New Zealand’s euthanasia and cannabis referendums will rightly give power to the people – The Guardian

New Zealanders will take part in a world-leading double referendum next year when they vote in the countrys general election. In addition to electing a new government, one referendum question will ask about the legalisation of cannabis for recreational use, and the other will ask whether euthanasia should be legalised in certain circumstances.

Its going to be messy, emotional, and polarised. Theres already a lot of anxiety and negativity about the referendums across the political spectrum. Much of this is influenced by the ongoing fallout from the Brexit referendum, as well as a general fear of conservative populism.

On the left, many are worried that voters are not up to the task of these difficult questions, and that interest groups including social conservatives and churches will dominate the campaign. Theres also concern about misinformation and ignorance affecting the outcome.

The justice minister, Andrew Little, said this week that: The chances it will be a reasonably ugly election are reasonably high due to clearly egregiously factually incorrect statements. Hes therefore ordered his ministry to set up a unit to deal with misinformation on the referendum debates. And hes committed to fighting it himself, saying: I will do the best I can to make people alert to the possibility that half of what you might see on social media might be bullshit.

On the right, Nationals leader, Simon Bridges, is warning that the cannabis referendum will amount to New Zealands own Brexit. He argues the exercise has been badly set up, which will lead to uncertainty about the results.

All of these concerns have validity, even if they are somewhat over-egged. There will be plenty of problems with the referendums and the associated campaigns. Its true that the formulation of the referendums leaves a lot to be desired.

For example, only the euthanasia question is binding. If passed, the vote would allow terminally ill people with less than six months to live to choose assisted dying if approved by two doctors. The legalisation of cannabis for recreational purposes question, in contrast, will only provide an indicative vote. The public are expected to trust the politicians to sort out significant details of the legalisation after the vote, leaving the possibility of voter betrayal or confusion. Cannabis was legalised for medicinal purposes in 2018.

But thats what politics is all about an open contest of ideas, including bad ones. A referendum involves some of the messiest parts of democracy. But progressing difficult social change is best when it takes the people along with it, giving them the ultimate say.

The cannabis and euthanasia votes should also be celebrated as a chance for the New Zealand public to lead the world no other country has dealt with these issues via a full public referendum. The two issues have been pushed to referendum by the minor parties in the Labour-led coalition government. The Greens have negotiated for the cannabis question, and the populist New Zealand First party have demanded that a euthanasia decision go to voters. NZ First also favours abortion liberalisation being put to the public vote, too.

Theres been something of a backlash among the commentariat against the public being tasked with deciding these important issues. Many have lamented that a perhaps less informed electorate are doing the job that should rightfully be done by parliamentarians.

Cabinet minister Willie Jackson recently said I dont believe in referendums We are put there to make decisions if you dont like us, vote us out every three years.

And he argued that progressive accomplishments, such as same-sex marriage, homosexual law reform, abortion, womens rights would all have been lost if the public had been given the vote on them.

Thats why many politicians and pundits argue issues like these should be decided by conscience votes in parliament, in which individual MPs get to make their own personal decisions unencumbered by party lines. For the democratically minded, its hard to see how this is superior, as this process is simply involves an elite-driven outcome based on the peculiarities of unpredictable MPs, who cant generally be held to account for their vote.

This desire for MPs to take control generally reflects an elitist mood that seems to be growing in democracies around the world at the moment one that says the public are not to be trusted with too much power.

And yet, for every populist elected, there are examples of more socially progressive advances. Even in traditionally conservative Ireland, for example, theres now been a string of referendums with enlightened results: same-sex marriage in 2015, abortion and blasphemy law reform in 2018, and then divorce law modernisation this year. And in 2020, New Zealand might join this socially liberal trend.

Referendums should be celebrated for resolving difficult and divisive issues, as well as for their ability to draw the public into political decision-making and debate.

Putting questions to the public means that a much bigger societal debate occurs, and ultimately the decisions made have greater legitimately and endurance.

In an age of increasing suspicion of elites, as well as a growing public discontent with democracy, more devolution of power to voters on key issues is surely the way forward.

Bryce Edwards is a senior associate at the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies at Victoria University, Wellington

Read this article:

New Zealand's euthanasia and cannabis referendums will rightly give power to the people - The Guardian

Thursday’s papers: Orphan repatriation, priests on euthanasia and tips on handling the darkness – YLE News

The camp at al-Hol has been on Finland's political agenda. Image: Fadel Senna / AFP

Finnish politics has been shaken in recent weeks by news that the country is looking to bring back children from a camp in northern Syria.

