Assisted suicide opponents meet in Connecticut

By Alex Schadenberg 

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

(right side of the room)

The Associated Press reported on the East Coast Conference Against Assisted Suicide today.

The Associated Press reported that:

Organizers say about 140 people have turned today for conference on assisted suicide. 

The two-day event, dubbed East Coast Against Assisted Suicide, was wrapping up on Saturday in Windsor Locks. It was sponsored by several groups that oppose legalizing the practice, including the Connecticut-based Family Institute of Connecticut and Second Thoughts Connecticut. 

Other sponsors included the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition and Second Thoughts Massachusetts. 

Speakers include experts from the region and around the world who oppose assisted suicide legislation in the U.S., particularly the East Coast. 

Last year marked the second straight year that a Connecticut legislative committee held a public hearing on legislation allowing physicians to prescribe medication to help terminally ill patients end their lives. The bill was not brought up for a vote.

The East Coast Conference Against Assisted Suicide was an incredible success. It was organized to train people from all political and social points of view to understand the issues related to assisted suicide and to effectively oppose it in their state.

to
Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/living/health-fitness/article4064655.html#storylink=cpy

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie may need to Veto assisted suicide bill

By Alex Schadenberg
International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Governor Chris Christie

It seems likely that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie may need to veto the State assisted suicide bill. 

The media has reported that Stephen Sweeney (D), the President of the New Jersey State Senate, has agreed to be the primary sponsor for New Jersey Senate Assisted Suicide Bill 382, after Joseph Vitale (D) withdrew his sponsorship of the assisted suicide bill.

Vitale, the Chairman of the State Senate Health Committee, told the New Jersey media:

“I initially supported the idea of the bill and signed on. After a time, I had more questions and concerns than answers. So I thought it was honest to remove my name and continue to think about it.”

On November 13, the New Jersey State Assembly passed the assisted suicide bill A 2270 by a vote of 41 to 31 after pushing for a quick vote on the bill while the Brittany Maynard story was fresh in the minds of the state legislators.

New Jersey citizens are urged to contact their State Senators to defeat the assisted suicide bill.

Everyone can sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Links to more information:

Swiss Federal Court drops charges by assisted suicide campaigner against police and forensic team

By Alex Schadenberg
International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Criminal trespassing charges filed by Ludwig Minelli, the founder of the Dignitas assisted suicide clinic against Swiss police and a forensic medical team was rejected by the Swiss Federal Court.

According to the Swiss media:

The court decided that there would be no criminal proceedings against seven members of canton Zurich’s prosecution, police and forensic medicine teams. In August 2012, they were called to a house in Pfäffikon for a legal inspection involving a person who had committed assisted suicide. In another room, they noticed a second person who was not dying as expected but gasping for air. 

The civil servants decided to take the 67-year-old woman ... to the hospital, where she received painkillers and died the same day. The government employees stayed at the house owned by Dignitas until the paramedics arrived.

Ludwig Minelli

Minelli filed criminal trespassing charges because the authorities didn't leave the Dignitas suicide clinic after he asked them to leave. The media article stated:

...the Federal Court in Lausanne concluded that it is understandable that the people present had assumed that something had gone wrong in the case of the second accompanied suicide, and that they had tried to uphold the rights of the unconscious woman. The judges said that by virtue of their function it was correct to stay in the Dignitas house and take measures to protect her.

The Dignitas assisted suicide clinic has been associated with several controversial assisted suicide deaths. 

A Petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to Veto the Assisted Suicide Bill.

Dear Governor Christie, 

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

I urge you to veto the assisted suicide bill A2270. 

Through this bill vulnerable elders will be put at risk. Every year in New Jersey, it is estimated that out of 1 ½ million people over age 60, there are 175,000 reported and unreported cases of abuse.

Depressed people will be harmed by this bill. Oregonian Michael Freeland, where assisted suicide is legal, easily obtained a lethal prescription for his terminal diagnosis, despite a 43-year history of severe depression, suicide attempts, and paranoia. The prescribing doctor said he didn't think a psychological consult was "necessary." Oregon’s statistics for the last four years show that an absurdly low 2% of patients who died by assisted assisted were referred for a psychological evaluation.

Governor Chris Christie

Please think about New Jersey residents, elders and disabled people who may be vulnerable and without the sort of support and control assisted suicide proponents take for granted, innocent people who will be impacted by this piece of bad social policy.

