of Anrich Burger IOL news reported that Davison was being investigated in more deaths.

Euthanasia Society President charged with murder of disabled man - More Information.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Last week Sean Davison, a member of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies board, was arrested for participating in the murder of Anrich Burger, in 2014. Anich became a quadriplegic in a car accident.

Euthanasia activist charged in murder of disabled man in South Africa.

In September 2014 I wrote an article urging police to investigate Davison. I wrote:

Sean Davison, who was previously convicted in New Zealand for assisting his mother’s death, has admitted to assisting the suicide of a South African quadriplegic man. Davison is now saying that he will never assist in euthanasia again. 

Davison should be investigated for his part in the death of Anrich Burger who became a quadriplegic in a 2005 car accident. 

Davison told the South African media that: “Anrich Burger was a very close friend. I wouldn't want to ever go through that again. It was very stressful”

Adele Redmond and Mandy Te, reporting for Stuff media in New Zealand, provided more information on the Davison case. According to the article:

He (Davison) has often spoken publicly about Burger's death in 2014, acknowledging he was with his friend in his Waterfront hotel room as he died – but said that was not a crime. "Dr Burger committed suicide," Davison said. "He wrote his own prescription; he collected it, he arranged for the hotel. I was at the end with him, but he clearly expressed his wish to die." 

But South African authorities believe the 57-year-old killed Burger – and others as well. Opposing bail, Prosecutor Megan Blows told the Cape Town Magistrate's Court during Davison's bail hearing that "new information has come to light [that] the accused might have committed similar offences". 

Because of evidence collected during a "search and seizure" operation at Davison's R3.5 million Cape Town mansion, Blows requested a postponement so new allegations and items could be investigated.

We also learn from the Stuff article that Davison was planning to move to Australia and only returned to South Africa to resign his job.

Davison is a long-time euthanasia activist. More information will be released on November 16, when he returns to court.

Euthanasia Society President Charged with Murder of Disabled Man

This media release was published by Euthanasia-Free New Zealand on September 20, 2018

Media Release

Sean Davison, a New Zealand citizen who was convicted of assisted suicide in Dunedin, appeared in a South African court on Wednesday on a murder charge.

The charge is in relation to the death of Anrich Burger, 53, who became a quadriplegic after a motor vehicle accident in 2005. He was not terminally ill.

In 2014 the accused told News24 how he helped Mr Burger, a close friend of his, end his life with lethal drugs in November the previous year. 

• Euthanasia activist charged with murder of disabled man in South Africa.

Mr Burger’s fiancé was not present nor informed of the plan, since she did not support assisted suicide or euthanasia.

After pleading not guilty, Mr Davison was released on R20,000 (about NZ $2,050) bail. He is scheduled to appear in Court again on 16 November.

The State alleges that the murder was premeditated and that new information suggests that the accused may have committed other similar offences.

In 2011 Mr Davison was sentenced to five months’ house arrest in Dunedin after pleading guilty to counselling and procuring his mother’s suicide.

Mr Davison, 57, is the president of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies, the international organisation of which the New Zealand End of Life Choice Society (formerly the Voluntary Euthanasia Society), is a member.

“Not all quadriplegics want to die, but those who do want to, should have the option,” said Mr Davidson after his speech at the Federation’s Conference in 2014.

On its website the Federation supports euthanasia and assisted suicide for “all competent adults with incurable illnesses” – not only those with terminal illnesses and six months to live.

“Mr Davison’s words and actions demonstrate that ‘assisted dying’ advocates don’t really want a narrow law limited to terminal illness, but one that would eventually allow virtually any competent adult with an incurable condition to be eligible, including people with disabilities,” says Renée Joubert, Executive Officer of Euthanasia-Free NZ.

The End of Life Choice Bill, which is currently before the New Zealand Parliament’s Justice Committee, proposes legal assisted suicide and euthanasia for people with terminal illnesses or other “grievous and irremediable medical conditions.”