The camp at al-Hol houses women who are or have been married to Isis fighters. Also at al-Hol are children, and orphans who were in the region when the Isis caliphate fell.

Early on Wednesday morning Foreign Minister Pekka Haavisto survived a confidence vote brought by the opposition parties after rancorous debate inside parliament and on social media, with the focus on the adults at the camp.

The question as posed by Centre Party leader Katri Kulmuni in a hastily-deleted Instagram poll was whether to repatriate the women and children at the camp, or just the children.

On Wednesday evening Haavisto told Yle that an operation was underway, before Helsingin Sanomat reported that two orphans from the camp had left on their way to Erbil, and from there to Finland.

Soon afterwards Yle also confirmed the events, with the Finns in the camp gathered by guards and photographed before the two children were removed from the facility.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs is expected to announce news of the repatriation once the children are with Finnish authorities in Erbil.

A doctoral thesis has drawn plenty of media attention after it suggested that up to half of Lutheran priests in Finland may be positive about euthanasia, if it remains separate from standard healthcare provision.

Iltalehti reports that the study found two out of five priests willing to consider euthanasia as an option if the patients life expectancy was a few days, but just one in five was similarly inclined if the patient could expect to survive for months.

"This is surprising, considering that Christian churches and communities tend to oppose euthanasia. Earlier studies have also shown that religious professionals are usually against euthanasia," said doctoral candidate Miia Kontro in a widely-quoted press release.

The study showed that female priests were more positive than male ones in relation to euthanasia.

Saturday marks the winter solstice and at this, the darkest time of the year, many people in Finland turn to thoughts of hibernation, special daylight lamps and other support measures to get through the winter.

The Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) is not immune to these thoughts of kaamos, and has produced a handy list of ten tips for those craving daylight.

Business daily Kauppalehti reports the list.

The use of daylight-imitating lamps, regular exercise (but not in the evening), winding down properly in the evening before sleep (no bright lights or phones), and making sure you see friends even if you feel like hibernating at home are among the top hints from Finlands health and wellness boffins.

See the original post:

Thursday's papers: Orphan repatriation, priests on euthanasia and tips on handling the darkness - YLE News

Passive euthanasia: Retired professor couple registers ‘living will’ in Chandigarh court – ANI News

ANI | Updated: Dec 22, 2019 04:58 IST

Chandigarh [India], Dec 22 (ANI): A retired professor couple based in Chandigarh has moved an advance directive in the local court here that will let them state their wishes for their future medical care in case of a terminal illness.The advance directive, or 'living will', has been moved in the Chandigarh district court.Speaking to ANI, professor DN Jauhar, who has executed the living will, noted that passive euthanasia became legal in India after the Supreme Court, in its March 2018 verdict, gave a legal sanction to it and permitted advance directive."Passive euthanasia has become legal after the Supreme Court's landmark March 2018 judgement. You have to execute a document known as advance directive. You can call this living will, although this word has not been used in the judgement," the professor said."We are perhaps the first people to move an advance directive. Back in 1999, we worked on a thesis where we had strongly argued that passive euthanasia should be allowed. Under the Constitution, I have the fundamental right to live with dignity, which also includes my right to die with dignity," he added. (ANI)

Original post:

Passive euthanasia: Retired professor couple registers 'living will' in Chandigarh court - ANI News

After promising 5-year review, Trudeau govt instead moves to expand euthanasia now – Lifesite

December 18, 2019 (Euthanasia Prevention Coalition) Canada's Justice Minister, David Lametti, was reported in aRadio Canada interviewas considering extending euthanasia to teenagers and people who are incompetent but made a previous request.

Lametti, who voted against Bill C-14 in 2016 because it didn't go far enough, has been ordered byPrime Minister Trudeau to expand Canada's euthanasia law.

All of this is based on the fact that theLiberal government did not appealaQubec court decision that struck downthe section of Canada's euthanasia law requiring that a person's "natural death must be reasonably foreseeable."

The Liberal government double speak is particularly concerning. Last Spring the government announced that no changes will be made to the law until after the government completed a five year review, that would begin in June 2020.What is the purpose of a five year review if the government eliminates the restrictions in the law previous to the consultation?

Christian Nol reporting for Radio Canada explains what Lametti said in the interview (Google translated):

... the Minister of Justice said he was juggling the idea of allowing people who suffer from a neurodegenerative disease, such as Parkinson's disease, to seek medical aid in dying early, before being unable to express their consent.