A2270 is not safe. Assisted suicide is not safe.

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Links to more information:

Few Swiss doctors participate in assist suicide

By Alex Schadenberg
International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

A study published today by the Swiss Academy of Sciences found that the majority of Swiss doctors are unwilling to participate in assisted suicide while the majority approved of assisted suicide.

The Swiss Academy of Sciences sent questionnaires to 4800 Swiss physicians and received only 1318 responses (27%). Due to the low response rate the results of the survey may not be accurate.

The Swiss media reported that:

For the majority of the 1,318 respondents, support for assisted suicide depended on the specific situation: the more clearly a purely physical and terminal disease is present, the greater the acceptance of physician-assisted suicide. Three-quarters were opposed to assisted suicide in the case of people who are old but otherwise healthy, while over half rejected assisted suicide for patients with mental illness.

The study, also examined physicians’ personal experiences in this area: 

less than half of the respondents had, on at least one occasion, received a serious request for assisted suicide.

About a quarter had, at least once, evaluated whether the eligibility criteria for assisted suicide were met. Most of the physicians concerned have done so very rarely, while individual respondents have undertaken such an evaluation at least 50 times.

In jurisdictions where euthanasia and assisted suicide are legal, very few doctors are willing participate in causing the death of their patients. Out of the 1318 physicians who responded to the study, only 111 had participated in an assisted suicide.

In Switzerland, assisted suicide is carried out by assisted suicide groups. The physician assesses the person who requests assisted suicide and prescribes a lethal dose, but the assisted suicide groups facilitate the death.

Barbara Kay: Euthanasia is killing

By Alex Schadenberg

Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The National Post published an excellent article by Barbara Kay, one of Canada's most respected columnists, titled: Beware of euthanasia's friendly face.

Barbara Kay

Kay's article accomplishes two tasks: it properly defines the language and purpose of Bill 52, the Québec euthanasia bill that passed last June, and she reports on her experience at a dinner organized by the Physicians for Social Justice opposing Québec's euthanasia law, that was held in Montréal.

Kay points out that the Québec euthanasia law, that is scheduled to come into effect in December 2015, legalizes euthanasia and not assisted suicide. Kay wrote:

In general, even intelligent and educated people have rather fuzzy notions about euthanasia (which is not assisted suicide, though many people conflate the two). The only reason the Quebec government is calling euthanasia “medical aid in dying” is that they believe it creates an end run around the Criminal Code, which proscribes the killing of patients by doctors. But euthanasia is killing by doctors. Surveys show 60% of Quebecers do not realize the bill provides for death by lethal injection, just like the death penalty in the U.S. — and euphemisms do not change that. 

There is only one form of medical treatment that can accurately be described as “medical aid in dying,” and that is palliative care. Which is why palliative care doctors, as well as many family physicians, are almost as appalled by the wording of the bill as they are by euthanasia itself.

Kay then writes about the response from prominent Québec physicians to the euthanasia law:

I spoke with Manny Borod, a palliative care physician at the Montreal General Hospital, who articulated the grievances his peers feel. Foremost is the illicit intrusion of the government into medicine’s jurisdiction. Governments should not be in the business of deciding what is or what is not a medical treatment. If the government can decide euthanasia is a medical treatment, Dr. Borod asks, “what’s to stop them from legislating other medical treatments?” Like many of his colleagues, he would like to see less aggressive, technology-heavy treatment applied to dying patients and more attention paid to enriching and enlarging the palliative resources that would give those patients a better death.

Dr Balfour Mount

Kay then wrote about the speech given by Balfour Mount, at the event. Dr Mount is the father of palliative care in North America and a leading opponent of euthanasia: Kay wrote:

Most galvanizing were the words of Balfour Mount. ... Dr. Mount’s passionate disdain for the medicalization of euthanasia remains undimmed. Calling euthanasia “medical aid in dying” is a “cowardly distortion of language,” he said. The dying do not want to be killed; they want an “easy death,” and “that is what palliative care gives them.”

Dutch Health Minister calls for tighter euthanasia guidelines

By Alex Schadenberg
International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Edith Schippers

Dutch Health Minister, Edith Schippers, reacted to comments by Professor Theo Boer by calling for tighter guidelines for euthanasia. Boer, an ethicist who was a member of a Euthanasia Review Committee for 9 years and oversaw more than 4000 euthanasia cases in the Netherlands.

