I like to think that activists who promote the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide are people who have the best of intentions but view life in a different way than I do.
When I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies bi-annual conference in Toronto (Sept 2006), I experienced a very different reality.
Many of the people present were directly involved in skirting the law by causing the death of people.
The concern I have for vulnerable people was simply negated and all effective opposition to their ideology was attacked as religious dogmatism.
I have been told that Francine Lalonde is a nice person but when I read Bill C-562 I feel the same type of unrest in my heart as I felt when I attended the Right to Die conference.
The bill legalizes euthanasia and assisted suicide for people who experience physical and mental pain. People who experience mental pain are often among the most socially devalued persons in our culture and yet Lalonde is willing to prescribe death instead of compassionate care for them.
The bill does not define terminal illness. Does it not concern Lalonde that people who receive a terminal diagnosis are often immediately shocked by that information? Many people go through a tempory depression after learning of their medical condition and only after experiencing a supportive environment or a period of acceptance do they once again gain composure.
The bill bases competency on whether or not the person appears to be lucid. Does Lalonde not realize that one is not competent unless they are actually lucid? Many people who experience chronic depression will appear to be lucid when in fact they are not competent to make important decisions.
The bill does not limit euthanasia and assisted suicide to physicians. Lalonde uses the term medical practitioner as defined by provincial law. This term is not limited to physicians only.
I do not like to compare Bill C-562 to the type of advocacy work that is associated with Dr. Philip Nitschke, Australia’s Dr. Death, but Nitschke advocated that Graeme Wylie be allowed to die by euthanasia, even though he had Alzheimer's disease and was incompetent to consent to the act.
Bill C-562 allows for the euthanasia of incompetent people so long as they have made the request in a valid advanced directive. Is Lalonde not concerned that medical practitioners may use this part of her bill to eliminate many of the most expensive patients in our long-term care facilities?
The problem with the “Dying with Dignity” movement is that they claim to be about legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide for terminally ill people who are suffering uncontrolled pain, but that is only their calling card. In reality they are about the “right to die” becoming recognized as a radical new human right that will be available to everyone, at anytime, for any reason.
Bill C-562 would move Canada very close to that radical social position.
Friday, June 20, 2008
An analysis of Bill C-562: An act to amend the Criminal Code (right to die with dignity)
On June 12, 2008 Francine Lalonde MP (Bloc Quebecois) from La Pointe-de-l’Île introduced Bill C-562: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (right to die with dignity).
In June 2005 Lalonde introduced Bill C-407. Bill C-562 has only minor revisions to Bill C-407.
Bill C-562 amends subsections 222(7) and subsection 241(2) of the criminal code.
Section 222 is the homicide provision in the criminal code. Bill C-562 legalizes euthanasia by amending subsection 222(7) of the criminal code.
Euthanasia is a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending the life of another person to relieve that person’s suffering where the act is the cause of death. (Of Life and Death - 1995)
Section 241 is the assisted suicide provision in the criminal code. Bill C-562 legalizes assisted suicide by amending subsection 241(2) of the criminal code.
Assisted suicide is the act of intentionally killing oneself with the assistance of another who provides the knowledge, means or both. (Of Life and Death - 1995)
Bill C-562 amends the criminal code by adding to subsections 222(7) and 241(2) exceptions whereby the law can be circumvented.
• The bill states that the person must be at least eighteen years old.
This “safeguard” may be unconstitutional because it limits what is determined by the bill to be appropriate medical treatment based on the age of the person. Since the constitution recognizes that we are all equal under the law, therefore it may be unconstitutional to limit the rights of individuals, based on age, without good reason.
• The bill states that the person is eligible: after trying or expressly refusing the appropriate treatments available that they continue to experience severe physical or mental pain without any prospect of relief.
Therefore, a person is eligible if they experience severe physical pain without any prospect of relief. Physical and mental pain can always be mitigated. Modern palliative care and has substantially improved over the past 20 years. Whereas medical science has not solved all the every problem with pain and symptom management, the concept of physical pain without any prospect of relief is more a sign of a patient who has not been appropriately cared for and not a reason for euthanasia or assisted suicide.
The bill is a direct threat to the lives of people with disabilities and/or chronic conditions who are often viewed as being without any prospect of relief. People with disabilities and chronic conditions will often view their life experience differently from those who are making a judgement of their quality of life.
In this bill, a person is also eligible if they experience severe mental pain without any prospect of relief. Chronic depression and mental pain is always treatable. Further, one must question the concept of providing euthanasia and assisted suicide to a person who experiences a chronic depression or mental pain because you could never be sure that they are competent to consent.
The bill does not require medical practitioners to refer people with mental pain to a registered psychiatrist or a psychologist.
A person is also eligible if they have refused appropriate treatments that are available. How can a physician determine that there is no prospect of relief if the person refuses appropriate treatments?
• The bill states that the person is eligible if: they suffer from a terminal illness. The bill does not define terminal illness.
Many people live with a terminal illness but are not actively dying. My step-father died 2½ years after being diagnosed with terminal cancer.
This bill would have qualified my step-father for euthanasia or assisted suicide when he was diagnosed.
• The bill states that the person is eligible if: the person has provided a medical practitioner, while appearing to be lucid, with two written requests more than 10 days apart expressly stating the person’s free and informed consent to opt to die.
The assumption that someone is competent when they are appearing to be lucid is very questionable. To appear to be lucid cannot be considered an appropriate measure for competency.
The safeguard related to making two written requests more than 10 days apart is to prove the lasting intent of the person. The fact that the person who makes the request only needs to appear to be lucid renders the safe-guard ineffective.
• The bill states that if the person has designated in writing with free and informed consent, before two witnesses with no personal interest in the death of the person, another person to act on his or her behalf with any medical practitioner when the person does not appear to be lucid.
This means that a person can die by euthanasia if they have made the request in a valid advanced directive.
It is unclear whether the person who commits euthanasia on behalf of the incompetent person must be a medical practitioner. The bill states that “another person can act on his or her behalf with any medical practitioner when the person does not appear to be lucid.” This may mean that a person can cause the death of an incompetent person if it is done with a medical practitioner and fulfills the request within a valid advanced directive?
• The bill requires that written confirmation of the diagnosis been received from at least two medical practitioners. The bill does not limit the practice of doctor shopping. In the state of Oregon, people who are denied an assisted suicide prescription from one doctor will simply go to another doctor.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to assure that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the written requests for euthanasia and assisted suicide was made under duress or while a person was not lucid.
This safeguard is designed to guarantee competency. Since the person who makes the request only needs to appear to be lucid renders the safeguard ineffective.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner has informed the person of the consequences of the request for euthanasia or assisted suicide and of the alternatives that are available to the person.
This safeguard is designed to guarantee that the person is aware of the available options. Since the person is not required to try effective treatments renders the safeguard ineffective.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to act in the manner indicated by the person and that the person may revoke their request at any time.
• The bill requires the medial practitioner to provide the coroner with a copy of the written confirmations of the diagnosis that were received from at least two medical practitioners.
This is a common “after-the-fact” reporting system that exists in other jurisdictions where they have legalized euthanasia and/or assisted suicide. After-the-fact reporting does not provide any protection for the person who has died already, it only provides protection for the medical practitioner.
• The bill defines medical practitioner as a duly qualified person by provincial law to practice medicine. The definition of medical practitioner is not limited to a physician.
Summary of Bill C-562:
• The bill legalizes euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada.
• The bill does not restrict euthanasia and assisted suicide to citizens of Canada. Canada could become a haven for American Suicide Tourists.
• The person must be at least 18 years old.
• A person may refuse appropriate treatments and still obtain euthanasia or assisted suicide. How can a physician determine that there is no prospect of relief if the person refuses appropriate treatments?
• The person may be experiencing either physical or mental pain. The bill will allos death as a treatment for depression or other chronic mental conditions.
• The bill does not define terminal illness and it is not limited to people who are terminally ill.
• The bill measures competency based on appearing to be lucid. What does that mean?
• The bill requires the person to submit two written requests at least 10 days apart.
• The bill allows incompetent people to die by euthanasia if they have made the request within a valid advanced directive. It is not clear whether medical practitioners are the only ones who can carry out euthanasia on incompetent people.
• The bill requires at least two medical practitioners to confirm the persons diagnosis in writing.
• The bill requires that all requests for euthanasia and assisted suicide be made free of duress.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to inform the person of all alternatives.
• The bill assures that the person may revoke their request at any time.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to provide confirmation of the diagnosis to the coroner. After-the-fact reporting systems only protect the medical practitioner and not the person.
• The definition of medical practitioner is not limited to a physician.
Final comments:
Legalizing euthanasia and/or assisted suicide is always wrong because:
• It directly and intentionally threatens the lives of the most vulnerable members of society. The lives of people with disabilities and chronic conditions, people who live with depression and mental illness, and others are directly threatened by euthanasia and assisted suicide.
• It establishes euthanasia and assisted suicide as treatment options for problems that are properly solved by effective and compassionate medical care.
• It changes the trust relationship between the medical practitioner and the patient.
• Society cannot legislate autonomy and choice in relation to acts that intentionally and directly cause death. No level of safeguard will ever protect vulnerable people from the subtle pressure to “choose” death.
Canadians must reject bill C-562.
Canadians must promote the right of every Canadian to excellent end-of-life care and to guarantee that every Canadian is treated with respect and dignity until their natural death.
Bill C-562 can be read at:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3570851&Language=e&Mode=1&File=24
In June 2005 Lalonde introduced Bill C-407. Bill C-562 has only minor revisions to Bill C-407.
Bill C-562 amends subsections 222(7) and subsection 241(2) of the criminal code.
Section 222 is the homicide provision in the criminal code. Bill C-562 legalizes euthanasia by amending subsection 222(7) of the criminal code.
Euthanasia is a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending the life of another person to relieve that person’s suffering where the act is the cause of death. (Of Life and Death - 1995)
Section 241 is the assisted suicide provision in the criminal code. Bill C-562 legalizes assisted suicide by amending subsection 241(2) of the criminal code.
Assisted suicide is the act of intentionally killing oneself with the assistance of another who provides the knowledge, means or both. (Of Life and Death - 1995)
Bill C-562 amends the criminal code by adding to subsections 222(7) and 241(2) exceptions whereby the law can be circumvented.
• The bill states that the person must be at least eighteen years old.
This “safeguard” may be unconstitutional because it limits what is determined by the bill to be appropriate medical treatment based on the age of the person. Since the constitution recognizes that we are all equal under the law, therefore it may be unconstitutional to limit the rights of individuals, based on age, without good reason.
• The bill states that the person is eligible: after trying or expressly refusing the appropriate treatments available that they continue to experience severe physical or mental pain without any prospect of relief.
Therefore, a person is eligible if they experience severe physical pain without any prospect of relief. Physical and mental pain can always be mitigated. Modern palliative care and has substantially improved over the past 20 years. Whereas medical science has not solved all the every problem with pain and symptom management, the concept of physical pain without any prospect of relief is more a sign of a patient who has not been appropriately cared for and not a reason for euthanasia or assisted suicide.
The bill is a direct threat to the lives of people with disabilities and/or chronic conditions who are often viewed as being without any prospect of relief. People with disabilities and chronic conditions will often view their life experience differently from those who are making a judgement of their quality of life.
In this bill, a person is also eligible if they experience severe mental pain without any prospect of relief. Chronic depression and mental pain is always treatable. Further, one must question the concept of providing euthanasia and assisted suicide to a person who experiences a chronic depression or mental pain because you could never be sure that they are competent to consent.
The bill does not require medical practitioners to refer people with mental pain to a registered psychiatrist or a psychologist.
A person is also eligible if they have refused appropriate treatments that are available. How can a physician determine that there is no prospect of relief if the person refuses appropriate treatments?
• The bill states that the person is eligible if: they suffer from a terminal illness. The bill does not define terminal illness.
Many people live with a terminal illness but are not actively dying. My step-father died 2½ years after being diagnosed with terminal cancer.
This bill would have qualified my step-father for euthanasia or assisted suicide when he was diagnosed.
• The bill states that the person is eligible if: the person has provided a medical practitioner, while appearing to be lucid, with two written requests more than 10 days apart expressly stating the person’s free and informed consent to opt to die.
The assumption that someone is competent when they are appearing to be lucid is very questionable. To appear to be lucid cannot be considered an appropriate measure for competency.
The safeguard related to making two written requests more than 10 days apart is to prove the lasting intent of the person. The fact that the person who makes the request only needs to appear to be lucid renders the safe-guard ineffective.
• The bill states that if the person has designated in writing with free and informed consent, before two witnesses with no personal interest in the death of the person, another person to act on his or her behalf with any medical practitioner when the person does not appear to be lucid.
This means that a person can die by euthanasia if they have made the request in a valid advanced directive.
It is unclear whether the person who commits euthanasia on behalf of the incompetent person must be a medical practitioner. The bill states that “another person can act on his or her behalf with any medical practitioner when the person does not appear to be lucid.” This may mean that a person can cause the death of an incompetent person if it is done with a medical practitioner and fulfills the request within a valid advanced directive?
• The bill requires that written confirmation of the diagnosis been received from at least two medical practitioners. The bill does not limit the practice of doctor shopping. In the state of Oregon, people who are denied an assisted suicide prescription from one doctor will simply go to another doctor.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to assure that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the written requests for euthanasia and assisted suicide was made under duress or while a person was not lucid.
This safeguard is designed to guarantee competency. Since the person who makes the request only needs to appear to be lucid renders the safeguard ineffective.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner has informed the person of the consequences of the request for euthanasia or assisted suicide and of the alternatives that are available to the person.
This safeguard is designed to guarantee that the person is aware of the available options. Since the person is not required to try effective treatments renders the safeguard ineffective.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to act in the manner indicated by the person and that the person may revoke their request at any time.