The possibility that seriously ill young people between the ages of 14 and 17 may seek medical assistance in dying, with psychological tags in place, is also being considered.

We will have to see if we have a strong consensus. The Canadian and Quebec societies of 2019 are not the same as in 2015. There is an evolution, a greater acceptance of assisted dying in Canada.

Lametti did recognize that he could simply amend the law based on the Quebec court decision.Radio Canada reported:

The other option on the table is to settle the question of reasonably foreseeable death in time for March 11, while keeping an in-depth review of the law for this summer. The government had promised to review the law every five years, a deadline that arrives in June.

The Globe and Mail suggested a more cautious approach in itsDecember 16 editorial. It suggested that legislation require that before MAiD is done, all other options be tried first and that the government assure better services for people with chronic conditions that cause suffering. The Globe and Mail editorial concluded:

But Ottawa should not just throw up its hands and enforce no precautions. That could tilt the balance too far in the other direction. Making access to assisted death too difficult is undesirable, but so is making it too easy.

The federal government announced that there would be a five year review of the euthanasia law beginning in June 2020 and yet it is now considering amending the legislation before the review is done.

Canada's euthanasia law does not provide oversight and control. EPC would like the government to step back and agree to an honest analysis of what is the actual happening with euthanasia in Canada.

Published with permission from the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

Read more:

After promising 5-year review, Trudeau govt instead moves to expand euthanasia now - Lifesite

Cat program worthy of city’s approval | Our Opinion – Bowling Green Daily News

Its a real shame that more people dont take the time to spay or neuter their pets.

It is a relatively inexpensive and quick procedure, which is why we have a hard time figuring out why more people dont have it done. In a perfect world, this wouldnt even be an issue, but obviously we dont live in a perfect world.

A problem that our community is having with feral cats was spotlighted in a Daily News story in October. The Bowling Green-Warren County Humane Society has been working on a Community Cat Program in which feral cats are caught, spayed or neutered and then released back to the outdoors.

The humane society received a $90,000 grant this year from the Petco Foundation to start the program and end the practice of cat euthanasia, which officials said hasnt been effective in decreasing the feral cat population.

The fact that there has not been a significant decrease in the feral cat population emphasizes why this program is needed.

Thankfully, the Bowling Green City Commission has approved a trial period for a program to help address the citys feral cat population. The trial period will go to June 30, 2021, at which time the commission could extend the program or amend the citys code of ordinances to allow the program to run permanently.

We believe this was a wise move by the city commission not only to cut down on the amount of euthanasia, but also to control the population of cats that run wild in our area.

We appreciate the city and the humane society for being proactive on this most important issue.

Read more:

Cat program worthy of city's approval | Our Opinion - Bowling Green Daily News

Struggling animal shelter budgets on kindness of others – KTBS

MINDEN, La. Recent meetings of Mindens City Council have resulted in little more than shouting matches.

"You all look like a bunch of damn idiots, a woman named Lisa McKinney shouted at the council at an early December meeting, following heated debates and the rejection of grant money for the citys airport.

In early November, three council members walked out minutes after the meeting began, costing the council its quorum and forcing the meeting to adjourn. The walkout was the result of a motion to add an item to the meetings agenda, seeking to discuss the citys employee manual.

On a quieter side of Minden, a city department with only one employee struggles to stay afloat on a shoestring budget.

"Im just here taking care of these animals and doing the best I can," said Tommy Primeaux, Mindens sole animal control officer who also runs the citys animal shelter.

Minden Animal Control operates on a budget of $99,385 per year, which includes Primeauxs salary and benefits.

A part-time, uniformed volunteer assists Primeaux at the shelter, which cant afford the liability of allowing volunteers from the community at large.

"We rely on a lot of donations to keep us going," Primeaux said.

The shelter would barely function without the generosity of local nonprofits.

"Its a very hard job, but we have to look at it as if we didnt do it, I dont know who would," said Stephanie Gantt, a volunteer for the Webster Humane Association.

The school teacher and mother of three spends much of her spare time rounding up loose animals and assisting with adoptions across Webster Parish.

"We do work a lot with the (Minden) shelter, trying to pull animals out because they are very limited on their supplies and any in-housing facilities that they have there," Gantt said.