“Disabled people would be included under both clauses of David Seymour’s Bill,” says Ms Joubert. “Terminal illness involves disability. So do many other longstanding physical and mental conditions.”

ENDS

Euthanasia activist charged with murder of disabled man in South Africa.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Sean Davison, the euthanasia activist who arrested in 2010 for assisting the suicide of his mother in New Zealand. In September 2011 Davidson agreed to a plea bargain when he pled guilty to the assisted suicide of his mother and was sentenced to 5 months of house arrest.

Davison was arrested in the alleged murder of 43-year-old Dr Anrich Burger who became a quadriplegic following a car accident. IOL news reported that Davidson was charged with murder in Cape Town and released on R20 000 in bail and will return to court on November 16.

IOL news also reported that Davison may have been involved with other similar deaths:

“There was a search warrant with the Hawks involved and his laptop and cellphone were seized and he is expected to appear at the Cape Town Magistrate's Court this morning to hear on possible bail.” 

NPA spokesman Eric Ntabazalila said outside the court on Wednesday that from information obtained from the search and seizure it came to light that Davison may have committed other similar offences.

Davison has been a known euthanasia activist since he was arrested in 2010 in the death of his mother. In 2014 Davidson told the media that he would not assist in euthanasia again  while commenting on his involvement in the death of Anrich Burger. 

Davison allegedly assisted the death of Burger, not because he was terminally ill, but because he was disabled.

The most popular articles in 2016 on euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

In 2016, Canada officially decriminalized euthanasia and California decriminalized assisted suicide. The disability rights movement were right to protest the movie - Me Before You and the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition produced the documentary - The Euthanasia Deception documentary.

Good news. The South Africa Supreme Court rejected euthanasia, the New Mexico Supreme Court rejected assisted suicide, and South Australia rejected euthanasia.

We have hope. Our supporters wants Caring and Not Killing options and they oppose giving physicians, or others, the right in law to be directly involved with killing patients.

The 10 most popular articles posted on the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition blog in 2016.

1. Boycott the movie - Me Before You: "Disability Death Porn." Posted May 26.
2. California Assisted suicide law prompts insurance company to deny coverage to terminally ill woman. Posted Oct 20, 2016.
3. Canadian Senate passes euthanasia bill in time for their summer break. Posted June 17.
4. South Africa Supreme Court rejects euthanasia. Posted Dec 6.
5. The Euthanasia Deception documentary. Posted Sept 30.
6. Advice to Canada from Belgium: Safeguards are an illusion. Posted April 28.
7. Woman dies by euthanasia, may only have had a bladder infection. Posted Nov 14.
8. New Mexico Supreme Court: There is no right to assisted suicide. Posted June 30.
9. Canada's euthanasia bill provides a perfect cover for murder. Posted April 14.
10. The Declaration of Hope. Posted Jan 1.

More information updates:

• Dutch euthanasia deaths continue to rise in 2015.
• Belgian 2015 euthanasia report: Deaths continue to rise.
• Oregon 2015 assisted suicide report - another 26% increase.
• Washington State 2015 assisted suicide report. Assisted deaths increase by 31.7%.
• Switzerland: 26% increase in assisted suicide deaths in 2014.
• Quebec euthanasia report: 14% non-compliance with the euthanasia law.
• Do Not Kill Me: I oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Post truth, Euthanasia and Elder abuse - Linking headlines.

This article was published on December 15, 2016 by Mercatornet.

Margaret Somerville

By Margaret Somerville

Exploring the connections that can be made among three very recent stories in the news, which at first glance seem unrelated, can provide important insights and warnings. These stories are that “post-truth” is the Oxford English Dictionary’s word of the year; that the Victorian Government will introduce an “assisted dying” bill in the second half of 2017 which, if passed, would legalize physician-assisted suicide and in exceptional cases euthanasia; and that the Australian Law Reform Commission has just released a discussion paper which documents elder abuse in Australia and seeks ways to prevent it.