• The bill requires the medial practitioner to provide the coroner with a copy of the written confirmations of the diagnosis that were received from at least two medical practitioners.
This is a common “after-the-fact” reporting system that exists in other jurisdictions where they have legalized euthanasia and/or assisted suicide. After-the-fact reporting does not provide any protection for the person who has died already, it only provides protection for the medical practitioner.
• The bill defines medical practitioner as a duly qualified person by provincial law to practice medicine. The definition of medical practitioner is not limited to a physician.
Summary of Bill C-562:
• The bill legalizes euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada.
• The bill does not restrict euthanasia and assisted suicide to citizens of Canada. Canada could become a haven for American Suicide Tourists.
• The person must be at least 18 years old.
• A person may refuse appropriate treatments and still obtain euthanasia or assisted suicide. How can a physician determine that there is no prospect of relief if the person refuses appropriate treatments?
• The person may be experiencing either physical or mental pain. The bill will allos death as a treatment for depression or other chronic mental conditions.
• The bill does not define terminal illness and it is not limited to people who are terminally ill.
• The bill measures competency based on appearing to be lucid. What does that mean?
• The bill requires the person to submit two written requests at least 10 days apart.
• The bill allows incompetent people to die by euthanasia if they have made the request within a valid advanced directive. It is not clear whether medical practitioners are the only ones who can carry out euthanasia on incompetent people.
• The bill requires at least two medical practitioners to confirm the persons diagnosis in writing.
• The bill requires that all requests for euthanasia and assisted suicide be made free of duress.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to inform the person of all alternatives.
• The bill assures that the person may revoke their request at any time.
• The bill requires the medical practitioner to provide confirmation of the diagnosis to the coroner. After-the-fact reporting systems only protect the medical practitioner and not the person.
• The definition of medical practitioner is not limited to a physician.
Final comments:
Legalizing euthanasia and/or assisted suicide is always wrong because:
• It directly and intentionally threatens the lives of the most vulnerable members of society. The lives of people with disabilities and chronic conditions, people who live with depression and mental illness, and others are directly threatened by euthanasia and assisted suicide.
• It establishes euthanasia and assisted suicide as treatment options for problems that are properly solved by effective and compassionate medical care.
• It changes the trust relationship between the medical practitioner and the patient.
• Society cannot legislate autonomy and choice in relation to acts that intentionally and directly cause death. No level of safeguard will ever protect vulnerable people from the subtle pressure to “choose” death.
Canadians must reject bill C-562.
Canadians must promote the right of every Canadian to excellent end-of-life care and to guarantee that every Canadian is treated with respect and dignity until their natural death.
Bill C-562 can be read at:
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3570851&Language=e&Mode=1&File=24
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Japan gripped by suicide epidemic
Many people refuse to recognize the connection between suicide and assisted suicide.
The primary indicator for requests for euthanasia or assisted suicide is depression or a feeling of hopelessness. This happens to be the same primary indicator for suicide attempts.
The recent phenomenon of suicide promoting websites that offer instructions and in some cases counseling to encourage someone to commit suicide further connects suicide to assisted suicide.
Some of these suicide promoting/counseling websites are operated by groups that exist to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide. One of those website operators is Dr. Philip Nitschke from Australia.
This is a significant problem in Japan. If you read the article from the link you will notice that Japan has a suicide epidemic that has been worsened by the suicide websites.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk:80/tol/news/world/asia/article4170649.ece
On May 1, I reported about a call for internet providers in Japan to block access to suicide websites in relation to the surge in suicides in Japan.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
This has also become a problem in the UK. If you link to one of my previous blog posts you will notice that the problem of suicide websites has become so prevalent in one region of the UK that the government is discussing strenghtening the law to shut-down these websites.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/06/uk-government-discussing-closure-of.html
I am convinced that these websites have a similar effect on society as legalizing assisted suicide. Suicide promotion/counseling websites prey on the vulnerable who are either depressed or feeling a sense of hopelessness.
Often these people have been marginalized in society or made to feel like they are a burden on society or feel like they have no one who cares for them or no reason to live.
More often these are people who are experiencing clinical depression or treatable mental conditions. These are the people society needs to protect.
Vulnerable people are also the ones who become victimized by euthanasia or assisted suicide. Undiagnosed depression is a common problem. Just because someone has a terminal or chronic condition, does not mean that their request for euthanasia or assisted suicide is not a cry for help in a difficult personal time.
These websites need to be shut-down on a world-wide basis. The purveyors of these websites need to be prosecuted in a similar manner as people who are circulating child pornography.
These websites directly effect the most vulnerable in society and they must be stopped.
The recent phenomenon of suicide promoting websites that offer instructions and in some cases counseling to encourage someone to commit suicide further connects suicide to assisted suicide.
Some of these suicide promoting/counseling websites are operated by groups that exist to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide. One of those website operators is Dr. Philip Nitschke from Australia.
This is a significant problem in Japan. If you read the article from the link you will notice that Japan has a suicide epidemic that has been worsened by the suicide websites.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk:80/tol/news/world/asia/article4170649.ece
On May 1, I reported about a call for internet providers in Japan to block access to suicide websites in relation to the surge in suicides in Japan.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
This has also become a problem in the UK. If you link to one of my previous blog posts you will notice that the problem of suicide websites has become so prevalent in one region of the UK that the government is discussing strenghtening the law to shut-down these websites.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/06/uk-government-discussing-closure-of.html
Often these people have been marginalized in society or made to feel like they are a burden on society or feel like they have no one who cares for them or no reason to live.
More often these are people who are experiencing clinical depression or treatable mental conditions. These are the people society needs to protect.
Vulnerable people are also the ones who become victimized by euthanasia or assisted suicide. Undiagnosed depression is a common problem. Just because someone has a terminal or chronic condition, does not mean that their request for euthanasia or assisted suicide is not a cry for help in a difficult personal time.
These websites need to be shut-down on a world-wide basis. The purveyors of these websites need to be prosecuted in a similar manner as people who are circulating child pornography.
These websites directly effect the most vulnerable in society and they must be stopped.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Foreshadow of things to come.
I just read Mark Pickup's profound new blog entry "Foreshadow of things to come."
http://humanlifematters.blogspot.com/2008/06/foreshadows-of-things-to-come.html
Pickup recognizes the problem with intentionally dehydrating people who are not otherwise dying to death.
To intentionally dehydrate someone to death, who is not otherwise dying, is euthanasia by omission because the cause of death is dehydration and not the medical condition.
We can play with language and philosophy all we want, but the underlying reality is that to intentionally cause death, by action or omission, is a threat to the lives of people with disabilities.
http://humanlifematters.blogspot.com/2008/06/foreshadows-of-things-to-come.html
Pickup recognizes the problem with intentionally dehydrating people who are not otherwise dying to death.
To intentionally dehydrate someone to death, who is not otherwise dying, is euthanasia by omission because the cause of death is dehydration and not the medical condition.
We can play with language and philosophy all we want, but the underlying reality is that to intentionally cause death, by action or omission, is a threat to the lives of people with disabilities.
Doctor offers to treat dying Winnipeg man
Finally there is some reasonable progress in the Golubchuk case.
Grace Hospital has a doctor who has agreed to provide medical care for Samuel Golubchuk. The other doctors who were attempting to put pressure on the system by refusing to provide medical care for Golubchuk will not have to be involved in the case and will not be in a position to refuse to provide medical treatment to the other patients.
There are several problems with the Golubchuk case.
The first concern is the lack of effective communication between the hospital and the family. An antagonistic relationship forced the Golubchuks to seek a legal recourse to a situation that was best solved by proper negotiation and mediation.
The second concern is the lack of respect for the particular moral beliefs of the orthodox Jewish community. By pressuring everyone to fit within one decision-making model they are creating a culture that will require other families who have particular moral beliefs to seek legal remedy when the physician or the hospital is unwilling to respect their beliefs.
Not everyone will make the same decisions that the Golubchuk family have made. Nonetheless, we need to respect the diversity of our nation and uphold the right of a family to defend the wishes of their family members when it comes to maintaining life-support.
Finally, there is a lot of propaganda connected to the Golubchuk case.
Arthur Shafer has been quick to deride the decisions made in the Golubchuk case and he has been willing to exaggerate the claims of Dr. Anand Kumar, who painted a worse case scenario in order to defend his decisions that the family has litigated against him.
We need to lower the tension and introduce a mediator to allow the family and the hospital to find common ground without the current hostility that has surrounded this case.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com:80/s/cbc/080618/canada/canada_winnipeg_doctor
Grace Hospital has a doctor who has agreed to provide medical care for Samuel Golubchuk. The other doctors who were attempting to put pressure on the system by refusing to provide medical care for Golubchuk will not have to be involved in the case and will not be in a position to refuse to provide medical treatment to the other patients.
There are several problems with the Golubchuk case.
The first concern is the lack of effective communication between the hospital and the family. An antagonistic relationship forced the Golubchuks to seek a legal recourse to a situation that was best solved by proper negotiation and mediation.
The second concern is the lack of respect for the particular moral beliefs of the orthodox Jewish community. By pressuring everyone to fit within one decision-making model they are creating a culture that will require other families who have particular moral beliefs to seek legal remedy when the physician or the hospital is unwilling to respect their beliefs.
Not everyone will make the same decisions that the Golubchuk family have made. Nonetheless, we need to respect the diversity of our nation and uphold the right of a family to defend the wishes of their family members when it comes to maintaining life-support.
Finally, there is a lot of propaganda connected to the Golubchuk case.
Arthur Shafer has been quick to deride the decisions made in the Golubchuk case and he has been willing to exaggerate the claims of Dr. Anand Kumar, who painted a worse case scenario in order to defend his decisions that the family has litigated against him.
We need to lower the tension and introduce a mediator to allow the family and the hospital to find common ground without the current hostility that has surrounded this case.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com:80/s/cbc/080618/canada/canada_winnipeg_doctor
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Extra-ordinary Treatment vs Ordinary Care
This morning I was interviewed on CBC radio in Winnipeg Manitoba concerning the Golubchuk case.
I was asked what level of treatment constitutes ordinary care, and should be always provided, and what constitutes extraordinary treatment that is optional.
First: The Golubchuk case is unique because Samuel Golubchuk is an orthodox Jewish man who holds a distinct set of principles. I respect the Golubchuk family and I uphold their right to defend the principles that they and their father hold.
When people call me and ask specific medical questions I always differentiate between medical decisions that will be of benefit and carry a minimal amount of burden and those that provide very little benefit and may have a significant level of burden.
When a treatment is of benefit and the burden of the treatment is minimal then the treatment should be provided. When the treatment provides a minimal benefit or causes a significant level of burden then the treatment should be considered optional, based on the wishes of the person or their substitute decision-maker.
Basic care provisions, often referred to as ordinary care, should be considered obligatory. Basic care provisions include warmth, care, comfort, pain relief, fluids and food (unless it is physiologically impossible to provide, or the person is nearing death, or if its provision is a significant burden to the person) and other basic necessities of life. The respirator should not be considered obligatory but may be necessary for the continuation of life.
We must never cause death, but only allow death to occur.
Therefore we must reject any action or omission that directly and intentionally causes the death of a person. This is an issue of fundamental justice and equality.
You cannot allow one person to directly and intentionally cause the death of another person. This would give one person the power over life and death of another person. You can never control this and it will always result in a direct threat, by action or omission, of the lives of the most vulnerable.
I was asked what level of treatment constitutes ordinary care, and should be always provided, and what constitutes extraordinary treatment that is optional.
First: The Golubchuk case is unique because Samuel Golubchuk is an orthodox Jewish man who holds a distinct set of principles. I respect the Golubchuk family and I uphold their right to defend the principles that they and their father hold.
When people call me and ask specific medical questions I always differentiate between medical decisions that will be of benefit and carry a minimal amount of burden and those that provide very little benefit and may have a significant level of burden.
When a treatment is of benefit and the burden of the treatment is minimal then the treatment should be provided. When the treatment provides a minimal benefit or causes a significant level of burden then the treatment should be considered optional, based on the wishes of the person or their substitute decision-maker.
Basic care provisions, often referred to as ordinary care, should be considered obligatory. Basic care provisions include warmth, care, comfort, pain relief, fluids and food (unless it is physiologically impossible to provide, or the person is nearing death, or if its provision is a significant burden to the person) and other basic necessities of life. The respirator should not be considered obligatory but may be necessary for the continuation of life.
We must never cause death, but only allow death to occur.
Therefore we must reject any action or omission that directly and intentionally causes the death of a person. This is an issue of fundamental justice and equality.
You cannot allow one person to directly and intentionally cause the death of another person. This would give one person the power over life and death of another person. You can never control this and it will always result in a direct threat, by action or omission, of the lives of the most vulnerable.
More on Samuel Golubchuk
I was interviewed today by CBC radio in Manitoba concerning the Golubchuk case in Winnipeg.
It appears that the doctors are intentionally pressuring the system into a crisis in order to get their way and stop providing treatment for Samuel Golubchuk.
We need to remember that Samuel Golubchuk is an orthodox Jewish man. His family is defending their faith position by asking that nothing be done that would result in his death. I may not make the same treatment decisions as the Golubchuks but I respect the family's right to defend their father's wishes and his faith position.
Further to the issue of the physicians intentionally pressuring the system to reject treatment for Samuel Golubchuk, the legal system clearly gives the institution the advantage. Grace Hospital has hired, at taxpayers' expense, the best legal team in Manitoba to represent their position while the Golubchuk family are left to their own limited resources to protect the values of their father. Clearly, the system leans heavily towards supporting the hospital's agenda.
I am concerned that it is not possible to have a fair legal trial when the hospital has such legal advantages.