Recently Boer wrote an article calling for reform of the Dutch euthanasia law. Boer stated that euthanasia is being granted to people who have years to live. 

The media reported that Schippers is calling for tighter guidelines on euthanasia. The article stated:

Minister Schippers wants a geriatrician to be always involved in euthanasia of people with dementia and in the case of psychiatric patients a psychiatrist must always play a role. The latter often happens in practice though, but it should be according to Schippers clearly laid down in guidelines.

Schipper also wants: 

 a second specialist to always be involved in complex euthanasia cases.

Theo Boer

Last July Boer wrote an article opposing euthanasia where he stated:

I used to be a supporter of euthanasia. But now, with twelve years of experience, I take a different view.

Boer argued that the number of euthanasia deaths, and the reasons for euthanasia have greatly expanded since the introduction of the euthanasia law in 2002. Boer stated that:

"Cases have been reported in which a large part of the suffering of those given euthanasia or assisted suicide consisted in being aged, lonely or bereaved. 

Whereas the law sees assisted suicide and euthanasia as an exception, public opinion is shifting towards considering them rights, with corresponding duties on doctors to act. 

Pressure on doctors to conform to patients’ (or in some cases relatives’) wishes can be intense. Pressure from relatives... is in some cases an important factor behind a euthanasia request."

Links to similar articles:

• Theo Boer: Assisted Suicide - Don't Go There.
• What happens when euthanasia becomes legal.
• Netherlands 2013 euthanasia report.
• Dutch euthanasia clinic lethally injects woman who didn't want to live in a nursing home.

New Jersey Assisted Suicide bill sponsor withdrew sponsorship.

By Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Senator Joseph Vitale (D)

New Jersey Senator, Joseph Vitale, (D) withdrew sponsorship of the New Jersey Senate Assisted Suicide Bill. Vitale, who is the Chairman of the State Senate Health Committee, told the New Jersey media:

“I initially supported the idea of the bill and signed on. After a time, I had more questions and concerns than answers. So I thought it was honest to remove my name and continue to think about it.”

On Thursday November 13, the New Jersey State Assembly passed the assisted suicide A 2270 by a vote of 41 to 31.

Vitale will hold hearings on the assisted suicide bill in the State Senate Health Committee. The New Jersey Assisted Suicide bill may be defeated in the State Senate. If it passes in the Senate, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie must uphold his promise and veto the bill.

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Links to more information:

Assisted Suicide groups are allowed into Swiss nursing homes.

This article was published by Bioedge on November 15, 2014.

By Michael Cook

The legislature of the Swiss canton of Neuchâtel has voted overwhelmingly to force government-funded nursing homes to allow representatives of assisted suicide groups to advertise their services.

(Neuchâtel is in the west of Switzerland, bordering on France, and is predominantly French-speaking.)

There are no exemptions for conscientious objection by managers in the homes. The only critierion, according to Swiss.info, is the personal choice of the patients. Personal autonomy must take precedence over the rules of the nursing homes. About 60 institutions will be affected by the decision.

The new regulations specify that nursing home personnel will not be allowed to interfere if a patient chooses to die. In fact, they are required to set aside a room where the staff of the assisted suicide organisation Exit will help the person to die.

The law establishes some conditions for such procedures. The disease or condition must be serious and incurable and other end-of-life options must be discussed. If the nursing home refuses to cooperate, the patient can complain to the authorities. Only homes which do not accept government funding will be allowed to close their doors to Exit.

Exit (whose full name is Exit ADMD Suisse Romande) caters for French-speaking Swiss. Another group, called simply Exit, caters for German-speakers. Last year the French Exit began to offer its services to elderly people who did not have a terminal illness but wished to die. According to one report, it assisted the suicide of 155 people last year, and its German counterpart 459. Apparently nursing homes in the German cantons are far more amenable to visits by Exit.

German Parliament opposes assisted suicide groups.

By Alex Schadenberg
International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

German Bundestag

The German Bundestag debated the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide yesterday. German legislators did not debate a bill but rather they debated the general issues related to euthanasia and assisted suicide in order to determine the direction of future legislation. The media stated:

An unusual, highly emotional debate in German parliament ended with the majority expressing support for prohibiting organized assisted suicide. But not all representatives called for an outright ban of the practice.

The Majority of the members were opposed to the assisted suicide business. Volker Kauder (CDU) pointed to a recent development that he said is a cause for concern:

Organizations that offer assisted suicide services to their members. He said it was a "perversion" that, according to the amount in membership dues paid, assisted suicide services would be provided either immediately, or after a certain waiting period. "What does that have to do with humanity? " he asked. "Is that something we want to have in our society?"