“Post-truth”

Here’s how Wikipedia describes “post-truth” in relation to politics: “Post-truth politics (also called post-factual politics) is a political culture in which debate is framed largely by appeals to emotion disconnected from the details of policy, and by the repeated assertion of talking points to which factual rebuttals are ignored. Post-truth differs from traditional contesting and falsifying of truth by rendering it [truth] of "secondary" importance.”

Or, one could add, of little or no importance at all.

In contemporary societies we increasingly use the prefix “post”: post-industrial, post-modern, post-feminist, post-religious, and so on, and now post-truth. We know what we were; we know we are no longer that; but we don’t yet know what we now are or are becoming.

Words are the tools of both truth and lies, so words matter. Nowhere is this truer than in the euthanasia debate.

The euthanasia debate

Word changes can be subtle and nuanced. So, for instance, when, as has happened in promoting the legalization of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, more words are used to describe something that already had a name – euthanasia has become “physician assisted dying” and even the word death is dropped - we should know that we are being manipulated and something is being concealed. That something is the intentional infliction of death.

The strongest case for the legalization of euthanasia is made at the level of the suffering identified individual who wants to die when and how they choose. Australian journalist Andrew Denton makes the case for legalizing euthanasia in this way in describing his father’s death. We feel compassion for his father and Mr Denton himself for the suffering they both endured and our hearts rightly go out to them.

In a post-truth society feelings matter more than facts, the heart rules the head. So the facts about the larger impact of legalizing euthanasia – what it will mean for healthcare institutions, professions and professionals; how it will damage foundational societal values, such as respect for human life in general and the prohibition on intentionally killing another human being, except to save life; the impact in the future of normalizing euthanasia; and so on - are ignored or even denied.

Even hard factual evidence is rejected: In Canada the courts accepted the pro-euthanasia claim that in the Netherlands and Belgium, where euthanasia is legal, there was no “logical slippery slope” (the situations and persons eligible for euthanasia expand rapidly and very substantially once it is legalized) or “practical slippery slope” (euthanasia is carried out in breach of the law, especially on vulnerable people). But the evidence is clearly otherwise, as has been recognized by the Irish Supreme Court and most recently the Supreme Court of South Africa.

We can question whether the current “progressive values” stance of giving priority to respect for individual autonomy over upholding values, such as respect for life, needed to protect the common good, means that we have become a narcissistic society, one focussed just on individuals’ claims, and that the denial of facts which would cause us to reject those claims is a “narcissistic unawareness”.

I hasten to add here that I am not denying the importance of feelings -- they are one of the central ways of “human knowing” -- but facts are, at the least, equally important, not least because good facts are essential for good ethics and good ethics is essential for good law.

And so to the third story where facts are needed and serious concerns raised about the abuse of one group of vulnerable people, namely, the elderly.

Elder abuse

Here’s a December 12 ABC website headline: 

“Elder abuse inquiry calls for power of attorney changes to stop children ripping parents off”.

The post continues “A national register of enduring powers of attorney should be established to prevent greedy children from using the document as a "licence to steal" from their elderly parents, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) says”, referring to an ALRC discussion paper which is part of its inquiry into elder abuse, which includes elderly persons being victims of financial fraud.

The paper notes that “the potential for pressure and coercion in setting up the instruments [the powers of attorney appointing children to act on their parent’s behalf]” and that “early inheritance syndrome” is on the rise.

“With Australians living longer than ever before, the ALRC inquiry heard many examples of children who were impatient to get their hands on their parents' money and tried to claim their inheritance before they were entitled to it. 

This is often described as "early inheritance syndrome". 

"It's as if the current generation wants it now and somehow they justify that it's okay to take mum or dad's money right now," said Aged and Disability Advocacy Australia CEO, Geoff Rowe.”