Webster Humane provided food and beds for the Minden Animal Shelter, along with outdoor kennels and large fans so that dogs have a place to go when the shelters eight indoor kennels are being cleaned. Gantt said Webster Humane even had to donate drain covers after puppies began falling into the drains.

Webster Humane is also in charge of adoptions in Minden because the shelter can't afford its own program.

Tommy Primeaux tends to a dog and her day-old puppies.

"With the Sterilization Act with the State of Louisiana, all animals have to be spayed or neutered before leaving the shelter, and fully vetted, Primeaux said. And since were not allocated all that money to all that service, we rely on rescue groups to take care of that part for us."

The shelter came close to euthanizing multiple dogs in early December because it was past capacity, until the nonprofit was able move the animals out at the 11th hour.

Primeaux said collaborating with nonprofit rescue groups has helped hundreds if not thousands of dogs escape euthanasia. Thats something the shelter wasnt doing before Primeaux took over in 2015.

According to Primeaux, 242 stray animals were taken in between October 2018 and October, and 122 were euthanized during that time (Primeaux said he has not euthanized an animal since). The previous year, 154 strays were taken in and 112 of them were euthanized.

Before Primeauxs tenure at Minden Animal Control, he said the previous director was putting 200 to 300 dogs down each month.

Primeaux is now asking the city for more money to help in his efforts.

"We have to wait our turn just like everyone else," Primeaux said.

The city relies on (the shelter) to help clean up the streets with the animals and cats and dogs that are out in the street, but then they dont support the shelter when the shelter needs their help," Gantt said.

Mayor Terry Gardner said money is tight in Minden, and the city has been forced to cut millions of dollars across different departments.

Gardner said hed like to take advantage of grant programs, like those that assist in training service animals, to bring more money to the shelter.

For that to happen, it would have to go through the city council.

"I'm hoping that we all come back after Christmas with a fresh approach, a good attitude," Gardner said.

Primeaux is urging members of the community to do their part to help reduce euthanasia rates by spaying or neutering and micro-chipping their pets.

Read more here:

Struggling animal shelter budgets on kindness of others - KTBS

Home for the Holdiays – Journal of the San Juan Islands

Submitted by the Animal Protection Society of Friday Harbor

Many of you in the community know about Cowboy, but for those who dont, he has been a long-term resident at the Animal Protection Society of Friday Harbor. Cowboys journey home has taken almost two years. He was originally brought in as a stray, with no information about his history, to a shelter in Modesto, California, where shortly after he was scheduled to be euthanized. Around this time, Lead and Love Dog Rescue in Bend, Oregon, saved over 10 dogs from euthanasia at that shelter, Cowboy being one of them. On March 27, 2018, he was transferred to APS-FH through connections with Becky Pohlad, one of our Advisory Board members. Cowboy has been at our shelter since. Although he had been labeled an intimidating dog, everyone who took the time to get to know Cowboy couldnt understand why such a wonderful dog was overlooked time and time again. Eventually, he became an honorary staff member and won many hearts along the way, but none-the-less he sat. And waited.

Little did we know Cowboy had a secret admirer all along, and it started with a kiss. Cowboy was out on a walk one day and was introduced to Susan Mazzarella, APS-FH board president. When she put her hand out to let him smell her, he reciprocated with a gentle lick. After that she was a solid member of his fan club. Time went by, and soon Susan was ready to add to her fur family. She immediately turned to Cowboy. They started things off slowly, with gentle walks and many treats, which eventually led to an overnight stay. Cowboy never came back from that overnight visit. Susans family welcomed him in with warm arms, cozy couches and lots of love. The adoption was made official, and Cowboy had found his perfect home just in time for the holidays.

The APS-FH team would like to thank everyone who believed in Cowboy and provided the support to make his holiday wish come true.

Our mission is to provide compassionate care and brighter futures for homeless animals, with a commitment to providing a safe haven for homeless and lost animals; reuniting lost pets with their owners; placing animals in our care into qualified and loving homes; reducing pet overpopulation through spay/neuter education and assistance; advising and advocating for the protection of animals; networking with other shelters and pet rescue groups impacted by overcrowding or natural disasters to decrease euthanasia rates to save lives; advocating for animal welfare through education, outreach and assistance; promoting a stronger sense of the animal-human bond; and always adhering to our no-kill philosophy for adoptable animals.

Read this article:

Home for the Holdiays - Journal of the San Juan Islands

Article 21s scope needs to be expanded, says SC judge – The Hindu

Article 21 in the Indian Constitution was formulated after hours of discussion and deliberations and there is scope for expansion, said Supreme Court Judge V. Ramasubramanian.