I am also very dissappointed with the fact that Grace Hospital has not provided a mediator for this dispute. Communication between Grace Hospital and the family has broken down. It is likely that other decisions may be possible if the family and the hospital could communicate in a non-confrontational manner.
It is also too bad that the physicians and Grace Hospital continue to refuse to respect the orthodox Jewish faith perspective of the Golubchuk family. The circumstances of this case are not common and require a special sensitivity to solve.
It appears that the doctors are intentionally pressuring the system into a crisis in order to get their way and stop providing treatment for Samuel Golubchuk.
We need to remember that Samuel Golubchuk is an orthodox Jewish man. His family is defending their faith position by asking that nothing be done that would result in his death. I may not make the same treatment decisions as the Golubchuks but I respect the family's right to defend their father's wishes and his faith position.
Further to the issue of the physicians intentionally pressuring the system to reject treatment for Samuel Golubchuk, the legal system clearly gives the institution the advantage. Grace Hospital has hired, at taxpayers' expense, the best legal team in Manitoba to represent their position while the Golubchuk family are left to their own limited resources to protect the values of their father. Clearly, the system leans heavily towards supporting the hospital's agenda.
I am concerned that it is not possible to have a fair legal trial when the hospital has such legal advantages.
I am also very dissappointed with the fact that Grace Hospital has not provided a mediator for this dispute. Communication between Grace Hospital and the family has broken down. It is likely that other decisions may be possible if the family and the hospital could communicate in a non-confrontational manner.
It is also too bad that the physicians and Grace Hospital continue to refuse to respect the orthodox Jewish faith perspective of the Golubchuk family. The circumstances of this case are not common and require a special sensitivity to solve.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Competent Enough to Live
I recently received an email from Bobby Schindler, the brother of Terri Schiavo, that included a shocking article about the Karen Weber case.
Karen's case is similar to Terri Schiavo's case, whereby the media is referring to her as a "vegetable" and the husband wants her to be dehydrated to death by withholding her fluids and food.
Please read the article:
http://www.townhall.com:80/Columnists/BobbySchindler/2008/06/13/competent_enough_to_live
You may also want to go to the website for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation at: http://www.terrisfight.org/
Karen's case is similar to Terri Schiavo's case, whereby the media is referring to her as a "vegetable" and the husband wants her to be dehydrated to death by withholding her fluids and food.
Please read the article:
http://www.townhall.com:80/Columnists/BobbySchindler/2008/06/13/competent_enough_to_live
You may also want to go to the website for the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation at: http://www.terrisfight.org/
Golubchuk injustice
The Samuel Golubchuk trial is being moved to mid-September from its original date in mid-November.
Many people would rightly say that this case needs to be heard sooner rather than later.
The facts are that the original trial date was based on the reality that the legal counsel for the Golubchuk family was already scheduled for trial in September and unable to represent the Golubchuk family in trial at that time.
Several important witnesses for the Golubchuk family also indicated that they would be unavailable in September.
Therefore the original timing for the trial was based on the ideology that the family should have proper legal representation.
The injustice is clear.
The family who are fighting to protect the wishes and values of their father are being trounced on by Goliath, the health care system and all of its resources. The lawyer for the Golubchuk family was simply told to reschedule his other commitments or they would have to find another lawyer.
It is interesting that Grace Hospital was represented by a large team of lawyers from big law firms, while the Golubchuk family is represented by a lawyer who does not work for a major law firm.
Well, nonetheless, David did beat Goliath.
Many people would rightly say that this case needs to be heard sooner rather than later.
The facts are that the original trial date was based on the reality that the legal counsel for the Golubchuk family was already scheduled for trial in September and unable to represent the Golubchuk family in trial at that time.
Several important witnesses for the Golubchuk family also indicated that they would be unavailable in September.
Therefore the original timing for the trial was based on the ideology that the family should have proper legal representation.
The injustice is clear.
The family who are fighting to protect the wishes and values of their father are being trounced on by Goliath, the health care system and all of its resources. The lawyer for the Golubchuk family was simply told to reschedule his other commitments or they would have to find another lawyer.
It is interesting that Grace Hospital was represented by a large team of lawyers from big law firms, while the Golubchuk family is represented by a lawyer who does not work for a major law firm.
Well, nonetheless, David did beat Goliath.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Manitoba doctors do not have the right to remove life-sustaining treatment against the wishes of the patient
Dr. Jocelyn Downie, the Canada Research Chair of Health Law and Policy said at a End-of-Life Ethics & Decision-Making conference at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg today that doctors do not have the legal right to withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment against a patient’s wishes.
Downie stated that there is no legal precedent in Canada that gives doctors the authority to remove a feeding tube or issue do not resuscitate orders against a patient’s wishes.
Downie directly contradicted the statement of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba who assert in their February 1, 2008 policy statement that a physician could unilaterally decide to remove life-sustaining treatment, including fluids and food, in certain circumstances.
The Statement said that even when a patient is likely to regain a level of self-awareness, that the physician could still withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment if the doctor has agreement from at least one other physician. If the family disagrees the doctor must seek agreement with the family, but if agreement cannot be achieved the doctor must give 96 hour notice before removing life-sustaining treatment, including fluids and food.
Downie said that the guidelines need to be revised because they go too far. Doctors can't medically determine whether a life is worth living.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/story/4184124p-4774196c.html
The comments made by Downie may also affect the case of Samuel Golubchuk, an orthodox Jewish man who’s family is seeking to have his life-sustaining treatment continued while Grace Hospital in Winnipeg is seeking to withdraw it.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/03/response-to-college-of-physicians.html
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-york-doctor-to-testify-in-favor-of.html
Downie stated that there is no legal precedent in Canada that gives doctors the authority to remove a feeding tube or issue do not resuscitate orders against a patient’s wishes.
Downie directly contradicted the statement of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba who assert in their February 1, 2008 policy statement that a physician could unilaterally decide to remove life-sustaining treatment, including fluids and food, in certain circumstances.
The Statement said that even when a patient is likely to regain a level of self-awareness, that the physician could still withdraw life-sustaining medical treatment if the doctor has agreement from at least one other physician. If the family disagrees the doctor must seek agreement with the family, but if agreement cannot be achieved the doctor must give 96 hour notice before removing life-sustaining treatment, including fluids and food.
Downie said that the guidelines need to be revised because they go too far. Doctors can't medically determine whether a life is worth living.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/story/4184124p-4774196c.html
The comments made by Downie may also affect the case of Samuel Golubchuk, an orthodox Jewish man who’s family is seeking to have his life-sustaining treatment continued while Grace Hospital in Winnipeg is seeking to withdraw it.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/03/response-to-college-of-physicians.html
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-york-doctor-to-testify-in-favor-of.html
Friday, June 6, 2008
Suicide websites and internet chatrooms could be closed down
Madeleine Moon, MP (Bridgend in South Wales), is asking her government to amend the 1961 law that forbids suicide counseling by making it illegal to counsel or promote suicide via the internet, email or other communications devices.
There have been 20 recent suicides in South Wales that are believed to have involved suicide sites or suicide chatrooms.
Currently the law is interpreted to only forbid face to face suicide aiding, abeting or counseling suicide.
Moon stated that "these websites are horrendous. They push people to kill themselves and tell them how to do it."
Vernon Coaker, the Home Office Minister told the justice committee that the Government was determined to act.
He stated that: "Aiding and abeting suicide, online or offline, is illegal. Something should be done about it and they (websites) should be taken down."
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "There are difficulties as many of them are based overseas, but we're considering whether the law can be strengthened.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2082806/Suicide-websites-and-internet-chatrooms-could-be-closed-down.html
At the same time Japan is being hit by more horrific suicide deaths in connection to suicide websites.
There have been at least 182 cases since late March in which people have killed themselves following instructions on the internet that explain how to mix household chemicals to generate hydrogen sulphide gas.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23809619-5006003,00.html
Every nation needs to outlaw suicide promoting websites in a similar manner as Australia did a few years ago. If the UK strengthens their laws concerning suicide websites, momentum will be started for Canada and the other common law nations to follow suit.
Currently the law is interpreted to only forbid face to face suicide aiding, abeting or counseling suicide.
Moon stated that "these websites are horrendous. They push people to kill themselves and tell them how to do it."
Vernon Coaker, the Home Office Minister told the justice committee that the Government was determined to act.
He stated that: "Aiding and abeting suicide, online or offline, is illegal. Something should be done about it and they (websites) should be taken down."
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "There are difficulties as many of them are based overseas, but we're considering whether the law can be strengthened.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2082806/Suicide-websites-and-internet-chatrooms-could-be-closed-down.html
At the same time Japan is being hit by more horrific suicide deaths in connection to suicide websites.
There have been at least 182 cases since late March in which people have killed themselves following instructions on the internet that explain how to mix household chemicals to generate hydrogen sulphide gas.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23809619-5006003,00.html
Every nation needs to outlaw suicide promoting websites in a similar manner as Australia did a few years ago. If the UK strengthens their laws concerning suicide websites, momentum will be started for Canada and the other common law nations to follow suit.
Long term priorities for the Dutch right to die lobby
Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
The NVVE (Dutch euthanasia lobby) are currently debating the long-term direction of the euthanasia movement in the Netherlands. Full legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide in the Netherlands is simply not enough for the euthanasia lobby. I have always stated that their final goal is to make the right to die - a human right.
The recent debate about the long-term future directions of the NVVE were published in the Relevant, which is the magazine of the NVVE.
Dr. Rob Jonquiére, the CEO of the NVVE explained that the NVVE has sought input from public meetings, experts and other organizations. From the consultations they identified several areas of concern.
The framework of their memorandum has been written in individual parts. They have identified the dilemma of euthanasia for people with dementia, assisted suicide in cases of chronic psychiatric suffering, and finally the possibility of legalizing the last-will-pill for those people who think that their life is complete.
The renewed objective of the NVVE is that everyone has the right to make their own decision about death. The questions of when, where and how are decisions that the individual should have the right to make. The spectrum of end-of-life decisions include stopping life-prolonging treatment to palliative sedation, from assisted suicide to euthanasia and everything in between.
The long-term goals of the NVVE will be implemented as projects that will be carried out by project managers who will build teams that will be composed of volunteers, committee members and experts.
They are hoping to establish priorities for approval by their 2009 meeting with full implementation by 2015.
The Right to Die lobby is busy establishing its priorities for the future. Are we ready to dispel their lies to the world?
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
The recent debate about the long-term future directions of the NVVE were published in the Relevant, which is the magazine of the NVVE.
Dr. Rob Jonquiére, the CEO of the NVVE explained that the NVVE has sought input from public meetings, experts and other organizations. From the consultations they identified several areas of concern.
The framework of their memorandum has been written in individual parts. They have identified the dilemma of euthanasia for people with dementia, assisted suicide in cases of chronic psychiatric suffering, and finally the possibility of legalizing the last-will-pill for those people who think that their life is complete.
The renewed objective of the NVVE is that everyone has the right to make their own decision about death. The questions of when, where and how are decisions that the individual should have the right to make. The spectrum of end-of-life decisions include stopping life-prolonging treatment to palliative sedation, from assisted suicide to euthanasia and everything in between.
The long-term goals of the NVVE will be implemented as projects that will be carried out by project managers who will build teams that will be composed of volunteers, committee members and experts.
They are hoping to establish priorities for approval by their 2009 meeting with full implementation by 2015.
The Right to Die lobby is busy establishing its priorities for the future. Are we ready to dispel their lies to the world?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
34 evacuated from suicide death in Japan
Japanese police evacuated 34 people from an apartment building today in response to another noxious suicide death.
http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5j6PLZUNkGmdLuPBwOfA4OEi00V1QD9131E383
The epidemic of suicide deaths has been exasperated by the new trend of downloading instructions from the internet to make a suicide gas concoction.
Japan has always had a high suicide rate but government figures show that 84 people committed suicide last month in Japan with the help of suicide instructions from the internet that give specific instructions as to how to mix chemicals for suicide.
The police are cracking down on websites that provide suicide information and they recently asked web providers to shut-down sites that promote suicide.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/japan-looks-to-lower-suicide-rate.html
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Once again, it is imperative that something be done to shut down websites that promote suicide. Society is effectively shutting down child porn websites, the same needs to be done for suicide promotion websites.
Related news:
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention has given an $85,000 two year grant to researcher Mark S. Kaplan to make recommendations concerning the suicide rate in Oregon.
http://www.oregonlive.com/health/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1212528319125450.xml&coll=7
It is very interesting that the only state in the US that has legalized assisted suicide is also within the top 5 for seniors suicide rates in the US.
http://ap.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5j6PLZUNkGmdLuPBwOfA4OEi00V1QD9131E383
The epidemic of suicide deaths has been exasperated by the new trend of downloading instructions from the internet to make a suicide gas concoction.
Japan has always had a high suicide rate but government figures show that 84 people committed suicide last month in Japan with the help of suicide instructions from the internet that give specific instructions as to how to mix chemicals for suicide.
The police are cracking down on websites that provide suicide information and they recently asked web providers to shut-down sites that promote suicide.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/japan-looks-to-lower-suicide-rate.html
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Once again, it is imperative that something be done to shut down websites that promote suicide. Society is effectively shutting down child porn websites, the same needs to be done for suicide promotion websites.
Related news:
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention has given an $85,000 two year grant to researcher Mark S. Kaplan to make recommendations concerning the suicide rate in Oregon.
http://www.oregonlive.com/health/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1212528319125450.xml&coll=7
It is very interesting that the only state in the US that has legalized assisted suicide is also within the top 5 for seniors suicide rates in the US.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Barbara Wagner offered assisted suicide instead of medical treatment
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
Barbara Wagner was prescribed a drug to treat her lung cancer by her oncologist. But the State Health Plan informed her that they would not pay for the treatment.