There are no concrete statistics on the prevalence of elder abuse in Australia, but a 2016 research report to the Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department states that:

“at the international level, the WHO (2015) recently reported that estimated prevalence rates of elder abuse in high- or middle-income countries ranged from 2% to 14% … and that the perpetrators are likely to be related to the victim… [and] one study suggests that neglect could be as high as 20% among women in the older age group (Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health [ALSWH], 2014). Older women are significantly more likely to be victims than older men, and most abuse is intergenerational (i.e., involving abuse of parents by adult children), with sons being perpetrators to a greater extent than daughters.”

Combined effect

So consider in a “post-truth” society the combined effect in relation to elderly persons of “pressure and coercion”, “early inheritance syndrome”, abusers’ self-justification of the abuse, 2 percent to 14 percent of elderly persons being victims of abuse, and women being more at risk than men, in the context of legalized euthanasia. At the very least, we should have second thoughts about whether legalization is a good idea.

Margaret Somerville is Professor of Bioethics in the School of Medicine at the University of Notre Dame Australia. Until recently, she was Samuel Gale Professor of Law, Professor in the Faculty of Medicine, and Founding Director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law at McGill University, Montreal.

South Africa Supreme Court rejects euthanasia.

Euthanasia Exposed protest (November 2016)

Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The Supreme Court of South Africa rejected euthanasia and assisted suicide by overturning the lower court decision that approved death of Robin Stransham-Ford, of Cape Town, by euthanasia or assisted suicide by Judge Hans Fabricius on April 30, 2015.

Judge Fabricius legislated from the Bench when he ruled that:

"The applicant is entitled to be assisted by a medical practitioner either by the administration of a lethal agent or by providing the applicant with the necessary lethal agent to administer himself."

Stransham-Ford died of cancer two hours before the order was granted.

Euthanasia Exposed, a group that formed to oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide, sent out a media release (by email) stating:

BREAKING NEWS: Today, 6 December 2016 the South African Supreme Court of Appeal said that Judge Fabricius was wrong in his 2015 judgement authorising Robert Stransham-Ford to have assisted sucide/euthanasia.

The court confirmed this is really a matter for elected parliament and not judges to decide. The decision was made in haste and did not properly consider South African law, the international context, our social values or the impact on the right to life. The medical information provided to the court was flawed and contradicted the real medical records, which were withheld until a court order was issued. The case was manipulated by the euthanasia lobby group, its lawyers and the estate, and the medical records indicate Stransham-Ford was actually asking if he could back out of euthanasia/assisted suicide. 

The court judgment used many of the same reasons which we wrote in our article 'Why judge Fabricius was wrong':

• The separation of powers requires that parliament as representatives of the country as a whole should decide any changes on the law rather than requiring judges to decide.

• The applicant died before the ruling was given.  Circumstantial evidence seems to indicate this information may have been deliberately withheld from the court.

• Judge Fabricius ruling was decided in haste (one day) on a matter of national importance, an urgency apparently manufactured on an individual case by the lobby group Dignity SA.

• The applicants attorneys had refused to provide the opposing friend of the court legal teams with information they needed to respond.

• The South African situation is different to the juristictions where euthanasia is legal, which argues against foreign cases being used as precedent. We have different social values, a different socio-economic and policing situation.

• The applicants affidavit was factually and medically doubtful on many points.

• The organisation Dignity SA was publicly raising funds to pay for the court case, but the application insisted it was just on behalf of the individual.

• The hasty Fabricius judgment did not properly consider South African law or international precedent cases.

• Judge Fabricus was wrong to assume that the common law on murder needed to change to accommodate assisted suicide and euthanasia. The court needs to consider whether its decision would undermine the foundational value of the right to life or be supportive of it.

Further reasons emerged from the judgment, which we were not aware of:

• The picture of Mr Stransham-Ford's final illness as depicted in the legal affidavits bore little resemblence to reality as found in his medical records.  