Justice Ramasubramanian was delivering the D.V. Subba Rao Memorial Lecture on Expanding horizon of Article 21, organised by Centre for Policy Studies and Visakhapatnam Public Library, here on Saturday.

Article 21, considered the heart and soul of the Constitution, states, No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Initially, the wording was due process of law in place of procedure established by law. But after painstaking discussions, it was decided to use the latter in the fine print, as the former would have burdened the judicial system, Justice Subramanian said.

He also noted that though the then Constituent Assembly comprised about 82% Congressmen, Chairman of the Drafting Committee B.R. Ambedkar invited members from opposition parties to also be a part of the committee, so that it could be framed in the most democratic way.

Justice Ramasubramanian said that the British were of the opinion that there was a dearth of intellectuals in India and that Indians would be incapable of drafting a Constitution. But we proved them wrong, he said.

Talking about expanding horizons, the Supreme Court judge was of the opinion that there were untouched areas which needed to be focused on due to the changing times.

According to him, there are two main aspects in the Article Life and liberty and equality. While life and liberty are political and civil rights, equality encompasses economic, social and cultural rights.

The developing area is fraternity. It is the third generation of rights and covers areas such as collective rights and green rights, he said.

Elaborating on it, he said that this aspect touches upon sensitive but relevant areas such as dignity in death or euthanasia, right to self-identity and right to privacy.

Justice Ramasubramanian was introduced to the gathering by Director of Centre for Policy Studies Prof. A. Prasanna Kumar. He also spoke about D.V. Subba Rao and hailed him as a legal luminary.

Andhra Pradesh High Court Judge and son of D.V. Subba Rao, D.V.S.S. Somayajulu, spoke.

You have reached your limit for free articles this month.

Register to The Hindu for free and get unlimited access for 30 days.

Find mobile-friendly version of articles from the day's newspaper in one easy-to-read list.

Enjoy reading as many articles as you wish without any limitations.

A select list of articles that match your interests and tastes.

Move smoothly between articles as our pages load instantly.

A one-stop-shop for seeing the latest updates, and managing your preferences.

We brief you on the latest and most important developments, three times a day.

Not convinced? Know why you should pay for news.

*Our Digital Subscription plans do not currently include the e-paper ,crossword, iPhone, iPad mobile applications and print. Our plans enhance your reading experience.

See the original post here:

Article 21s scope needs to be expanded, says SC judge - The Hindu

Two archbishops urge support of House resolution on assisted suicide – Crux: Covering all things Catholic

WASHINGTON, D.C. Two U.S. archbishops urged support of a House concurrent resolution that calls for comprehensive medical care over suicide or assisted suicide for patients nearing the end of their lives.

We must do what we can to uphold the dignity of life, cherish the lives of all human beings, and work to prevent all suicides, said a joint Dec. 20 statement from Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, chairman of the U.S. bishops Committee on Pro-Life Activities, and Archbishop Paul S. Coakley of Oklahoma City, chairman of the bishops Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development.

Assisted suicide fractures the human family by targeting its most vulnerable members, including the elderly and persons with disabilities, suggesting that their lives are not worth living, the two archbishops said.

The resolution, introduced Dec. 12 by Rep. J. Louis Correa, D-California, has 10 co-sponsors. It was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

We urge the U.S. Congress to do all it can to protect Americans from this cruel practice, and to ensure those who are ill, disabled, or facing the end of life receive comprehensive medical and palliative care instead of a facilitated suicide, Naumann and Coakley said.

There is no constitutional right to assisted suicide, the resolution says. The government has a legitimate interest in prohibiting assisted suicide, and such prohibitions rationally relate to protecting the vulnerable from coercion and protecting disabled and terminally ill people from prejudice, negative and inaccurate stereotypes, and societal indifference.'

The federal government should ensure that every person facing the end of their life has access to the best quality and comprehensive medical care, including palliative, in-home, or hospice care, tailored to their needs, it adds. The federal government should not adopt or endorse policies or practices that support, encourage, or facilitate suicide or assisted suicide, whether by physicians or others.

The Pontifical Academy for Life hosted the World Innovation Summit for Health Dec. 11-12 in Rome. The day before the conference began, the academys president, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, said end-of-life issues would be on the agenda.

Helping communities and countries take notice of this issue is key, Paglia said, if they hope to avoid that the growing number of elderly leads not just to a culture of disposal, but actual disposal, that is the culture of euthanasia.