In the letter informing Wagner that they would not pay for the necessary cancer treatment, they indicated that they would cover palliative, or comfort care, which included assisted suicide.
Link to the story:
 |
| Barbara Wagner |
The State of Oregon manages its health care dollars by determining which treatments that they are will pay for with State healthcare dollars.
“I think it’s messed up,” Wagner saidShe was particularly upset because the letter of denial said that assisted suicide would be covered.
“To say to someone, we’ll pay for you to die, but not pay for you to live, it’s cruel,” she said. “I get angry. Who do they think they are?”The language in the letter referring to Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act comes out of the Health Service Commission’s statement of intent under examples of comfort and palliative care, said Dr. John Sattenspiel, senior medical director for LIPA.
“I understand the way it was interpreted,” he said. “I’m not sure how we can lift that. The reality is, at some level (doctor-assisted suicide) could be considered as a palliative or comfort care measure."
The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is also concerned that the Oregon State Health Plan views assisted suicide and palliative care as similar health care services. Good palliative care allows a person to live until they die, whereas assisted suicide only causes death.Once assisted suicide is viewed as a medical treatment, then it is always an option, even when good treatment or care is available.
Wagner is receiving treatment, but not due to the recognition by the State of Oregon that her life was worth living but rather because the pharmaceutical company has offered her the Gift of Treatment by providing the drug for Wagner at no cost.
This case should be an example of what happens when assisted suicide become legal.
I stood to gain from assisted suicide
http://www.abc.net.au:80/news/stories/2008/06/03/2263841.htm
The court case concerning the euthanasia death of 71 year-old Graeme Wiley, who was mentally incompetent from Alzheimer’s disease, by his partner 59 year-old Shirley Justins is uncovering some important and very sad facts about the case.
The Crown is seeking a conviction for murder against Justins, while Justins has pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of aiding and abetting Wiley’s suicide.
Under cross-examination, Justins admitted that:
•she had a financial conflict of interest and Wiley’s death relieved her from her obligation to care for him.
• she admitted that she deliberately misled Wiley’s lawyer when she failed to tell him that Wiley had Alzheimer’s disease and was incompetent to make personal decisions. Wiley changed his will to give most of his estate to Justins less than a month before his death.
• she admitted that Wiley didn’t remember that he had daughters during his assessment in December 2005 which was four months before he changed his will to replace his daughters as the primary beneficiaries of his two million dollar estate.
• she also admitted that she paid 75-year-old Caren Jenning, more than $2,000 to get the drug (Nembutal) from Mexico for Mr Wiley.
Jenning has pleaded guilty to importing the euthanasia drug from Mexico but has pleaded not guilty to being an accessory to murder or aiding and abetting in a suicide.
Many people think that euthanasia and/or assisted suicide should be legal to give people a choice as to when and how their life should end.
The reality is that by legalizing euthanasia and/or assisted suicide society is then changing the law by allowing a person to be directly involved in taking another person's life. Justins was able to fool Wiley’s lawyer into changing his will, even when he had mid- to late- stage Alzheimer’s disease.
Is it never possible to protect vulnerable people when the prohibition for killing others has been removed.
Some would say that we should legalize assisted suicide and then regulate it in order to protect vulnerable people from similar circumstances.
The reality is that vulnerable people are highly dependent on others for their basic care. It is for this reason that their would never be a regime whereby the vulnerable will be protected from legal assisted suicide.
Even Dr. Philip Nitschke, Australia’s leading euthanasia agitator, admitted to turning a blind eye to the fact that Wylie was incompetent to decide to die by euthanasia. So much for the idea that euthanasia and assisted suicide should made available to competent persons only.
Go to: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/nitschke-hell-bent-on-assisted-suicide.html
Finally, many people say, There have been no abuses in the State of Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal, so why would there be abuses in other places?
The reality is that in 2007, 49 people died by assisted suicide in Oregon and none was sent for psychiatric or psychological assessment.
Since the Oregon reports are based on the information that is gleaned from the assisted suicide reports that are sent in from the physician who prescribes assisted suicide, and since those reports are destroyed after the report is published, therefore we will never be able to prove that Wiley type cases are not happening in Oregon.
Go to: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/physician-assisted-suicide-pas-in.html
Those who favor the right to die need to re-think their position. The Wiley case is the prime example of why euthanasia and assisted suicide should never become legal because it is a direct threat to the lives of the most vulnerable members of society.
The court case concerning the euthanasia death of 71 year-old Graeme Wiley, who was mentally incompetent from Alzheimer’s disease, by his partner 59 year-old Shirley Justins is uncovering some important and very sad facts about the case.
The Crown is seeking a conviction for murder against Justins, while Justins has pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of aiding and abetting Wiley’s suicide.
Under cross-examination, Justins admitted that:
•she had a financial conflict of interest and Wiley’s death relieved her from her obligation to care for him.
• she admitted that she deliberately misled Wiley’s lawyer when she failed to tell him that Wiley had Alzheimer’s disease and was incompetent to make personal decisions. Wiley changed his will to give most of his estate to Justins less than a month before his death.
• she admitted that Wiley didn’t remember that he had daughters during his assessment in December 2005 which was four months before he changed his will to replace his daughters as the primary beneficiaries of his two million dollar estate.
• she also admitted that she paid 75-year-old Caren Jenning, more than $2,000 to get the drug (Nembutal) from Mexico for Mr Wiley.
Jenning has pleaded guilty to importing the euthanasia drug from Mexico but has pleaded not guilty to being an accessory to murder or aiding and abetting in a suicide.
Many people think that euthanasia and/or assisted suicide should be legal to give people a choice as to when and how their life should end.
The reality is that by legalizing euthanasia and/or assisted suicide society is then changing the law by allowing a person to be directly involved in taking another person's life. Justins was able to fool Wiley’s lawyer into changing his will, even when he had mid- to late- stage Alzheimer’s disease.
Is it never possible to protect vulnerable people when the prohibition for killing others has been removed.
Some would say that we should legalize assisted suicide and then regulate it in order to protect vulnerable people from similar circumstances.
The reality is that vulnerable people are highly dependent on others for their basic care. It is for this reason that their would never be a regime whereby the vulnerable will be protected from legal assisted suicide.
Even Dr. Philip Nitschke, Australia’s leading euthanasia agitator, admitted to turning a blind eye to the fact that Wylie was incompetent to decide to die by euthanasia. So much for the idea that euthanasia and assisted suicide should made available to competent persons only.
Go to: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/nitschke-hell-bent-on-assisted-suicide.html
Finally, many people say, There have been no abuses in the State of Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal, so why would there be abuses in other places?
The reality is that in 2007, 49 people died by assisted suicide in Oregon and none was sent for psychiatric or psychological assessment.
Since the Oregon reports are based on the information that is gleaned from the assisted suicide reports that are sent in from the physician who prescribes assisted suicide, and since those reports are destroyed after the report is published, therefore we will never be able to prove that Wiley type cases are not happening in Oregon.
Go to: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/physician-assisted-suicide-pas-in.html
Those who favor the right to die need to re-think their position. The Wiley case is the prime example of why euthanasia and assisted suicide should never become legal because it is a direct threat to the lives of the most vulnerable members of society.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Washington State Initiative I-1000
The initiative to legalize assisted suicide in Washington State appears to be gaining ground.
The Death With Dignity I-1000 campaign to legalize assisted suicide has raised one million dollars;, they have organizations, such as the lobby group Compassion & Choices, working to raise more money on a national basis, and they have the former governor of Washington State, Booth Gardner, as a lead campaigner.
Every American who opposes assisted suicide, whether they be disability rights activists, palliative care professionals, pro-life supporters or anybody, needs to join the campaign to oppose I-1000.
Initiative I-1000 supporters are currently collecting signatures throughout the State of Washington. Due to fact that they have the money to spend money on paid signature collectors, I expect that they will collect 226,000 valid signatures.
We cannot wait until the signature campaign is verified before we start to raise the necessary money to oppose the legalization of Oregon-style assisted suicide in Washington State.
The Campaign against assisted suicide in Washington State must become the priority for all Americans who oppose assisted suicide.
Please go to http://noassistedsuicide.com/ and donate money or offer support today.
The Death With Dignity I-1000 campaign to legalize assisted suicide has raised one million dollars;, they have organizations, such as the lobby group Compassion & Choices, working to raise more money on a national basis, and they have the former governor of Washington State, Booth Gardner, as a lead campaigner.
Every American who opposes assisted suicide, whether they be disability rights activists, palliative care professionals, pro-life supporters or anybody, needs to join the campaign to oppose I-1000.
Initiative I-1000 supporters are currently collecting signatures throughout the State of Washington. Due to fact that they have the money to spend money on paid signature collectors, I expect that they will collect 226,000 valid signatures.
We cannot wait until the signature campaign is verified before we start to raise the necessary money to oppose the legalization of Oregon-style assisted suicide in Washington State.
The Campaign against assisted suicide in Washington State must become the priority for all Americans who oppose assisted suicide.
Please go to http://noassistedsuicide.com/ and donate money or offer support today.
Friday, May 30, 2008
New York Doctor to testify in favor of Sustaining Life Support for Orthodox Jewish Man
A neurologist from New York has agreed to testify as a medical expert on behalf of the family of Samuel Golubchuk an Orthodox Jewish man from Winnipeg Canada.
Dr. Leon Zacharowicz agreed to work on the case pro-bono after being contacted by Agudath Israel of America. Dr. Zacharowicz is planning to go to Winnipeg sometime this summer to examine Golubchuk himself in preparation for the trial that is currently scheduled for November 2008.
Dr. Edward Reichman, a leading expert and lecturer in the field of medical ethics stated that according to Jewish ethics "If a person’s life is dependent on the ventilator, the decision to take them off the ventilator would be equal to homicide"
Dr. Reichman further stated to The Jewish Star that "The overwhelming majority of rabbinic authorities maintain that it would be prohibited to remove the respirator, if that would lead to the individual’s death."
Dr. Reichman predicts that "This case could be a real test case. It could become a terrible trend if it gets pushed through. It would be a tragedy, definitely for Orthodox Jews, but also for other patients. If it gets passed in Canada, it can succeed in the United States as well."
http://www.vosizneias.com/16520/2008/05/28/winnipeg-canada-ny-doctor-to-testify-in-favor-of-sustaining-life-support-for-orthodox-patient/
Dr. Leon Zacharowicz agreed to work on the case pro-bono after being contacted by Agudath Israel of America. Dr. Zacharowicz is planning to go to Winnipeg sometime this summer to examine Golubchuk himself in preparation for the trial that is currently scheduled for November 2008.
Dr. Edward Reichman, a leading expert and lecturer in the field of medical ethics stated that according to Jewish ethics "If a person’s life is dependent on the ventilator, the decision to take them off the ventilator would be equal to homicide"
Dr. Reichman further stated to The Jewish Star that "The overwhelming majority of rabbinic authorities maintain that it would be prohibited to remove the respirator, if that would lead to the individual’s death."
Dr. Reichman predicts that "This case could be a real test case. It could become a terrible trend if it gets pushed through. It would be a tragedy, definitely for Orthodox Jews, but also for other patients. If it gets passed in Canada, it can succeed in the United States as well."
http://www.vosizneias.com/16520/2008/05/28/winnipeg-canada-ny-doctor-to-testify-in-favor-of-sustaining-life-support-for-orthodox-patient/
Euthanasia Bill passes California Assembly
Bill AB 2747 passed in the California Assembly by a vote of 42 to 34.
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_9424815
This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to remove opposition to euthanasia by omission in California and is promoted as a bill that promotes palliative care options and end-of-life care information.
http://www.sunherald.com/447/story/592749.html
Nobody opposes good palliative care initiatives and information, but this bill mandates that a person who is given a one year life-expectancy will be informed and given the medical support to be intentionally dehydrated to death by the means of terminal sedation and dehydration.
If a physician is morally opposed to terminally sedation and dehydration of a person who is not actively dying or experiencing uncontrolled physical pain (euthanasia by omission), that physician is mandated to refer the patient to a physician who is willing to intentionally dehydrate the patient.
Bill AB 2747 represents the new strategy for Compassion & Choices, the leading euthanasia lobby group in the US.
Compassion & Choices has worked tirelessly in the past few years to legalize assisted suicide in California without success.
By mandating that palliative care become abused by the promotion of terminal sedation and dehydration for those who are not actively dying or suffering uncontrolled pain, they will achieve a significant part of their final goal of legalizing euthanasia.
For more information go to
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/toward-honest-talk.html
To intentionally cause death by dehydration is not assisted suicide but rather euthanasia.
Assisted suicide means that a person knowingly provides the means for someone to kill themselves. Death by dehydration requires a direct and active involvement in the death of the person and not simply a provision of the means.
Bill AB 2747 is simply unnecessary. The use of terminal sedation for people who are actively dying or experiencing intractable pain is considered an ethical option by nearly everyone. Access to good palliative care information and services are not legislative issues but rather budgetary issues.
This bill is about mandating the right to die by dehydration for people who are not near to death and who are not suffering from intractable pain.
This means that people who want to legalize euthanasia are in fact settling for half of their final goal with the hope that once death by dehydration becomes a common procedure, people will then demand death by injection because it is in fact a more compassionate way to die.
Californians need to recognize what Bill AB 2747 represents and strenuously oppose it.
A similar bill is also being debated in Vermont.
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_9424815
This bill is a thinly veiled attempt to remove opposition to euthanasia by omission in California and is promoted as a bill that promotes palliative care options and end-of-life care information.
http://www.sunherald.com/447/story/592749.html
Nobody opposes good palliative care initiatives and information, but this bill mandates that a person who is given a one year life-expectancy will be informed and given the medical support to be intentionally dehydrated to death by the means of terminal sedation and dehydration.