According to the media, the German Health Minister opposes assisted suicide.

Health Minister Hermann Groehe said he opposed doctor assisting suicide. He said Germany should instead expand its network of hospices, so everyone has access to palliative care and the best painkillers while dying.

The media reported that the German Health Minister will likely introduce an assisted suicide bill in February 2015.

Philip Nitschke (Dr Death) on trial in Darwin Australia.

The following is an excerpt from the article by Paul Russell, the director of HOPE: preventing euthanasia & assisted suicide and Vice Chair of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition International, titled: Three Days in Darwin, concerning the Philip Nitschke trial.

Paul Russell

By Paul Russell

Nitschke’s defence during the Darwin appeal revolved around his claim that he was not Nigel Brayley’s doctor and had therefore no obligation to try and dissuade him from suicide and that, in his assessment, Brayley was rational in his decision.

(Nigel Brayley died by suicide, after contacting Nitschke for advice).

The Guardian framed Nitschke’s defence:

New Jersey Governor must veto assisted suicide bill

By Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Nancy Elliott with
Governor Chris Christie.

Today, the New Jersey Assembly passed bill A 2270, a bill to legalize assisted suicide by a vote of 41-31.

The New Jersey Assembly brought the assisted suicide vote up quickly because the assisted suicide lobby wanted to capitalize on the death of Brittany Maynard.

Nancy Elliott, a member of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition International Board spoke with Christie about his position last June and said, 

“I had the opportunity to speak with Governor Chris Christie from New Jersey. I know that a lot of you are concerned about the Assisted Suicide bill that passed the Health Committee in New Jersey. He assured me vehemently that he has not changed his position on Assisted Suicide, that he would veto it if it came to his desk and that as long as he was the Governor of New Jersey this was not going to become law.”

Sign the petition urging New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to veto the assisted suicide bill.

Germany debates assisted suicide.

By Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

The German parliament will be debating assisted suicide in their lower house today. According to the media, there is no bill before parliament, but the members are debating between their divided positions. The media has reported that:

No legislation is on the table yet, but five caucuses have developed on the issue, mostly crossing party lines. Some want to tighten rules against euthanasia, and others to legalize it as Belgium and the Netherlands have done. 

Germany currently permits doctors to cease life-extending treatment or to administer powerful and dangerous sedatives at a dying person‘s request, but assisting a suicide is a crime. The debate in the Bundestag was a first airing of the issue before bills are moved for debate.

According to the media, German Health Minister opposes euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Health Minister Hermann Groehe said he opposed doctors assisting suicide. He said Germany should instead expand its network of hospices, so everyone has access to palliative care and the best painkillers while dying.

The history of euthanasia in Germany should be enough to caution German parliamentarians.

Once you give physicians the right, in law, to cause death, ethical boundaries prohibiting the intentional killing of human beings are forever changed. The result is what we have seen in the Netherlands and Belgium where euthanasia began as a way of dealing with the "hard cases" and has now expanded to include euthanasia for children, people with dementia, people with psychiatric issues, loneliness, and for those who are "tired of living"

There is also significant number of unreported euthanasia deaths in the Netherlands and Belgium. It is the under-reported cases that are often related to abuses that include the intentional assisted deaths without explicit request.

Assisted Suicide and the suicide contagion effect?

By Margaret Dore

Margaret Dore

It is well established that a single suicide can encourage other suicides, which is called a "suicide contagion." If the additional suicides use the same method, they are "copy cat" suicides. Moreover, as explained below, this encouragement phenomenon is relevant to Compassion & Choices' media campaign.

A famous example of a suicide contagion is the suicide death of Marilyn Monroe, which inspired an increase in other suicides. This encouragement phenomenon can also occur when the inspiring death is not a suicide. An example is the televised execution of Saddam Hussein, which led to suicide deaths of children worldwide. An NBC News article begins: 

 "The boys' deaths - scattered in the United States, in Yemen, in Turkey and elsewhere in seemingly isolated horror - had one thing in common: They hanged themselves after watching televised images of Saddam Husseins' execution."

Groups such as the National Institute of Health and the World Health Organization have developed guidelines for reporting suicide to prevent suicide contagions. Important points include that the risk of additional suicides increases "when the story explicitly describes the suicide method, uses dramatic/graphic headlines or images, and repeated/extensive coverage."