Crux is dedicated to smart, wired and independent reporting on the Vatican and worldwide Catholic Church. That kind of reporting doesnt come cheap, and we need your support. You can help Crux bygiving a small amount monthly, or witha onetime gift. Please remember, Crux is a for-profit organization, so contributions are not tax-deductible.

View post:

Two archbishops urge support of House resolution on assisted suicide - Crux: Covering all things Catholic

A design for death: meeting the bad boy of the euthanasia movement | 1843 – The Economist 1843

Its a sunny autumn morning in the Jordaan, Amsterdams chocolate-boxiest district. Over tea in a modishly renovated maisonette, a voluble Australian 72year-0ld wearing round glasses and fashionable denim is regaling me with his new-year plans, which involve an elegant gas chamber stationed at a secret location in Switzerland and a happily dead body.

My hosts name is Philip Nitschke and hes invented a machine called Sarco. Short for sarcophagus, the slick, spaceship-like pod has a seat for one passenger en-route to the afterlife. It uses nitrogen to enact a pain-free, peaceful death from inert-gas asphyxiation at the touch of a button. With the help of his wife and colleague, the writer and lawyer Dr Fiona Stewart, Nitschke is ushering the death-on-demand movement towards a dramatic new milestone and their enthusiasm is palpable.

Weve got a number of people lined up already, actually, says Nitschke, whose unique CV (and previous occupation as a registered physician) has earned him the nickname Dr Death. The front-runner in the one-way journey to Switzerland is a New Zealander whom Nitschke has known for years. Shes not terminally ill, but is becoming increasingly disabled by macular degeneration something she finds intolerable after a lifetime of reading for pleasure. Shes also got an ideological, philosophical supportive commitment to the idea, explains Nitschke. Shes coming from a long way because she likes the concept and she sees it as the future.

Whether that future is utopian or dystopian depends on your perspective. Nitschke has twice been nominated for Australian of the Year for his work with Exit International, the end-of-life choices information and advocacy organisation he founded in 1997; activities include the publication of The Peaceful Pill, a continuously updated directory of information on how to end it all. But over the past two decades, members of the medical, psychiatric and even the pro-voluntary euthanasia communities have come to reject his brand of increasingly strident some say extreme advocacy for what he terms rational suicide: an individuals inalienable right to die in a manner of their choosing. His one time ally, the former UN medical director Michael Irwin, has branded him totally irresponsible for telling people how to obtain drugs that could help them end their own lives. And in August 2019 the grieving daughter of a man who took his life after contact with Exit International denounced Nitschke, saying the information you put out kills people who are not in a rational state of mind to make that decision.

Nitschke says he doesnt want to make a load of money from it, but theres Silicon Valley swagger in his latest projects ambition to disrupt the business of elective death through technology. The Sarco concept came to Nitschke while watching "Soylent Green", a 1970s sci-fi movie in which Charlton Heston, disgusted by a world ravaged by global warming, seeks euthanasia in the serenity of a customised government clinic. Its set in 2022. Eventually, Nitschke wants the 3D-printed Sarco to be accessible on demand to anyone, anywhere a sort of cosmic Uber into the great beyond. But for now, hes taking his invention to Switzerland because its the only jurisdiction worldwide in which, so long as theres no malicious purpose, assistance in a suicide is not a crime.

Nitschke and Stewart are much jollier than youd expect the right-to-die movements only power couple to be. Theyre full of well joie de vivre and arch banter about everything from Brexit to the roadworks that have denuded the front of their home of a beloved creeper. If its not dead, boy is it doing a bloody good impression of being dead, observes Nitschke, correctly. Stewart is at the kitchen table, processing applications from her laptop, and asking correspondents for proof of age. Officially, membership to Exit is restricted to the over 50s, and its members are mostly in jurisdictions where neither assisted suicide nor euthanasia are available which is to say, most of the countries in the world. Im the door bitch, she jokes.

Stewart had been a pro-choice advocate in Australia before meeting Nitschke at a festival of ideas in Brisbane in 2001.Later, she would be horrified by the state of his nascent organisation. She said, This is a mess youre not paying enough tax, your business is a shambles and it needs proper management. says Nitschke. She turned the whole thing around. I cant do much without her.