If a physician is morally opposed to terminally sedation and dehydration of a person who is not actively dying or experiencing uncontrolled physical pain (euthanasia by omission), that physician is mandated to refer the patient to a physician who is willing to intentionally dehydrate the patient.
Bill AB 2747 represents the new strategy for Compassion & Choices, the leading euthanasia lobby group in the US.
Compassion & Choices has worked tirelessly in the past few years to legalize assisted suicide in California without success.
By mandating that palliative care become abused by the promotion of terminal sedation and dehydration for those who are not actively dying or suffering uncontrolled pain, they will achieve a significant part of their final goal of legalizing euthanasia.
For more information go to
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/toward-honest-talk.html
To intentionally cause death by dehydration is not assisted suicide but rather euthanasia.
Assisted suicide means that a person knowingly provides the means for someone to kill themselves. Death by dehydration requires a direct and active involvement in the death of the person and not simply a provision of the means.
Bill AB 2747 is simply unnecessary. The use of terminal sedation for people who are actively dying or experiencing intractable pain is considered an ethical option by nearly everyone. Access to good palliative care information and services are not legislative issues but rather budgetary issues.
This bill is about mandating the right to die by dehydration for people who are not near to death and who are not suffering from intractable pain.
This means that people who want to legalize euthanasia are in fact settling for half of their final goal with the hope that once death by dehydration becomes a common procedure, people will then demand death by injection because it is in fact a more compassionate way to die.
Californians need to recognize what Bill AB 2747 represents and strenuously oppose it.
A similar bill is also being debated in Vermont.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Suicide Tourists dying at Dignitas clinic in Switzerland
The Dignitas suicide clinic in Switzerland helped to kill 335 suicidal people in the past two years with 85 percent of them being foreigners.
Ludwig Minelli, the director of the Dignitas suicide clinic in Zurich has recently released his statistics on the number of deaths at the Dignitias clinic.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1216810.ece
The Dignitas clinic admits to charging approximately 5000 British pounds (approximately $10,000) to assist the suicide of their clients. One must first pay a membership fee to Dignitas before they will consider assisting a persons suicide. Of course it has nothing to do with money.
Minelli stated that 50 percent of the deaths are German suicide tourists with the British and the French making up the next two most common nationalities to die at the clinic.
Dignitas has been involved with suicides in vans, similar to the acts by Dr. Kevorkian, and they currently employ the plastic bag and helium method. They began the bag and helium method to avoid the need to receive approval from a physician who would write the lethal prescription.
Recently the Swiss court approved a case of assisting a suicide of a person who was chronically depressed and not physically dying.
Previous comments by Wesley
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2007/04/dignitas-to-finish-hate-crime-with.html
http://discardedlies.com/entry/?15281_
Doctors in Switzerland have compared the methods used by Dignitas to those that were used by the Nazi’s.
Some say that this is not a fair comparison because the Nazi’s weren’t concerned about the choice of the victim, but since when have depressed and suicidal people freely chose death.
It is imperative that countries support suicide prevention strategies for their most vulnerable citizens whom Minelli and his Dignitas team are preying on.
We must recognize that a caring society protects its vulnerable citizens at their greatest time of need.
Ludwig Minelli, the director of the Dignitas suicide clinic in Zurich has recently released his statistics on the number of deaths at the Dignitias clinic.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1216810.ece
The Dignitas clinic admits to charging approximately 5000 British pounds (approximately $10,000) to assist the suicide of their clients. One must first pay a membership fee to Dignitas before they will consider assisting a persons suicide. Of course it has nothing to do with money.
Minelli stated that 50 percent of the deaths are German suicide tourists with the British and the French making up the next two most common nationalities to die at the clinic.
Dignitas has been involved with suicides in vans, similar to the acts by Dr. Kevorkian, and they currently employ the plastic bag and helium method. They began the bag and helium method to avoid the need to receive approval from a physician who would write the lethal prescription.
Recently the Swiss court approved a case of assisting a suicide of a person who was chronically depressed and not physically dying.
Previous comments by Wesley
http://www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2007/04/dignitas-to-finish-hate-crime-with.html
http://discardedlies.com/entry/?15281_
Doctors in Switzerland have compared the methods used by Dignitas to those that were used by the Nazi’s.
Some say that this is not a fair comparison because the Nazi’s weren’t concerned about the choice of the victim, but since when have depressed and suicidal people freely chose death.
It is imperative that countries support suicide prevention strategies for their most vulnerable citizens whom Minelli and his Dignitas team are preying on.
We must recognize that a caring society protects its vulnerable citizens at their greatest time of need.
Japan looks to lower suicide rate
Japan is reviewing its guidelines aimed at reducing the number of suicides in Japan and hopes to reduce the suicide rate by 20 percent by 2016.
http://www.bloomberg.com:80/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a_2Lhi9MAfY0&refer=japan
Japan has been plagued by more than 30,000 suicide deaths each year over the past 10 years. According to the United Nations they have the 9th highest suicide rate in the world.
Recently the Japanese government asked internet providers to block websites that promote suicide and suicide methods, such as hydrogen sulphide on the internet after their was a rash of suicides committed using these techniques in the past few months. http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka Machimura said "It's outrageous that something that seems to promote suicide is widely available on the Internet. There is freedom of expression but it must be accompanied by responsibility. These things shouldn't go unregulated."
The Australian government passed a law prohibiting the promotion and counseling of suicide on the internet a few years ago in response to the work of Dr. Philip Nitschke, the Australian Dr. Death, who was providing suicide and counseling people to commit suicide via the internet.
All western nations need laws that protect vulnerable depressed and mentally incompetent people from falling victim to the euthanasia lobby who are promoting suicide (right to die) as a human right.
http://www.bloomberg.com:80/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=a_2Lhi9MAfY0&refer=japan
Japan has been plagued by more than 30,000 suicide deaths each year over the past 10 years. According to the United Nations they have the 9th highest suicide rate in the world.
Recently the Japanese government asked internet providers to block websites that promote suicide and suicide methods, such as hydrogen sulphide on the internet after their was a rash of suicides committed using these techniques in the past few months. http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka Machimura said "It's outrageous that something that seems to promote suicide is widely available on the Internet. There is freedom of expression but it must be accompanied by responsibility. These things shouldn't go unregulated."
The Australian government passed a law prohibiting the promotion and counseling of suicide on the internet a few years ago in response to the work of Dr. Philip Nitschke, the Australian Dr. Death, who was providing suicide and counseling people to commit suicide via the internet.
All western nations need laws that protect vulnerable depressed and mentally incompetent people from falling victim to the euthanasia lobby who are promoting suicide (right to die) as a human right.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Families encouraged to let "unresponsive" loved ones die
The recent Australian guidelines on withdrawing medical treatment from people in a "unresponsive" state will not only encourage families to withdraw medical treatment from their family members but also to deny them basic care provisions. http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23755540-952,00.html
The guidelines will encourage families to withdraw basic care such as tube feeding from their "unresponsive" loved one’s. When tube feeding is withdrawn from a person who is cognitively disabled and appears unresponsive, but who is not otherwise dying or nearing death, then the cause of death will be death by dehydration, or in other-words death by euthanasia by omission.
It should be considered optional to withdraw or withhold medical treatment that is risky, intrusive, destructive, exhausting, painful or repugnant or when the cost outweighs benefit or success, or when the treatment is literally futile.
But, medical care such as the provision of fluids and food by tube should be considered obligatory so long as the patient is physiologically benefitting from the care or until the person is imminently dying.
In order for everyone to be treated as an equal citizen, society needs to recognize the dignity of each human being, even when they: live with permanent physical or cognitive disabilities and unable to effectively communicate with others.
The new Australian guidelines encourage physicians and family members to treat people who are patients in post-coma unresponsiveness (PCU) and a minimally responsive state (MRS) differently than other people.
I think that this is a huge step towards future policies that will include the elimination of people with cognitive disabilities who will already be treated without equality and already viewed as expendable.
The guidelines will encourage families to withdraw basic care such as tube feeding from their "unresponsive" loved one’s. When tube feeding is withdrawn from a person who is cognitively disabled and appears unresponsive, but who is not otherwise dying or nearing death, then the cause of death will be death by dehydration, or in other-words death by euthanasia by omission.
It should be considered optional to withdraw or withhold medical treatment that is risky, intrusive, destructive, exhausting, painful or repugnant or when the cost outweighs benefit or success, or when the treatment is literally futile.
But, medical care such as the provision of fluids and food by tube should be considered obligatory so long as the patient is physiologically benefitting from the care or until the person is imminently dying.
In order for everyone to be treated as an equal citizen, society needs to recognize the dignity of each human being, even when they: live with permanent physical or cognitive disabilities and unable to effectively communicate with others.
The new Australian guidelines encourage physicians and family members to treat people who are patients in post-coma unresponsiveness (PCU) and a minimally responsive state (MRS) differently than other people.
I think that this is a huge step towards future policies that will include the elimination of people with cognitive disabilities who will already be treated without equality and already viewed as expendable.
Monday, May 26, 2008
When does death occur?
The recent story of Val Thomas (59) who awoke after having no brain waves for 17 hours, experiencing two cardiac arrests, and Rigor mortis began to set in.
The Thomas case opens new questions as to when we can be certain that death has occured.
What is really interesting is that Thomas awoke 10 minutes after the family discussed the prospect of Thomas being an organ donor, they said their goodbyes and removed all the tubes.
Read more about the story and watch the video links at:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357463,00.html
The Thomas case opens new questions as to when we can be certain that death has occured.
What is really interesting is that Thomas awoke 10 minutes after the family discussed the prospect of Thomas being an organ donor, they said their goodbyes and removed all the tubes.
Read more about the story and watch the video links at:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357463,00.html
Toward Honest Talk
I read an excellent article by Marilyn Golden in the Capitol Weekly online explaining why California's Bill AB 2747 that is sponsored by Patti Berg needs to be defeated.
Marilyn Golden is a Policy Analyst at the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) which is the leading center on policy and law in relation to disability rights in the U.S.
Golden effectively explains how AB 2747 represents a change in strategy for the euthanasia lobby group compassion and choices (C & C). C & C have made several attempts to legalize assisted suicide since 2005.
Bill AB 2747 is designed to pave the way for the legalization of assisted suicide in California.
As a point of interest, there is a similar bill in Vermont that is also being sponsored by the euthanasia lobby groups.
Please go to the article by Golden at:
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cx57q8rve5v4bj2&issueId=x4tyolqkrlw0m0&xid=x4u6470wbq8h4b
Marilyn Golden is a Policy Analyst at the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) which is the leading center on policy and law in relation to disability rights in the U.S.
Golden effectively explains how AB 2747 represents a change in strategy for the euthanasia lobby group compassion and choices (C & C). C & C have made several attempts to legalize assisted suicide since 2005.
Bill AB 2747 is designed to pave the way for the legalization of assisted suicide in California.
As a point of interest, there is a similar bill in Vermont that is also being sponsored by the euthanasia lobby groups.
Please go to the article by Golden at:
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cx57q8rve5v4bj2&issueId=x4tyolqkrlw0m0&xid=x4u6470wbq8h4b
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Nazi doctor receives medical award
Dr. Hans-Joachim Sewering, a 92-year-old german physician has been honored for performing unequalled service in the cause of freedom of the practice and the independence of the medical profession, and to the nation’s health system by the German Federation of Internal Medicine.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=267a801e-2b52-42d7-b06e-1d27f3dabf24
The Anti-Defamation League in the U.S. claims that Sewering sent up to 900 children to their death at a euthanasia centre. Sewering has admitted being a member of the SS, but he has denied being responsible for euthanasia deaths.
These cases are very important because they remind us that people are capable of doing horrific acts to other human beings.
Society likes to believe that these horrific acts only happened because of the Nazi regime that controlled Germany, but the reality is that Hitler wasn’t ordering these deaths, physicians were ordering these deaths. Hitler only gave them permission.
Whether Sewering is partly responsible for 900 deaths or not, it is clear that in the long-term, the primary victims of euthanasia will be people with disabilities and other vulnerable persons who will either be subtly coerced into accepting death or killed out of indifference.
People who lack equality, also will lack the necessary ability to effectively resist the culture of death.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=267a801e-2b52-42d7-b06e-1d27f3dabf24
The Anti-Defamation League in the U.S. claims that Sewering sent up to 900 children to their death at a euthanasia centre. Sewering has admitted being a member of the SS, but he has denied being responsible for euthanasia deaths.
These cases are very important because they remind us that people are capable of doing horrific acts to other human beings.
Society likes to believe that these horrific acts only happened because of the Nazi regime that controlled Germany, but the reality is that Hitler wasn’t ordering these deaths, physicians were ordering these deaths. Hitler only gave them permission.
Whether Sewering is partly responsible for 900 deaths or not, it is clear that in the long-term, the primary victims of euthanasia will be people with disabilities and other vulnerable persons who will either be subtly coerced into accepting death or killed out of indifference.
People who lack equality, also will lack the necessary ability to effectively resist the culture of death.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
54 ill as new toxic fume suicide hits Japan
CNN news has reported about a suicide case in Japan that resulted in 54 people becoming sick from the toxic fumes related to the suicide concoction that was composed of a liquid pesticide.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/05/22/toxic.suicide/?iref=hpmostpop
Earlier this month a 24 year old man committed suicide by mixing laundry detergent and cleaning fluids.
In April, a 14 year old girl used the same method to commit suicide, resulting in 90 neighbors becoming sick from the toxic fumes.
CNN reported that:
"The suicides are seen as part of a spate of detergent-related deaths that experts say have been encouraged by Internet suicide sites since last summer.
Seiji Yoshikawa, deputy head of the Internet Hot Line, which operates under the guidelines of police, said the number of sites promoting detergent suicides soared in April.