• The psychologist who declared the applicant Robert Stransham-Ford to be psychologically fit and his desire to apply for suicide, did not provide reasoning on how the conclusion was reached and previously lived in the same street as him, which raises questions of independence.

• The applicants doctors medical records indicate he was wavering in his desire for suicide/euthanasia and asked his doctor if he could change his mind and that his real medical situation was very different to that described in the affidavits. The estate of Stransham-Ford had refused to release these medical records until a court order was issued for them. [Our comment on this is that it is very normal for people to waver in their desire for suicide, but suicide is irreversible, and this is a strong argument against legalising suicide.]

The Centre for Applied Legal Studies, at Wits submitted argument to the court that euthanasia and assisted suicide were working well overseas. The Health Professions Council of the State and the State submitted detailed evidence rebutting these claims and giving evidence of numerous abuses and problems overseas. The court provisionally accepted this evidence but after reviewing it, decided that it was too complex and detailed to sift through or decide on.

Euthanasia Exposed (SA) formed to oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide in South Africa, prepared an excellent opposition to the Fabricius decision that is published on their website.

Assisted Suicide is not a private matter.

Paul Russell

This article was published on the HOPE Australia website on July 16.

By Paul Russell, the founder and director of HOPE Australia.

New Zealand born South African based euthanasia advocate Sean Davison is in the press again, once more seemingly stepping across the line into assisting in suicide.

In 2011, Davison was convicted in a New Zealand Court of assisting the suicide of his own mother in 2006, a matter that came to light in the review of a draft of Davison’s book, Before we say goodbye. Davison admitted in 2010 to crushing 18 morphine tablets and mixing it into a glass of water before handing it to his mother, who had cancer. He was committed to home detention for five months before returning to South Africa and founding a ‘right-to-die’ movement.

In September 2014, Davison admitted at the world ‘right-to-die’ conference in Chicago that he had assisted in the suicide death of a quadriplegic medical doctor in 2013.

Australia’s other ‘Dr Death,’ Rodney Syme, gave a talk at that event entitled: Challenging the Legal System – and getting away with it. Perhaps, Davison heeded Syme’s advice as, on that occasion, no charges were ever brought against him.

Only a few days before Davison made this revelation to his international cohort, on his Dignity SA [Dignity South Africa] twitter feed, Davison tweeted: 

“Dignity SA is committed to good palliative care. Assisted Dying (sic) is a last resort for a small % for whom palliative care is not enough.”

The doctor in question [Dr. Anrich Burge] was not terminally ill. So much for standards.

This week, according to South Africa’s IOL news online, an anonymous caller tipped off the Cape Times that Davison was about to assist in another suicide, this time of a person in hospice care, apparently in his own home.

When contacted by the Cape Times, Davison would neither confirm nor deny. However, he seemed to have effectively admitted that something was afoot by telling the press:

“Where did you get that information from? I cannot confirm or deny that. I can’t comment about (the patient). This is a private matter which should not be publicised in the media. 

“One should respect people’s right to die in a dignified manner. (The patient) has been suffering for a long time.”

Contacted again on Tuesday, Davison insisted on speaking only to the Cape Times editor, but his demand was declined and the news editor contacted him.

New Zealand the assisted suicide debate changes venues.

This article was published on June 12 by Mercatornet.

Paul Russell

By Paul Russell - Director of Hope Australia.

On June 6 Justice Collins handed down his judgement in the High Court of New Zealand in a case brought by Lecretia Seales. Ms Seales had asked the court whether it would be an offence under the Crimes Act for her doctor to be able to help her die and whether a ban on assisted dying contravened the New Zealand Bill of Rights. In rejecting her application Justice Collins observed that:

"Ms Seales’ doctor would have been at risk of being prosecuted for either murder or manslaughter if she administered a fatal drug to Ms Seales intending to kill her. She would have been at risk of being charged with assisting suicide if she provided Ms Seales with a fatal drug, intending for Ms Seales take that drug and if Ms Seales died as a consequence."