Please consider the following: 

● Oregon's physician-assisted suicide law went into effect in 1998.
● By 2000, Oregon's regular suicide rate was "increasing significantly" See ("After decreasing in the 1990s, suicide rates have been increasing significantly since 2000").
● By 2007, Oregon's other (regular) suicide rate was 35% above the national average.
● By 2010, per the most recent report, Oregon's other (regular) suicide rate was 41% above the national average. 

The media campaign by Compassion & Choices, to promote the suicide of Ms. Maynard, violated and continues to violate all of these guidelines. We were told of the planned method, when and where it would take place and who would be there. There was and is repeated extensive coverage in multiple media. With this situation, the risk of suicide contagion associated with Compassion & Choices' media campaign is real. Moreover, in Oregon, where Compassion & Choices has already run similar, but smaller media promotions, there is statistical evidence suggesting, but not proving, a suicide contagion.

Margaret Dore is an attorney in Washington State where assisted suicide is legal. She is a former Law Clerk to the Washington State Supreme Court. She is President of Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)(4) nonprofit corporation. Choice is an Illusion welcomes everyone opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia regardless of your views on other issues. See www.margaretdore.com and www.choiceillusion.org.

Links to more information:

• Assisted suicide groups linked to suicide promotion website.
• Quick facts about assisted suicide.
• Nitschke continues to sell suicide over the internet.
• Suicide rate in Oregon continues to increase faster than the national average.
• Canadian study proves that the suicide contagion effect exists.

Dr Death (Philip Nitschke) on trial in Australia.

This article was published by HOPE Australia on November 10, 2014.

Paul Russell

By Paul Russell - Director, Hope Australia

Today (10th November 2014) in Darwin, Northern Territory, hearings began into the suspension of the medical licence to practice of Philip Nitschke, director of Exit International. Earlier, Nitschke had successfully challenged that the hearings should take place in the jurisdiction where he was registered; namely, the Northern Territory.

Nitschke’s medical practice licence was originally temporarily suspended following the death of Perth man, Nigel Brayley and the revelations contained in the ABC TV report concerning Nitschke’s relationship to Brayley prior to his suicide.

As the Guardian explained: 

“The board said at the time it took the interim action to “keep the public safe while other investigations or processes continue”. This week’s hearing does not relate to those investigations.”

The hearings this week concern only the matter of Nitschke’s licence to practice. The now twelve complaints to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, including yours truly’s complaint from 27 months ago, are separate matters.

Nitschke’s defence counsel has attempted to make the issue in the court about the question of so-called ‘rational’ suicide. This has been Nitschke’s defensive line since the Brayley matter became public. Counsel for the Medical Board, Lisa Chapman said that this ‘misses the point’.

UK proposes to Create “Suicide Courts?”

This article was published by Wesley Smith on his blog on November 8, 2014. 

Wesley Smith

By Wesley Smith

Talk about a death panel!

The House of Lords is debating again to legalize assisted suicide–struggles with the nonsense of fashioning ”strict guidelines” to protect against abuse. (As I have repeatedly shown, guidelines don’t protect, they just give the illusion of control.)

The latest scheme is to create what could be called “suicide courts,” where suicidal people will ask a judge to approve their doctor-prescribed suicide. From the Independent story:

Judges could routinely be given the power of life or death over patients who are determined to die to end their suffering. 

Proposals to use judges as the final arbiters of who can be helped to die go some way to satisfying opponents to Lord Falconer’s Assisted Dying Bill. Lord Pannick QC proposed judicial oversight in amendments to the Bill which went before the House of Lords yesterday. The Lords, in the first Parliamentary vote on the Bill, gave it their approval.

This is nuts! This would be worse than Oregon, in some ways, more destructive than Belgium and the Netherlands!

Assisted suicide should be illegal because it amounts to a joint enterprise to end a human life.

With legalization, you have private transactions between doctors and suicidal patients. It’s wrong, but the government isn’t officially or directly involved in the death.

But a suicide court would make the government a direct participant in suicide. The State would be ruling that some lives are not worth living. It would give an explicit imprimatur to suicide.

That’s a huge and dangerous step that should never be taken.

And here’s the irony: The UK opposes the death penalty. Trying to accommodate the Culture of Death is driving us out of our minds.