"They are rife on the Internet. Writing examples include 'you can die easily and beautifully' and 'this is much easier than charcoal-burning suicide,'" Yoshikawa said, referring to a once-popular suicide method, The Associated Press reported.'
On May 1, I reported about a call for internet providers in Japan to block access to suicide websites in relation to the surge in suicides in Japan.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Governments on a world-wide basis need to enact laws to shut down websites that promote and counsel people to commit suicide in order to protect the vulnerable depressed and mentally ill people who are using these websites.
Websites that promote child pornography are effectively being shut down due to laws that have been enacted to protect children. In the same way we need to shut down websites that promote suicide.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, the Australian Dr. Death and the visible leader of the Right to Die lobby in Australia, has been involved in suicide counseling via the internet for many years. The Right to Die is not about dignity with dignity, it is about creating a universal "right to die".
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200609/INT20060912a.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23633391-2,00.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/05/22/toxic.suicide/?iref=hpmostpop
Earlier this month a 24 year old man committed suicide by mixing laundry detergent and cleaning fluids.
In April, a 14 year old girl used the same method to commit suicide, resulting in 90 neighbors becoming sick from the toxic fumes.
CNN reported that:
"The suicides are seen as part of a spate of detergent-related deaths that experts say have been encouraged by Internet suicide sites since last summer.
Seiji Yoshikawa, deputy head of the Internet Hot Line, which operates under the guidelines of police, said the number of sites promoting detergent suicides soared in April.
"They are rife on the Internet. Writing examples include 'you can die easily and beautifully' and 'this is much easier than charcoal-burning suicide,'" Yoshikawa said, referring to a once-popular suicide method, The Associated Press reported.'
On May 1, I reported about a call for internet providers in Japan to block access to suicide websites in relation to the surge in suicides in Japan.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/internet-providers-urged-to-remove.html
Governments on a world-wide basis need to enact laws to shut down websites that promote and counsel people to commit suicide in order to protect the vulnerable depressed and mentally ill people who are using these websites.
Websites that promote child pornography are effectively being shut down due to laws that have been enacted to protect children. In the same way we need to shut down websites that promote suicide.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, the Australian Dr. Death and the visible leader of the Right to Die lobby in Australia, has been involved in suicide counseling via the internet for many years. The Right to Die is not about dignity with dignity, it is about creating a universal "right to die".
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200609/INT20060912a.html
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23633391-2,00.html
Latimer's 'cause' is a real threat
There was an article about Robert Latimer in yesterday’s National Post in Canada. http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=528343
Robert Latimer is the Canadian farmer from Saskatchewan who killed his 12 year-old daughter Tracy in 1993 because she was “suffering” from cerebral palsy. Latimer has become a media celebrity over the years.
He was recently released on day-parole and has decided to live in Ottawa where he can agitate for his cause with the government representatives.
Today a letter appeared in the National Post that is written by Deiren Masterson from Toronto, that truly puts the Latimer case in perspective. http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=530493
Masterson writes
When Rebecca Beayni -- a 25-year-old living with cerebral palsy who is unable to talk or walk -- was awarded the city of Toronto Young Adult Award for Social Justice last year, there wasn't a mention of it in the Post. And to quote this article, Tracy Latimer “functioned at the level of a three-month-old.” So does this mean that three-month-olds are expendable too?
I have a friend, Michael, with Tracy's condition, a man with severe cerebral palsy whom doctors predicted wouldn't live past 10 -- he's now 36. He needs care in all aspects of life. He eats with a feeding tube. He has a particular love of music. Six years ago he danced for Pope John Paul II in front of an audience of millions. He's living a deeply meaningful life.
I’m able-bodied and able-minded, just like your reporters. With these tools I'm writing for my friends Rebecca and Michael, against the threat that Robert Latimer’s “cause" poses to them and those whom their lives represent. My message to your readers: Wake up!
Robert Latimer is the Canadian farmer from Saskatchewan who killed his 12 year-old daughter Tracy in 1993 because she was “suffering” from cerebral palsy. Latimer has become a media celebrity over the years.
He was recently released on day-parole and has decided to live in Ottawa where he can agitate for his cause with the government representatives.
Today a letter appeared in the National Post that is written by Deiren Masterson from Toronto, that truly puts the Latimer case in perspective. http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=530493
Masterson writes
When Rebecca Beayni -- a 25-year-old living with cerebral palsy who is unable to talk or walk -- was awarded the city of Toronto Young Adult Award for Social Justice last year, there wasn't a mention of it in the Post. And to quote this article, Tracy Latimer “functioned at the level of a three-month-old.” So does this mean that three-month-olds are expendable too?
I have a friend, Michael, with Tracy's condition, a man with severe cerebral palsy whom doctors predicted wouldn't live past 10 -- he's now 36. He needs care in all aspects of life. He eats with a feeding tube. He has a particular love of music. Six years ago he danced for Pope John Paul II in front of an audience of millions. He's living a deeply meaningful life.
I’m able-bodied and able-minded, just like your reporters. With these tools I'm writing for my friends Rebecca and Michael, against the threat that Robert Latimer’s “cause" poses to them and those whom their lives represent. My message to your readers: Wake up!
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Alleged suicide job shocks campaigners
A New Zealand news agency is suggesting that leaders on both sides of the euthanasia debate are surprised that an American woman using the name Susan Wilson was paid $12,000to fly to New Zealand and assist the death of a woman suffering from depression. http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/1786504
As the long-time leader of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Canada and now the International chair, I am neither surprised or shocked by this news.
In September 2006, I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies bi-annual conference in Toronto. During the proceedings of that conference, it was apparent that the end-goal for the euthanasia lobby was the acceptance of the "last-will-pill" or the peaceful pill.
Dr. Rob Jonquiere, the moderate leader of the Right to Die movement in the Netherlands explained that by taking the law in their own hands that activists were making it more difficult for politicians to accept the final goal - the acceptance of the "last-will-pill". When you analyze the concept of a last-will-pill you must agree that there is no way to protect people who are depressed or mentally incompetent from killing themselves with this pill.
We already know that the Supreme Court in the Netherlands approved euthanasia for people who are experiencing chronic depression or chronic mental suffering.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, who is the maverick Australian leader of Exit International promoted the peaceful pill that allegedly could be available to anyone at anytime.
Several years ago Wesley Smith reported comments by Nitschke in an article titled "Noxious Nitschke" stating that the "peaceful pill" could be available to troubled teens. http://www.nationalreview.com/smithw/smith200411150826.asp
The question for the euthanasia lobby is not that they oppose euthanasia or assisted suicide for people who suffer depression, the question is how will the public knowledge of their support for these acts affect their campaign to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide everywhere?
Finally, if there is nothing wrong with assisted suicide then why should assisting a suicide be done for free. Susan Wilson had to fly to New Zealand and accept the chance that she might be arrested for her actions.
Maybe the real shock is that someone would pay her $12,000 and the other members of the euthanasia lobby feel that they are being under paid.
As the long-time leader of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition in Canada and now the International chair, I am neither surprised or shocked by this news.
In September 2006, I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies bi-annual conference in Toronto. During the proceedings of that conference, it was apparent that the end-goal for the euthanasia lobby was the acceptance of the "last-will-pill" or the peaceful pill.
Dr. Rob Jonquiere, the moderate leader of the Right to Die movement in the Netherlands explained that by taking the law in their own hands that activists were making it more difficult for politicians to accept the final goal - the acceptance of the "last-will-pill". When you analyze the concept of a last-will-pill you must agree that there is no way to protect people who are depressed or mentally incompetent from killing themselves with this pill.
We already know that the Supreme Court in the Netherlands approved euthanasia for people who are experiencing chronic depression or chronic mental suffering.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, who is the maverick Australian leader of Exit International promoted the peaceful pill that allegedly could be available to anyone at anytime.
Several years ago Wesley Smith reported comments by Nitschke in an article titled "Noxious Nitschke" stating that the "peaceful pill" could be available to troubled teens. http://www.nationalreview.com/smithw/smith200411150826.asp
The question for the euthanasia lobby is not that they oppose euthanasia or assisted suicide for people who suffer depression, the question is how will the public knowledge of their support for these acts affect their campaign to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide everywhere?
Finally, if there is nothing wrong with assisted suicide then why should assisting a suicide be done for free. Susan Wilson had to fly to New Zealand and accept the chance that she might be arrested for her actions.
Maybe the real shock is that someone would pay her $12,000 and the other members of the euthanasia lobby feel that they are being under paid.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Washington State lawmakers oppose assisted suicide
http://www.tdn.com/articles/2008/05/20/breaking_news/doc483318d29f55d128012543.txt
The Daily News Online serving the Lower Columbia in Washington state reported today on the widespread political opposition to Initiative 1000, the Washington state plebiscite to legalize assisted suicide.
Democrat State Senator Margarita Prentice stated “It has virtually no protection for low-income and vulnerable people from being pressured into prematurely ending their life,”
Prentice, a registered nurse and chairwoman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee believes that “This very dangerous initiative never would have passed the legislature”
Republican representative Lynn Schindler stated that “Voters should realize that 25 states around the country have rejected this kind of dangerous proposal.”
Schindler warned people that “Under Initiative 1000, persons who are ill could feel pressured by organizations to end their own lives to escape the financial burden”
19 republican and 4 Democrat law makers have united to oppose Initiative 1000.
Washington Governor Chris Gregoire also opposes the measure. She said: “I find it on a personal level very, very difficult to support assisted suicide.”
The Coalition Against Assisted Suicide is particularly concerned about two provisions in the initiative:
• It does not require terminally ill patients to undergo a mental health evaluation before obtaining lethal drugs; even those with depression can seek assisted suicide.
• The family members of the patient need not be given notice of the patient’s intent.
Sen. Prentice said there is a danger that “physicians can prescribe lethal drugs to patients who are depressed or mentally ill.
In 2007, according to the Oregon Department of Health, not one patient in Oregon, where assisted suicide was legalized by plebiscite, was referred for psychological counseling, a sure sign to me there is nothing to protect those suffering psychological distress.”
The Daily News Online serving the Lower Columbia in Washington state reported today on the widespread political opposition to Initiative 1000, the Washington state plebiscite to legalize assisted suicide.
Democrat State Senator Margarita Prentice stated “It has virtually no protection for low-income and vulnerable people from being pressured into prematurely ending their life,”
Prentice, a registered nurse and chairwoman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee believes that “This very dangerous initiative never would have passed the legislature”
Republican representative Lynn Schindler stated that “Voters should realize that 25 states around the country have rejected this kind of dangerous proposal.”
Schindler warned people that “Under Initiative 1000, persons who are ill could feel pressured by organizations to end their own lives to escape the financial burden”
19 republican and 4 Democrat law makers have united to oppose Initiative 1000.
Washington Governor Chris Gregoire also opposes the measure. She said: “I find it on a personal level very, very difficult to support assisted suicide.”
The Coalition Against Assisted Suicide is particularly concerned about two provisions in the initiative:
• It does not require terminally ill patients to undergo a mental health evaluation before obtaining lethal drugs; even those with depression can seek assisted suicide.
• The family members of the patient need not be given notice of the patient’s intent.
Sen. Prentice said there is a danger that “physicians can prescribe lethal drugs to patients who are depressed or mentally ill.
In 2007, according to the Oregon Department of Health, not one patient in Oregon, where assisted suicide was legalized by plebiscite, was referred for psychological counseling, a sure sign to me there is nothing to protect those suffering psychological distress.”
Friday, May 16, 2008
Euthanasia Advocates fail to distance themselves from Exoo.
On Monday, May 12, 2008 my blog covered the issue of George Exoo and the recent film that has been made about him by film maker Jon Ronson.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-made-it-look-like-they-died-in-their.html
Ronson explained that he got the idea of making a film about Exoo after the death of Rosemary Toole. The Ronson exposeé proves that Exoo will assist the suicide of people who are depressed, mentally ill and not terminally ill.
Today Dr. Libby Wilson responded to the Exoo debacle in the guardian newspaper. Wilson explains that “it is by unfortunate associations that the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies are lumped together with loose cannons such as Rev George Exoo.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/society/2008/may/15/mentalhealth.health
The reality is that the Rev George Exoo finds his victims through the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies.
In September 2006, I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies conference in Toronto. One of the speakers was Dr. Philip Nitschke. Nitschke was there to promote the idea of the “peaceful” pill that could be used by anyone when they are “tired of living”.
Maybe Nitschke is just another loose cannon but the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies didn’t distance themselves from his comments.
A volunteer with the Compassion & Choices client support program explained that she “believes the cost for medical technology is often a waste of money.” She said “She became a volunteer because she wants to hasten her own death.”
This woman was a mainstream volunteer for Compassion & Choices.
Exoo is more extreme than the other Right to Die lobby, but he is only more extreme by degree, not because of his actions.
The Right to Die lobby is a death cult.
The only really difference between the mainstream lobby and the work of George Exoo is the strategy they have set to achieve their agenda.
http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-made-it-look-like-they-died-in-their.html
Ronson explained that he got the idea of making a film about Exoo after the death of Rosemary Toole. The Ronson exposeé proves that Exoo will assist the suicide of people who are depressed, mentally ill and not terminally ill.
Today Dr. Libby Wilson responded to the Exoo debacle in the guardian newspaper. Wilson explains that “it is by unfortunate associations that the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies are lumped together with loose cannons such as Rev George Exoo.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/society/2008/may/15/mentalhealth.health
The reality is that the Rev George Exoo finds his victims through the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies.
In September 2006, I attended the World Federation of Right to Die Societies conference in Toronto. One of the speakers was Dr. Philip Nitschke. Nitschke was there to promote the idea of the “peaceful” pill that could be used by anyone when they are “tired of living”.