One of those opposed to Sarco is Paul Biegler, adjunct research fellow at the Monash Bioethics Centre in Victoria. You can make an argument that people have got a right to control the time of their death, he tells me over Skype, later. You could make an argument that rational suicide in the absence of a terminal illness is a defensible option for some people. But it really is a quantum leap to go from saying that people have a right to choose the time and nature of their dying to providing a mechanism for that to happen.

A comprehensive assessment of worldwide data in 2016 showed that, in areas where euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide are legal, 0.3-4.6% of deaths result from them, with more than 70% of cases involving patients with cancer. The report described these numbers as an indication that despite growing legalisation the practice remains rare. The Netherlands relatively permissive law stipulates that to qualify for either procedure an applicant must be shown to be experiencing unbearable suffering from which there is no prospect of recovery with no reasonable alternatives available to end that suffering. It has been criticised for not making a distinction between physical and mental distress, which could, in theory, justify euthanasia for psychiatric patients. Switzerlands law is looser foreigners can travel there and legally access physician-assisted suicide. The only two legal requirements a candidate is required to satisfy are the intention to end their life and soundness of mind. The general approach [for the latter] has been to get a ticket of approval from a psychiatrist, notes Nitschke.

The Sarco project bore fruit at the same time as subtle legal developments in Switzerland. Although theres nothing in Swiss law to state that a person must be terminally ill to be eligible for assisted suicide, in practice, says Nitschke, groups such as Dignitas have chosen to further medicalise the legislation, he says, because the only way they could get a doctor to prescribe [the lethal dose of the barbiturate] Nembutal was for the person to say they were sick.

This, he thinks, is specious and evidence of the medical professions creeping paternalism, which he finds abhorrent. [Doctors are] always there, setting themselves up as the gatekeepers when it comes to areas of human endeavour that they should have no role in because when you medicalise something youve got to have a medical controller, he says.

The great irony of Nitschkes career, in his view, is that he seems to spend as much time arguing with people on my own side as he does weathering the rebukes of the born again Christians. He recalls being denounced by Dignity in Dying (in its former incarnation as the Voluntary Euthanasia Society) after he was detained, then released, by authorities at Heathrow airport on his way to host Exit workshops in the UK whilst carrying equipment for testing the safety of Nembutal, the barbiturate most often used for lethal injections, which terminally ill individuals were starting to obtain online from questionable sources.

They came out and said I was a danger to the movement. I found that annoying but I suppose what we were seeing was a difference in philosophy. I was telling people: get your own drugs, test your own drugs, be in control; they were saying: change the law, convince the politicians...

Its undeniable that Nitschkes campaigns have exhibited a certain PR-savvy pizzazz. He is the originator, no less, of the euthanasia flash mob, which took place to celebrate his 70th birthday and 20 years of Exit International (soundtrack: Bon Jovis "Its My Life", naturally). When he announced plans for Sarco, it was dismissed by some, says Nitschke, as a stunt, or some virtual creation in someones mind that didnt have any prospect of physical reality.

I can attest that the machine exists, having had the singular experience of reclining on a prototype at Nitschkes workshop on an industrial estate in Hillegom, South Holland, amidst the incongruous spring blaze of the tulip fields. Plus, scratch the surface of his provocative patter and theres a person a patient lurking behind each of his convictions.

Even aged 18, Nitschke demonstrated a flair for taking the law into his own hands after thieves stole the radio from his car, which was parked outside a dance. The police told him it was too small an affair to pursue so Nitschke spent two Saturday nights hiding in the boot with a .22 caliberrifle waiting for the thief to return. They did, and Nitschke marched them to a telephone and called the police, who arrested the thief and retrieved the stolen transistor.You should solve your own problems is how Id put it, says Nitschke.

Nitschke studied physics at the University of Adelaide before heading to the Northern Territory to work as an Aboriginal land-rights activist. Having studied for his medical degree with, he says, the intention of curing himself of hypochondria, in 1996 he became the first doctor in the world to administer a legal, lethal voluntary injection under the short-lived Rights of the Terminally Ill Act which, astonishingly, made the statute books in the Northern Territory by one vote.

Suddenly we had a law which meant terminally ill people could legally seek help from a doctor to die, he recalls. And when a patient came to me who was eligible, because he was dying of prostate cancer, as much as I was passionate about his right to die, I didnt want to be the one to do it, you know, so I built a machine that would downgrade euthanasia into assisted suicide. I would load it up and put the needle in the vein, all that stuff, but he was the one pressing the button.