This decision has significant implications in the wake of the Robin Stransham-Ford case in South Africa, where Judge Fabricius approved euthanasia or assisted suicide for the appellant, and the Canadian decision in the Carter case that declared effectively that the prohibition on assisted suicide and euthanasia were contrary to provisions in the Canadian Bill of Rights.

In all three cases the appeals have been based on a false premise that the disabilities of advancing illness would render people unable to commit suicide at a time of their choosing and that their rights were being denied on an equal basis with other citizens. This is emotional blackmail. As a colleague of mine expressed it recently: 

"If you won't promise to kill me later when I ask you to then I will kill myself sooner ... and you will have killed me!"

This is all predicated on the false assumption that, because suicide has been decriminalized that it is legal; if it is legal, then it is a right; if it is a right then it should be accessible to all, including people with a disability.

Let's be clear: suicide was decriminalized because it is not in the best interests of a suicide survivor. Suicide is not legal. There is no right to suicide.

South African Health Minister determined to stop assisted suicide

This article was published on the HOPE Australia website on May 4, 2015.

Paul Russell

By Paul Russell - Director of Hope Australia

In welcome news today from South Africa's News 24, the Health Minister, Aaron Motsoaledi, signalled an appeal to a recent court ruling that allowed for Assisted Suicide in the African nation.

The recent court ruling on an appeal by Pretorian Lawyer, Robin Stransham-Ford, that he be allowed to die by assisted suicide or euthanasia effectively struck a broad blow to the protection of human persons in South Africa because, contrary to the assertions of the judge, his decision was not limited to the person in question. Effectively, Judge Fabricius legislated from the bench.

Aaron Motsoaledi

In the article, Motsoaledi presented a cogent defence of the opposition to both assisted suicide and euthanasia:

“This judgment has the potential to give rise to fraud and unethical behaviour among doctors,” Motsoaledi said. 

“Very soon we will start hearing stories of families colluding with doctors to end the life of their loved ones because they wanted to cash in on insurance policies. Some people may even start planning their deaths because they know that their policies are maturing. 

“We can’t have that situation in South Africa because it would be difficult to police and deal with. To prevent it, we must stop it before it goes any further,” he said.

The article said that, 'So determined is the health minister to stop the decriminalisation of assisted suicide that he is prepared to go to the Constitutional Court to fight the ruling passed in favour of Advocate Robin Stransham-Ford, who wanted to be helped to die.'

It went on: 

South African court decision approves death by lethal injection

By Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Justice Hans Fabricius of the South Africa High Court signed a court order approving the euthanasia death of Robin Stransham-Ford who was living with Prostate Cancer.

Eyewitness News in South Africa reported that Robin Stransham-Ford died from his medical condition the morning of the decision. It is interesting that the timing of the court order was the same day as his death.

Justice Fabricius legislated from the bench by withdrawing protections in law from euthanasia and assisted suicide. Even though Fabricius claimed that this decision was exclusive to this situation, he in fact decided that judge's had the power to decide whether a person should be protected in law or allowed to be killed.

The court order states that Stransham-Ford, can:

be assisted by a qualified medical doctor, who is willing to do so, to end his life, either by administration of a lethal agent (euthanasia) or by providing the Applicant with the necessary lethal agent to administer himself (assisted suicide).

The court order continues by stating that doctors are not obligated to accede to the request but the doctor that does accede to the request shall not be subject to prosecution.

According to the Citizen News:

Mthunzi Mhaga, spokesperson for the Justice Minister, said the Minister intended would apply for leave to appeal against the ruling, but could only do so when Judge Fabricius gave reasons for his ruling on Monday.

Justice Fabricius claimed that his decision was an exception to the law, but his decision actually challenges the validity of the law.

Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide gives one group of people, usually physicians, the right in law to cause the death of another group of people. The law needs to equally protect every citizen, especially when they are in a vulnerable time of their life.

I won't assist in euthanasia again.

Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sean Davison, who was previously convicted in New Zealand for assisting his mother’s death, last week admitted to assisting the suicide of a South African quadriplegic man. Davison is now saying that he will never assist in euthanasia again.

Davison should be investigated for his part in the death of Anrich Burger who became a quadriplegic in a 2005 car accident.

Davison told the South African media that:

“Anrich Burger was a very close friend. I wouldn't want to ever go through that again. It was very stressful”

Davison's comments may be related to the fact that he is promoting a bill in the South African parliament to legalize assisted suicide. Davison's actions may lead to criminal charges but will hopefully lead to politicians rejecting the assisted suicide bill.

Kevin Fitzpatrick

Dr Kevin Fitzpatrick, the EPC - International Director and disability activist responded to the death of Burger by writing:

When a person with disabilities has pain, and distress about his work, his own patients’ welfare, and asks a doctor to help him commit suicide. If the doctor says ‘Let’s look at your pain management – let’s get you working again the way you’d like - you have so much to give these online patients seeking help’? That leads to a belief that life is worth living. 

But if a doctor responds: Well of course not. ‘You want to die? Yes of course I’ll help you’ – simple, eh? That leads to a belief that the person is better off dead.

Last weekend, Davison become a member of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies board.

Links to similar articles:

• Euthanasia: And they say that people with disabilities have nothing to fear...
• Assisted suicide: No support from this quadriplegic.
• Euthanasia: Death is not preferable to living with a significant disability.
• Euthanasia at the water cooler.

Euthanasia: And they say that people with disabilities have nothing to fear...

By Dr Kevin Fitzpatrick

Director of EPC - International and a leader of Not Dead Yet UK.

Dr Kevin Fitzpatrick

Health24.com (23/9/14) reports a story from SAPA (the South African Press Association):

A doctor, previously convicted in New Zealand for assisting his mother’s death now admits helping a South African quadriplegic to commit suicide.

Dr Anrich Burger, quadriplegic after a car accident in 2005, worked for Health24’s CyberDoc. He died in November 2013. Sean Davison’s spokesperson confirmed he had aided Burger to die, after Davison spoke at last week’s euthanasia conference in Chicago, US. Davison said: 

‘He asked me to be part of his plan, and I became his co-conspirator…’. He was also reported as saying later: ‘Not all quadriplegics want to die, but those who do want to, should have the option.’

Davison should face criminal charges. He has stepped past any pretense that assisted suicide/euthanasia is for terminally ill people and is openly assisting in the deaths of quadriplegics.

And they say that people with disabilities have nothing to fear…

No dignity in a syringe full of poison.

The following letter was published by The Star newspaper in South Africa (Link).

Eusebius McKaiser’s column headlined “Put my dignity first, kindly” (see related articles below) supports euthanasia, particularly in the aftermath of Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu’s recent declaration favouring assisted suicide or euthanasia to ensure death with dignity.

Of course everyone wants to die with dignity. But I cannot understand what is dignified about a doctor terminating (aka killing) a patient’s life, even at the patient’s request.

The point is, quite apart from the serious moral issues involved, such drastic action is unnecessary. I assist in a unit where many patients die from terminal disease, yet they are all counselled, cared for and appropriately medicated, so that their last days are as serene and peaceful as possible. Isn’t that dying with dignity?

It is true that many do die undignified deaths, at home or in hospital. But that only reflects failure to access the care available, such as the involvement of hospice, adequate sedation, good counselling and many other strategies to effectively reduce suffering and preserve dignity.

Please, Archbishop Tutu and Eusebius McKaiser, when you come to the end of life’s road, don’t look for a doctor with a syringe full of lethal poison. There is no dignity in that.

Look instead for a doctor who knows how to fulfil his responsibilities to his patients, and provide a peaceful environment that allows life to slip serenely away. That is the death with dignity you are looking for.

Dr Terry Gilpin
Port Shepstone, KwaZulu-Natal