Dutch euthanasia law needs reform. Euthanasia is granted to people who have years to live

By Alex Schadenberg

International Chair - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Theo Boer

An article published in the NL Times on November 7, reports that Theo Boer, an ethicist and former 9 year member of a Regional Euthanasia Review Committee in the Netherlands is stating that doctors, politicians and the review committees need to re-evaluate the euthanasia law.

The NL Times articles begins by stating that Boer believes that:

Euthanasia Doctors sometimes give in too quickly to the claims of patients that they are suffering unbearably. It can therefore not be ruled out that in the Netherlands euthanasia is granted to people who still had years to live.

The article explains that Boer (54), who recently left the Regional Euthanasia Review Committee in September after working there for more than nine years, has evaluated more than 4 thousand cases of euthanasia. Based on that experience Boer concludes that doctors, politicians and review committees should seriously consider re-evaluating the euthanasia law.

There are 5 review committees, in the Netherlands, that assess,  after the death, whether physicians have complied with the legal due diligence in the performance of euthanasia.

According to the article, Boer is convinced that, the requirement that the patient must be suffering unbearably was not properly considered when the law was created. Boer says that physicians will not tell their patients that they do not qualify for euthanasia because their suffering is not unbearable. The article stated:

In the first years after the introduction Boer had fewer problems with the provision on unbearable suffering because almost only people with a terminal, physical condition were given euthanasia. But now euthanasia is often given to people who still had some time to live.

According to the article, Boer wants to add a stronger medical component in the law or in its review. The fact that some conditions may fall by the wayside is outweighed by the advantages of a more objective criterion. Boer is concerned that if developments continue in this way, he expects a strong increase in the number of cases of euthanasia because people do not want to be put in a nursing home.

A woman was recently euthanized in the Netherlands because she didn't want to go to a nursing home.

Boer wants a moratorium on any more groundbreaking cases. Boer stated:

If it were up to him, he would form a committee that will conduct a public and cross-party discussion. This should be about what practice of euthanasia in the Netherlands is most future-proof and safe.

Links to similar articles:

• Theo Boer: Assisted Suicide - Don't Go There.
• What happens when euthanasia becomes legal.
• Netherlands 2013 euthanasia report.
• Dutch pediatricians want to legalize euthanasia for children.
• Dutch euthanasia clinic lethally injects woman who didn't want to live in a nursing home.

UK poll: Assisted suicide is not safe.

This article was published by the Care Not Killing Alliance in the UK.

Peers urged to ditch dangerous assisted suicide bill, as new polling shows that one in ten Britons would favour rewarding older people for ending their lives.

1. More than four in 10 believe assisted suicide will be extended beyond the terminally ill if the current law is changed. 

2. Clear majority of public says there is no safe system of assisted suicide. 

3. Fewer than three in 10 believe changing the law on assisted suicide will not lead to increase in abuse of vulnerable people.

Peers are being urged to ditch a dangerous assisted suicide bill that could lead to more than 1,200 deaths a year. Lord Falconer's Assisted Dying Bill has its committee stage in the House of Lords on Friday 7 November.

This is a joint call from disability rights campaign, Not Dead Yet and from Care Not Killing.

The two groups say that changing the law on assisted suicide would weaken protections for vulnerable people. They highlight the findings of a new poll from ComRes, which reveals high levels of concern among the British public around the proposed changes.

The poll found a clear majority believe that it is impossible to make a completely safe system.

Child with disabilities dies by euthanasia by dehydration.

By Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Nancy Fitzmaurice

The death by intentional dehydration of Nancy Fitzmaurice, a 12 year-old child with significant disabilities in the UK, is clearly a case of euthanasia by dehydration and not a case of withdrawing medical treatment.

I have a relative who lives with a very similar condition to Nancy, a condition that developed in a samilar manner.

The British case, that became known when an article was published in the Daily Mirror on October 25, 2014, is based on a decision by Justice Eleanor King in August, to approve the withdrawal of hydration and nutrition from Nancy.

This case set a terrible and dangerous precedent as this was the first time that a person, who was breathing on her own and not on life support or suffering from a terminal illness, died by dehydration with the approval of the court.

Euthanasia is the intentional action or omission of an action to cause death, where the death is the direct result, for reasons of "mercy." 

Since Nancy was not otherwise dying, and since the withdrawal of hydration and nutrition was done to cause the death of Nancy by dehydration and since she died by dehydration, this is clearly a case of euthanasia by dehydration.