Maybe Nitschke is just another loose cannon but the member societies of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies didn’t distance themselves from his comments.
A volunteer with the Compassion & Choices client support program explained that she “believes the cost for medical technology is often a waste of money.” She said “She became a volunteer because she wants to hasten her own death.”
This woman was a mainstream volunteer for Compassion & Choices.
Exoo is more extreme than the other Right to Die lobby, but he is only more extreme by degree, not because of his actions.
The Right to Die lobby is a death cult.
The only really difference between the mainstream lobby and the work of George Exoo is the strategy they have set to achieve their agenda.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Oregon's Trojan Horse
Go to http://www.internationaltaskforce.org/trojanhorse.htm to read the article written by Rita Marker, an attorney and the executive director of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide.
This article explains why Oregon, the only State in the US to legalize assisted suicide, has not expanded the parameters of the law.
This article also explains why the I-1000 campaign to legalize assisted suicide by plebiscite in Washington State is so important.
This analysis should encourage you to support the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide in Washington State - http://noassistedsuicide.com/
This article explains why Oregon, the only State in the US to legalize assisted suicide, has not expanded the parameters of the law.
This article also explains why the I-1000 campaign to legalize assisted suicide by plebiscite in Washington State is so important.
This analysis should encourage you to support the Coalition Against Assisted Suicide in Washington State - http://noassistedsuicide.com/
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) in Oregon:
Dr. Herbert Hendin and Dr. Kathleen Foley have written a thorough report on the experience in Oregon after 10 years of legal assisted suicide.
Hendin is a Professor of Psychiatry and the Chief Executive Officer and Medical Director of Suicide Prevention International.
Foley is a Professor of Neurology, Neuroscience, and Clinical Pharmacology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University and the Medical Director, International Palliative Care Initiative of the Open Society Institute.
Hendin and Foley examine the Oregon experience based on case studies and research articles. They make recommendations to the Oregon Public Health Division (OPHD) as to how they could ensure that patients are properly protected under the law.
For instance, the case of Helen proved that the law is not effectively protecting patients when they are experiencing depression.
Helen’s personal physician refused to assist in her suicide but didn’t offer specific reasons. A second physician refused to assist Helen in suicide on the grounds that Helen was depressed.
Helen’s husband then called Compassion in Dying (now Compassion & Choices) who referred Helen to a physician who assisted her suicide.
Barbara Coombs Lee, then the executive director of Compassion in Dying stated “‘If I get rebuffed by one doctor, I can go to another...’”
The physician who assisted the suicide for Helen regretted his minimal communication with the physicians who refused to assist Helen’s suicide and stated “Had I felt there was a disagreement among the physicians about my patient’s eligibility, I would not have written the prescription.”
The article also examines the contention that palliative care has improved in Oregon since the implementation of assisted suicide.
Hendin and Foley provide information that contradicts this assessment. They state that
“A Study at the Oregon Health & Science University indicated that there has been a greater percentage of cases of inadequately treated pain in terminally ill patients since the Oregon law went into effect. However, among patients who requested PAS but availed themselves of a substantive intervention by a physician, 46% changed their minds about having PAS.”
Hendin and Foley bring up significant concerns about the correlation between depression and assisted suicide. They show that “researchers have found hopelessness, which is strongly correlated with depression, to be the factor that most significantly predicts the wish for death.”
A guidebook for health care professionals that is written by the Oregon University Center for Ethics advises physicians to refer all cases requesting assisted suicide for psychiatric evaluation, even though the physician is only required to refer patients that are suspected to be experiencing depression or mental a psychological disorder.
The reality is that only 13% of assisted suicide requests were referred for a psychiatric evaluation between 1998 - 2005 and no-one was referred for a psychiatric evaluation out of the 49 assisted suicide deaths in 2007.
It is also concerning that under the Oregon law the psychiatric assessment is only required to determine if the person has the capacity to decide. A person could be depressed and yet considered capable to consent to death.
The Oregon law doesn’t protect the person from being pressured. Kate Cheney’s case illustrates that even though Cheney was sent for a psychiatric assessment with the first psychiatrist suggesting that she was not capable of consenting, a second psychiatrist determined Cheney could consent even though it was noted that Cheney’s daughter appeared more interested in her suicide than Cheney herself.
Hendin and Foley suggest that this case questions what value Oregon’s prohibition on coercion really has.
Hendin and Foley also investigated the “lack of teeth” in the reporting system in Oregon. The OPHD have not addressed the issue of non-reporting, even though in the Netherlands and Belgium the issue of non-reporting is significant. The OPHD appear to be more concerned with patient-doctor confidentiality than with monitoring compliance or abuse.
The OPHD have admitted that they have no way of knowing how may assisted suicide cases are not reported.
The role of the assisted suicide advocacy group Compassion and Choices must be questioned. Compassion and Choices have been directly involved in 73% of all assisted suicide deaths in Oregon.
In 2006 Compassion and Choices lobbied the OPHD by threatening legal action if OPHD didn’t change the term assisted suicide to a term which was more palatable. The term assisted suicide has now been replaced by Death with Dignity.
How can the OPHD assure people that the law is being followed when the assisted suicide lobby group is also the referral agency for the majority of the assisted suicide deaths in Oregon.
Hendin and Foley conclude that “As the Oregon assisted suicide law is currently implemented, “Death with Dignity Act” is something of a misnomer.”
To receive a copy of the article - Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective by Herbert Hendin and Kathleen Foley, simply contact Euthanasia Prevention Coalition at - 1-877-439-3348and request the article and we will send it to you.
http://www.spiorg.org/publications/HendinFoley_MichiganLawReview.pdf
Hendin is a Professor of Psychiatry and the Chief Executive Officer and Medical Director of Suicide Prevention International.
Foley is a Professor of Neurology, Neuroscience, and Clinical Pharmacology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University and the Medical Director, International Palliative Care Initiative of the Open Society Institute.
Hendin and Foley examine the Oregon experience based on case studies and research articles. They make recommendations to the Oregon Public Health Division (OPHD) as to how they could ensure that patients are properly protected under the law.
For instance, the case of Helen proved that the law is not effectively protecting patients when they are experiencing depression.
Helen’s personal physician refused to assist in her suicide but didn’t offer specific reasons. A second physician refused to assist Helen in suicide on the grounds that Helen was depressed.
Helen’s husband then called Compassion in Dying (now Compassion & Choices) who referred Helen to a physician who assisted her suicide.
Barbara Coombs Lee, then the executive director of Compassion in Dying stated “‘If I get rebuffed by one doctor, I can go to another...’”
The physician who assisted the suicide for Helen regretted his minimal communication with the physicians who refused to assist Helen’s suicide and stated “Had I felt there was a disagreement among the physicians about my patient’s eligibility, I would not have written the prescription.”
The article also examines the contention that palliative care has improved in Oregon since the implementation of assisted suicide.
Hendin and Foley provide information that contradicts this assessment. They state that
“A Study at the Oregon Health & Science University indicated that there has been a greater percentage of cases of inadequately treated pain in terminally ill patients since the Oregon law went into effect. However, among patients who requested PAS but availed themselves of a substantive intervention by a physician, 46% changed their minds about having PAS.”
Hendin and Foley bring up significant concerns about the correlation between depression and assisted suicide. They show that “researchers have found hopelessness, which is strongly correlated with depression, to be the factor that most significantly predicts the wish for death.”
A guidebook for health care professionals that is written by the Oregon University Center for Ethics advises physicians to refer all cases requesting assisted suicide for psychiatric evaluation, even though the physician is only required to refer patients that are suspected to be experiencing depression or mental a psychological disorder.
The reality is that only 13% of assisted suicide requests were referred for a psychiatric evaluation between 1998 - 2005 and no-one was referred for a psychiatric evaluation out of the 49 assisted suicide deaths in 2007.
It is also concerning that under the Oregon law the psychiatric assessment is only required to determine if the person has the capacity to decide. A person could be depressed and yet considered capable to consent to death.
The Oregon law doesn’t protect the person from being pressured. Kate Cheney’s case illustrates that even though Cheney was sent for a psychiatric assessment with the first psychiatrist suggesting that she was not capable of consenting, a second psychiatrist determined Cheney could consent even though it was noted that Cheney’s daughter appeared more interested in her suicide than Cheney herself.
Hendin and Foley suggest that this case questions what value Oregon’s prohibition on coercion really has.
Hendin and Foley also investigated the “lack of teeth” in the reporting system in Oregon. The OPHD have not addressed the issue of non-reporting, even though in the Netherlands and Belgium the issue of non-reporting is significant. The OPHD appear to be more concerned with patient-doctor confidentiality than with monitoring compliance or abuse.
The OPHD have admitted that they have no way of knowing how may assisted suicide cases are not reported.
The role of the assisted suicide advocacy group Compassion and Choices must be questioned. Compassion and Choices have been directly involved in 73% of all assisted suicide deaths in Oregon.
In 2006 Compassion and Choices lobbied the OPHD by threatening legal action if OPHD didn’t change the term assisted suicide to a term which was more palatable. The term assisted suicide has now been replaced by Death with Dignity.
How can the OPHD assure people that the law is being followed when the assisted suicide lobby group is also the referral agency for the majority of the assisted suicide deaths in Oregon.
Hendin and Foley conclude that “As the Oregon assisted suicide law is currently implemented, “Death with Dignity Act” is something of a misnomer.”
To receive a copy of the article - Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective by Herbert Hendin and Kathleen Foley, simply contact Euthanasia Prevention Coalition at - 1-877-439-3348and request the article and we will send it to you.
http://www.spiorg.org/publications/HendinFoley_MichiganLawReview.pdf
Monday, May 12, 2008
'I made it look like they died in their sleep'
Jon Ronson is a film producer who supported assisted suicide and decided to make a film about assisted suicide campaigner George Exoo.
Ronson contacted Exoo to make a film about him, after it became known that Exoo had assisted the suicide of Rosemary Toole in January 2002 in Ireland. The Toole suicide created significant support for assisted suicide in Ireland.
The guardian published a story today about the experience Ronson had with interviewing and getting to know Exoo and his suicide "ministry" while producing the film about him.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/may/12/mentalhealth.health?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
This may be the most interesting story about the "inside" of the underground death culture that I have read. Exoo claims to have been directly involved in 102 suicide deaths. What is astounding is that most of his "clients" were not terminally ill but just depressed and in need of psychiatric help.
The prime example of an Exoo client is Pam Acre, a 59 year-old woman living on the outskirts of Baltimore.
Acre describes her disease as difficult because all the tests come back negative.
Exoo is not concerned about the mental condition of Acre, he is only interested in describing each method of suicide and determining which method Acre prefers.
Ronson was also interesting in finding out how Exoo met his clients.
Ronson interviewed Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock society that has now morphed into the Compassion and Choices group in the U.S.
"Humphry said that the mainstream right-to-die groups will tell them (Exoo clients), "'We can't help you. It's not within our parameters because you aren't terminally ill.' But they pursue you. They call and call. And eventually someone will say, 'George Exoo will probably help you.' And that gets them off the phone and on to George."
What that means is that George Exoo is busy aiding, abeting and counseling suicide for people who are not terminally ill, and who simply need help for their depression and the mainstream "right to die" lobby is complicit by sending him their troubled callers.
The experience that Ronson has with George Exoo proves that when people learn about the right to die - suicide cult - they will change their mind about assisted suicide, like Ronson did.
The other inference that can be drawn from Ronson is that the only reason the mainstream right to die lobby won't "assist" people who are not terminal and only depressed because their goal is to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide and being associated with killing mentally ill and depressed people won't advance their goals.
Ronson contacted Exoo to make a film about him, after it became known that Exoo had assisted the suicide of Rosemary Toole in January 2002 in Ireland. The Toole suicide created significant support for assisted suicide in Ireland.
The guardian published a story today about the experience Ronson had with interviewing and getting to know Exoo and his suicide "ministry" while producing the film about him.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/may/12/mentalhealth.health?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
This may be the most interesting story about the "inside" of the underground death culture that I have read. Exoo claims to have been directly involved in 102 suicide deaths. What is astounding is that most of his "clients" were not terminally ill but just depressed and in need of psychiatric help.
The prime example of an Exoo client is Pam Acre, a 59 year-old woman living on the outskirts of Baltimore.
Acre describes her disease as difficult because all the tests come back negative.
Exoo is not concerned about the mental condition of Acre, he is only interested in describing each method of suicide and determining which method Acre prefers.
Ronson was also interesting in finding out how Exoo met his clients.
Ronson interviewed Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock society that has now morphed into the Compassion and Choices group in the U.S.
"Humphry said that the mainstream right-to-die groups will tell them (Exoo clients), "'We can't help you. It's not within our parameters because you aren't terminally ill.' But they pursue you. They call and call. And eventually someone will say, 'George Exoo will probably help you.' And that gets them off the phone and on to George."
What that means is that George Exoo is busy aiding, abeting and counseling suicide for people who are not terminally ill, and who simply need help for their depression and the mainstream "right to die" lobby is complicit by sending him their troubled callers.
The experience that Ronson has with George Exoo proves that when people learn about the right to die - suicide cult - they will change their mind about assisted suicide, like Ronson did.
The other inference that can be drawn from Ronson is that the only reason the mainstream right to die lobby won't "assist" people who are not terminal and only depressed because their goal is to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide and being associated with killing mentally ill and depressed people won't advance their goals.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Washington State: Becoming Two-Faced About Suicide
Wesley Smith has written a fabulous article about the connection between suicide and assisted suicide. The reference point for this article is Washington State which is currently having a debate around the legalization of assisted suicide by means of a plebiscite.