This decision differs from the decision to withdraw hydration and nutrition from someone who is dying and nearing death. 

This was a terrible legal precedent that approved death by dehydration for someone who was not otherwise dying, this decision also has significant negative ramifications for people with disabilities. Nancy was dehydrated to death, not because she was dying or nearing death, but because she was living with disabilities and her life was deemed to be "Not Worth Living."

The fact that Nancy lived for 14 days before dying from dehydration is a clear illustration of the difference between this decision to cause death and the withdrawal of hydration and nutrition to allow someone to die a natural death.

Oregon Oncologist Speaks of the Tragedy of Physician-Assisted Suicide

By Kenneth R. Stevens Jr. · November 4, 2014

Lauren Hill

(Lauren Hill, has been diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor and has been given only a few months to live. She just played in the opening basketball game at Mt. St. Joseph University.)

Physician-assisted suicide has recently been in the media because of Brittany Maynard, diagnosed with a brain tumor earlier this year, who came to Oregon and died of suicide from an overdose of barbiturates on November 1, 2014. The assisted suicide proponent organization, Compassion & Choices (former Hemlock Society), has orchestrated and centered a skillful media campaign about her story to promote further legalization of physician-assisted suicide.

She was attractive, young, recently married, and diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Even though she was very functional and able to travel to the Grand Canyon in recent weeks, she ended her life prematurely a few days ago with the drug overdose.

My 47-year experience caring for patients with cancer in Oregon has been rich with experiences with patients. Since Oregon’s assisted suicide law was passed by voters in 1994, I have studied the law and its effects and led efforts to fight it.

Brittany Maynard’s story is currently in the news, but there are other stories regarding assisted suicide in Oregon.

I first became involved with assisted-suicide in 1982, shortly before my 39-year old wife died of cancer in the brain. We had just made what would be her last visit with her doctor. As we were leaving the office, he said that he could provide her with an extra-large dose of pain medication. She said she did not need it because her pain was under control. As I helped her to the car, she said “Ken, he wants me to kill myself.” She had suffered a lot over the prior 18 months, but her doctor’s statement caused the most suffering to her. It devastated her that her doctor, her trusted doctor, would suggest that she kill herself. Two weeks later she peacefully died in our home without pain, and with dignity. We treasured all of our time together, even to the natural end of her life on earth.

Dying with dignity – really?

By Dr Kevin Fitzpatrick OBE 

Director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition International.

Spokesperson/Convener of the Not Dead Yet UK Campaign. 

Kevin Fitzpatrick

Death is not an event in life, like marriage, or buying your first car or home, not even like losing a limb. It is not a catastrophe to be ‘cured’ or fixed or accommodated going forward. Death is the end of all the possibilities of life. It is both more terrible and more important than injuries suffered in a car accident, or the suffering a cancer brings. We have lost that sense of its importance.

We live in a time when we are constantly bombarded by atrocities from across the globe. We say ‘life is cheap’ when what we really mean is that death is, when our sense of what it is for a human being, any human being, to die, is corrupted beyond repair. We have lost any sense of the ‘terrible beauty’ that Leon and Jill Uris photographed in Ireland in the 1970s, that even in such horrific and deadly circumstances there can still be something there for us to find profound, even beautiful. We only count death now as a degrading ‘failure’, as though we can and should be able to defeat it, if we only worked a little harder, did a bit more research. 

Death has become the cheapest of all commodities and dying is our new atrocity in western, wealthy cultures where the luxury of false ‘choice’ exists. Dying has become an abomination, in which we are supposed to be absolutely and irrevocably excluded from the new alchemists’ panacea…dignity.

So Brittany Maynard, faced with dying in a way she found unacceptable, has committed suicide with the help of the state of Oregon. There are so many questions left unresolved by her final act – would there have been any kind of dying she might have found acceptable? is it really so simple ‘Her life her choice?’ are there no concerns about how she has used her dying to promote a cause?

But my question here is not ‘Whose life is it anyway?’ – that question is a false one – oh, it looks like a question , has all the words in the right order - but it is actually nonsensical. Any part of this debate focusing on her ‘right’ to do this is specious, and no help whatsoever.

No, my question is ‘Whose dignity is it?’ I have lived for more than forty years with indignity after indignity – like the apoplectic railway worker screaming at me at 6 in the morning that my wheelchair was too big for the train carriage. Did he upset me? For sure. Did I lose my dignity? Well, actually, not that time. I kept my composure, my dignity. So whose indignity was it? His. My wheelchair is a standard, relatively-compact size, like the majority. His fury was entirely disproportionate, blaming me/my ‘chair was stupid and he was certainly not fit for his job in that moment.

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition challenges Quebec euthanasia law

By Hugh Scher, Legal Counsel - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Hugh Scher

Québec’s landmark law allowing euthanasia contravenes Canadian criminal homicide laws and represents a dangerous step towards a patchwork quilt of provincial regulation of serious criminal conduct, which is why the issue must be handled federally, says Toronto health, human rights and constitutional lawyer Hugh Scher.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition (EPC), represented by Scher, was granted leave to intervene in a constitutional challenge brought by the Physicians Alliance Against Euthanasia and Vivre Dans La Dignite, Living With Dignity, against both the federal and Québec provincial governments arguing Québec’s law, which was adopted last summer and will go into effect in December 2015, is stepping on federal jurisdiction by undercutting sections of the Criminal Code that outlaw assisted suicide and euthanasia and by attempting to define the intentional killing of patients by doctors as healthcare.

The proposed safeguards in the law are discriminatory and violate ss. 7 and 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, says an affidavit filed by the Coalition.

“Any change to decriminalize euthanasia is properly the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada, as it is in its pith and substance a question of criminal law,” says the court document. “The federal law is and should be paramount in order to ensure certainty, universality and equal benefit and protection of the criminal law across Canada.”

Assisted Suicide is bad medicine.

This article was published in the Sacramento Bee on November 1, 2014

By Marilyn Golden 

Marilyn Golden

Why, when listing opponents, did The Sacramento Bee editorial pushing an assisted-suicide law ignore the disability community? (“Give the dying the right to pick how and when to die”: Editorials, Oct. 26) We could be those most affected.

As a disability-rights advocate and person living with a disability, I know our concerns aren’t just “fear-mongering.” Rather, legalizing assisted-suicide is a direct threat to our community as well as to the elderly, people with chronic illness and others marginalized by society.

The Oregon assisted-suicide experiment has major problems.

When Oregonian Barbara Wagner was prescribed chemotherapy for aggressive lung cancer, the Oregon health plan refused to cover it. They offered, instead, among other things, to pay for her assisted suicide. Randy Stroup, another Oregonian with cancer, received a similar denial. Is there any wonder why? Treating people with terminal or chronic illness is expensive. At roughly $300, assisted suicide is the cheapest “treatment.”

Direct coercion is not even necessary. Denying, or even merely delaying, expensive, life-sustaining treatment can drive patients toward assisted suicide. It is a deadly mix with our cost-driven health care system.

This is partly why every major disability organization taking a position opposes legalizing assisted suicide.

Five reasons why Assisted Suicide should not be legal

This article was published by the Corsicana Daily Sun on November 1, 2014

By Scott Middleton M.D., FACS

A 29-year-old California woman changed her mind about dying this week. Brittany Maynard, who has terminal brain cancer, moved to Oregon for the announced purpose of taking her own life, under that state’s Death With Dignity Act. She was set to commit suicide, legally, with the assistance of one of my fellow physicians.

I believe this is a tragedy. We, as physicians, certainly have a role in end-of-life care. Admittedly, we sometimes abdicate that role. In reality, there is much truth in Hippocrates’ statement that we should “Cure sometimes, treat often, comfort always.”

“Physician-Assisted-Suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician’s role as healer, would be difficult to control and would pose serious societal risk” — from the Code of Ethics, American Medical Association.

Five of my reasons why Physician-Assisted-Suicide should not be legal:

An open letter to Brittany Maynard from Maggie Karner

Maggie Karner, a Connecticut woman who has a glioblastoma brain tumor, has written a letter to Brittany Maynard expressing her hope that Brittany decides not to die by assisted suicide.

Since early October, Brittany Maynard, who also has a glioblastoma brain tumor, has captured the emotions of Americans while she considers dying by a lethal dose of assisted suicide drugs.

In her Youtube video, Maggie Karner reads her open letter urging Brittany not to take her life by assisted suicide.

The assisted suicide lobby has turned the Brittany Maynard story into a new campaign to legalize assisted suicide throughout the United States.

The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition hopes that Brittany Maynard will release herself from the grip of Compassion & Choices and find the necessary medical care that will enable her to fight her terrible disease, and if she dies, that she will die a peaceful death.