This article is a must read for anyone who is concerned about the most vulnerable people in our society
www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2008/05/washington-state-becoming-two-faced.html
This article is a must read for anyone who is concerned about the most vulnerable people in our society
www.wesleyjsmith.com/blog/2008/05/washington-state-becoming-two-faced.html
A doctor's responsibility extends to society
Dr. Yoel Abells is a regular columnist in the national post.
Abells column from Wednesday, May 7 is a commentary of his re-reading of the book by Dr. Robert Lifton entitled Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide.
This book was possibly the best attempt at explaining why doctors, who are traditionally committed to healing and not killing, could willingly become involved in the holocaust and euthanasia killings of the Nazi era.
Dr. Abells explains that he re-read's Dr. Robert Liftons' book in relation to the recent Holocaust Remembrance Day.
This article is worth reading. Abells asserts that doctors need to be the moral conscience in our society. I agree.
The only question is - Do doctors in a post-modern society have a collective moral conscience?
http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=497286
Abells column from Wednesday, May 7 is a commentary of his re-reading of the book by Dr. Robert Lifton entitled Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide.
This book was possibly the best attempt at explaining why doctors, who are traditionally committed to healing and not killing, could willingly become involved in the holocaust and euthanasia killings of the Nazi era.
Dr. Abells explains that he re-read's Dr. Robert Liftons' book in relation to the recent Holocaust Remembrance Day.
This article is worth reading. Abells asserts that doctors need to be the moral conscience in our society. I agree.
The only question is - Do doctors in a post-modern society have a collective moral conscience?
http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=497286
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Oregon still stands alone: Ten years of physician-assisted suicide
The American Medical News has published an extensive article on Oregon’s Assisted Suicide law after 10 years.
The article covered several important concerns such as the fact that people who live with depression do not seem to be protected by the law anymore. The article stated:
“Numerous studies of patients in Oregon and elsewhere found that depressed patients are significantly more likely to seek physician-assisted suicide. Any person seeking a deadly prescription should receive a mental health consultation, according to a health care professionals guidebook prepared by a task force convened by Oregon Health & Science University’s Center for Ethics in Health Care.
Only 10% of patients who have died under the law were referred for psychiatric evaluation, which is legally required if the prescribing or consulting physician believes a patient may have depression or another mental illness. In 2007, no patients were referred for consultations.”
The article also pointed out that their have been flaws in the application of the act. The article stated:
“But use of the Death With Dignity Act has not been flawless. Though 94% of patients died without complications, 19 patients regurgitated the medication before dying. David Pruitt, a lung cancer patient, awakened 65 hours after taking the dose prescribed to kill him.
“What the hell happened?” he reportedly said after waking up. “Why am I not dead?”
Pruitt died of cancer two weeks later.”
The article also bought into some of the false ideas that are promoted by the euthanasia lobby group, Compassion and Choices. The article appears to state that legalizing assisted suicide has improved hospice/palliative care and other end of life care concerns. The article stated:
“Since Medicare began reimbursing hospice services in 1982, the number of patients choosing this end-of-life care option has grown steadily. One in three Americans now dies under the care of a hospice program, and the number of programs has grown almost 50% since 1997. In Oregon, overall hospice use has jumped 84% since the use of the Death With Dignity Act in 1998. Nearly six in 10 dying Medicare-age patients there received hospice care in 2005, the most recent year for which data are available. Oregon placed ninth among states on hospice utilization in 2005.”
It is a false comment to connect the increased utilization of hospice/palliative care with the introduction of assisted suicide in Oregon simply because in the same time-period hospice/palliative care has grown exponentially throughout the USA, not only Oregon.
The most important facts that the American Medical News and other articles fail to report is that 73% of all deaths by assisted suicide in Oregon are facilitated by the Compassion and Choices lobby group, who have a stable of physicians who are willing to prescribe death to their patients.
We will never know what is actually happening in Oregon when the reporting is done by the physicians who prescribe death and Compassion and Choices remains the primary provider of death in Oregon. The law remains covered in secrecy and these extensive reports are essentially numbers without real personal stories or truth connected.
Amednews.com - http://www.ama-assn.org:80/amednews/2008/05/12/prsa0512.htm
The article covered several important concerns such as the fact that people who live with depression do not seem to be protected by the law anymore. The article stated:
“Numerous studies of patients in Oregon and elsewhere found that depressed patients are significantly more likely to seek physician-assisted suicide. Any person seeking a deadly prescription should receive a mental health consultation, according to a health care professionals guidebook prepared by a task force convened by Oregon Health & Science University’s Center for Ethics in Health Care.
Only 10% of patients who have died under the law were referred for psychiatric evaluation, which is legally required if the prescribing or consulting physician believes a patient may have depression or another mental illness. In 2007, no patients were referred for consultations.”
The article also pointed out that their have been flaws in the application of the act. The article stated:
“But use of the Death With Dignity Act has not been flawless. Though 94% of patients died without complications, 19 patients regurgitated the medication before dying. David Pruitt, a lung cancer patient, awakened 65 hours after taking the dose prescribed to kill him.
“What the hell happened?” he reportedly said after waking up. “Why am I not dead?”
Pruitt died of cancer two weeks later.”
The article also bought into some of the false ideas that are promoted by the euthanasia lobby group, Compassion and Choices. The article appears to state that legalizing assisted suicide has improved hospice/palliative care and other end of life care concerns. The article stated:
“Since Medicare began reimbursing hospice services in 1982, the number of patients choosing this end-of-life care option has grown steadily. One in three Americans now dies under the care of a hospice program, and the number of programs has grown almost 50% since 1997. In Oregon, overall hospice use has jumped 84% since the use of the Death With Dignity Act in 1998. Nearly six in 10 dying Medicare-age patients there received hospice care in 2005, the most recent year for which data are available. Oregon placed ninth among states on hospice utilization in 2005.”
It is a false comment to connect the increased utilization of hospice/palliative care with the introduction of assisted suicide in Oregon simply because in the same time-period hospice/palliative care has grown exponentially throughout the USA, not only Oregon.
The most important facts that the American Medical News and other articles fail to report is that 73% of all deaths by assisted suicide in Oregon are facilitated by the Compassion and Choices lobby group, who have a stable of physicians who are willing to prescribe death to their patients.
We will never know what is actually happening in Oregon when the reporting is done by the physicians who prescribe death and Compassion and Choices remains the primary provider of death in Oregon. The law remains covered in secrecy and these extensive reports are essentially numbers without real personal stories or truth connected.
Amednews.com - http://www.ama-assn.org:80/amednews/2008/05/12/prsa0512.htm
Monday, May 5, 2008
Nitschke 'hell-bent on assisted suicide'
Two Australian women have pleaded not guilty in a New South Wales Supreme Court to murdering Graeme Wylie by giving him a lethal dose of Nembutal on March 22, 2006.
Shirley Justins (59) the partner of Wylie for 18 years and their friend Caren Jennings (74) were supporters of the group Exit International, the euthanasia lobby group that is operated by Dr. Philip Nitschke.
Justins and Jennings have also pleaded not guilty to importing the barbiturate Nembutal into Australia from Mexico. Both women pleaded guilty to the lesser alternative charge of aiding and abetting suicide.
In November 2005, Wylie was turned down by the Swiss Suicide group Dignitas because they questioned his ability to consent.
Dignitas had asked Nitschke to visit Wylie and report back as to his mental condition. Nitschke visited Wylie but decided not to further assess Wylie condition because he wanted to support Wylie’s desire for assisted suicide.
“The court was told Dr Nitschke was "hell bent" on getting Mr Wylie on the program.”
“If Graeme Wylie was affected by dementia to the extent that he no longer had the capacity to make an independent, informed decision himself about whether or not to commit suicide then from the law's point of view it is as though he did not know that the poison was there,” Mr Tedeschi, the lawyer for the crown, told the jury.
“(Justins' and Jenning's) actions in taking nembutal to him amount to murder.” stated Tedeschi.
This case emphasizes two important issues.
The euthanasia lobby is not really concerned about consent. Even someone who is suffering from Alzheimer or dementia can be killed, even when consent is not possible.
The second point is that the euthanasia lobby is not concerned with the health of their victims. They are only concerned with a change in the law, and once the law is changed, they are really concerned with facilitating death.
The same is true in the State of Oregon where last years report showed that none of the 49 assisted suicide deaths in 2007 were first referred to a psychiatrist or a psychologist, which is required by the law when the doctor suspects possible depression or mental issues.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/05/2235928.htm
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23649575-5005961,00.html
Shirley Justins (59) the partner of Wylie for 18 years and their friend Caren Jennings (74) were supporters of the group Exit International, the euthanasia lobby group that is operated by Dr. Philip Nitschke.
Justins and Jennings have also pleaded not guilty to importing the barbiturate Nembutal into Australia from Mexico. Both women pleaded guilty to the lesser alternative charge of aiding and abetting suicide.
In November 2005, Wylie was turned down by the Swiss Suicide group Dignitas because they questioned his ability to consent.
Dignitas had asked Nitschke to visit Wylie and report back as to his mental condition. Nitschke visited Wylie but decided not to further assess Wylie condition because he wanted to support Wylie’s desire for assisted suicide.
“The court was told Dr Nitschke was "hell bent" on getting Mr Wylie on the program.”
“If Graeme Wylie was affected by dementia to the extent that he no longer had the capacity to make an independent, informed decision himself about whether or not to commit suicide then from the law's point of view it is as though he did not know that the poison was there,” Mr Tedeschi, the lawyer for the crown, told the jury.
“(Justins' and Jenning's) actions in taking nembutal to him amount to murder.” stated Tedeschi.
This case emphasizes two important issues.
The euthanasia lobby is not really concerned about consent. Even someone who is suffering from Alzheimer or dementia can be killed, even when consent is not possible.
The second point is that the euthanasia lobby is not concerned with the health of their victims. They are only concerned with a change in the law, and once the law is changed, they are really concerned with facilitating death.
The same is true in the State of Oregon where last years report showed that none of the 49 assisted suicide deaths in 2007 were first referred to a psychiatrist or a psychologist, which is required by the law when the doctor suspects possible depression or mental issues.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/05/2235928.htm
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23649575-5005961,00.html
Friday, May 2, 2008
Rudd explains why he opposes euthanasia
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd of Australia has stated that he opposes voluntary euthanasia but would allow a free-vote in parliament on the issue.
The Sydney Morning Herald quoted Prime Minister Rudd as stating "It's just my own personal view ... that if you changed the laws in this area, I do become concerned about the way in which these things can drift over time," he said.
"Particularly in the attitude taken by older people themselves, or people with terminal illnesses, who then conclude that they are being an increasing burden to their families and then conclude that it's in other people's interests, not their own best interests, to seek euthanasia."
On the question of the free vote in parliament Prime Minister Rudd stated "If it becomes a matter for vote in the federal parliament, people exercise their conscience differently."
Green party Senator Bob Brown has introduced legislation in Australia to restore the law that legalized euthanasia in the northern territory of Australia in 1995.
For more information, go to:
http://news.smh.com.au/rudd-explains-why-he-opposes-euthanasia/20080502-2a5z.html#
The Sydney Morning Herald - May 2, 2008
The Sydney Morning Herald quoted Prime Minister Rudd as stating "It's just my own personal view ... that if you changed the laws in this area, I do become concerned about the way in which these things can drift over time," he said.
"Particularly in the attitude taken by older people themselves, or people with terminal illnesses, who then conclude that they are being an increasing burden to their families and then conclude that it's in other people's interests, not their own best interests, to seek euthanasia."
On the question of the free vote in parliament Prime Minister Rudd stated "If it becomes a matter for vote in the federal parliament, people exercise their conscience differently."
Green party Senator Bob Brown has introduced legislation in Australia to restore the law that legalized euthanasia in the northern territory of Australia in 1995.
For more information, go to:
http://news.smh.com.au/rudd-explains-why-he-opposes-euthanasia/20080502-2a5z.html#
The Sydney Morning Herald - May 2, 2008
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Internet providers urged to remove 'suicide gas' instructions
The euthanasia lobby likes to talk about choice and the right of competent people to make decisions about their own autonomy.
The reality is that the euthanasia lobby is really about creating a “right to die” meaning that people would have the right to have someone else directly involved in their death at the time of their choosing.
The euthanasia lobby really doesn’t care that their utopian vision directly threatens the lives of vulnerable people.
The posting of specific suicide instructions on the internet has prompted a strong response from Japanese police.
The National Police Agency in Japan has asked ISPs, telecom firms and cable broadcasters for help after 48 people have died using homemade hydrogen sulphide to commit suicide in the past month alone. They are asking that instructions on how to produce hydrogen sulphide gas be removed from suicide websites.
Remember, choice is a euphemism that is used by the euthanasia lobby to push a radical agenda for an international “right” to die.
Victims of suicide do not choose death, but rather die out of an extreme feeling of hopelessness that is often related to depression, mental illness or breakdown.
For more information go to http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/200805/s2232104.htm?tab=asia
The reality is that the euthanasia lobby is really about creating a “right to die” meaning that people would have the right to have someone else directly involved in their death at the time of their choosing.
The euthanasia lobby really doesn’t care that their utopian vision directly threatens the lives of vulnerable people.
The posting of specific suicide instructions on the internet has prompted a strong response from Japanese police.
The National Police Agency in Japan has asked ISPs, telecom firms and cable broadcasters for help after 48 people have died using homemade hydrogen sulphide to commit suicide in the past month alone. They are asking that instructions on how to produce hydrogen sulphide gas be removed from suicide websites.
Remember, choice is a euphemism that is used by the euthanasia lobby to push a radical agenda for an international “right” to die.
Victims of suicide do not choose death, but rather die out of an extreme feeling of hopelessness that is often related to depression, mental illness or breakdown.
For more information go to http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/200805/s2232104.htm?tab=asia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)