That patients name was Bob Dent and Nitschkes invention, the Deliverance Machine listed on the Wikipedia page for notable euthanasia devices in history and now on display in Londons Science Museum lasted eight months and ended the lives of three more people before the law was overturned and assisting in a suicide became a serious crime again.

The other important aspect of the Deliverance and this certainly doesnt apply to Sarco was that it meant the user was able to die in his wifes arms, says Nitschke. The machine didnt take up much space so he was able to press the button, push the machine away and hold his wife, his usually robust voice crackles. I was on the other side of the room, he says.

Initially, Nitschke ran Exit workshops exclusively for the terminally ill. His self-described big, blinding road to Damascus change came courtesy of a French academic from Perth named Lisette Nigot, whom Nitschke met in 1999 when she was 76. She had no desire to live to see 80, and repeatedly approached Nitschke asking for information about suicide drugs.

I always said to her, thats ridiculous: youre not sick, go on a world cruise or write a book. And one day she said: Mind your own business. I make this decision you run around imposing your template on other people of what a life worth living is and dole out your information only to those people you think meet your criteria. Youre the worst example of insufferable medical paternalism Ive ever met.I immediately crumpled and fell apart and agreed with her. It really affected me. Theres a photograph of Nigot whose 2002 suicide-note declared Nitschke to be her inspiration on the wall of the workshop in Hillegom.

Nitschke developed Sarco with the help of Haarlem-based industrial designer Alexander Bannink. My original design looked more like a bathtub, says Nitschke, whereas Alexander really pushed the idea of making it resemble a vehicle, to give the sense of going somewhere. Engaging suppliers for the project has been interesting. When we first went to see a company down in Vlaardingen about building these strange aluminium tanks, I said to them, Im building some sort of death machine, do you want one of your logos on the side of it? They declined.

Sarcos raison dtre, admits Nitschke, is aesthetic. It obviates what he calls the yuck factor inherent in other tools of peaceful suicide, such as the humble plastic bag and gas. Thats just as efficient, he says. You can tell people over and over and over, as I do in my workshops, that its cheap, reliable, quick and legal, but they say, I dont care if its a peaceful death, I do not like the look of it and I dont want to be found like that.

Sarco, meanwhile, is positively Instagrammable. A sleek conveyance that wouldnt look out of place in a Tesla showroom, it consists of a detachable capsule a coffin, essentially mounted diagonally on a stand. Once inside, its user presses a button, prompting the release of nitrogen from a store-bought canister. From a physiological point of view, it is peaceful, says Nitschke. Its not the same as a rope around the neck, a pillow in the face or a head underwater these are mechanical obstructions to breathing and theyre terrifying, let me tell you.

Unlike previous Nitschke-devised death technologies, Sarco does not require the procurement or prescription of drugs. This is handy because Nitschke is no longer a doctor, having publicly burned his medical licence in 2015 following a dispute with the South Australian chapter of the Medical Board of Australia. It suspended Nitschke before offering to reinstate him providing he fulfil 26 criteria which included refraining from talking about euthanasia. Shortly afterwards, Nitschke and Stewart moved to the Netherlands on an entrepreneurial visa.

Then came the elective death in May 2018 of Nitschkes friend, the 104-year-old botanist David Goodall, who refused to declare any serious condition beyond being tired of life but was nevertheless allowed to kill himself by lethal infusion at the Life Circle facility in Basel. That set a precedent, says Nitschke.

Nitschke and his lawyers began the process of setting up what he vaguely calls an organisation in Switzerland to facilitate the use of Sarco for those who want to end it all for whatever reason. For now, hes keeping the specifics of the facility and its whereabouts close to his chest for fear of sabotage, but he says hes been talking to amenable local psychiatrists whose participation hell need because the soundness of mind criterion still stands and is confident of success.

Its late November Black Friday, in fact when I call Nitschke on his mobile for an update. He and Stewart are on the road with Sarco in tow, having retrieved a display model from a flooded Venice, where it has been on show at the Palazzo Michiel as part of the Venice design festival since May (pictured above).It was bloody awful, he says of the devastation in Venice. Fortunately Sarco was on the palazzos first floor, but still it had to be carried by people wearing thigh-high waders, put on a barge and floated out of the place.

I ask whether Nitschke is feeling nervous about a debut for which there can, after all, be no dress rehearsal. There is a great deal of apprehension and nervousness, he affirms, and I can sense it building now as I watch the calendar days ticking down. Im getting more and more anxious about it because I well and truly recognise that theres a lot hinging on this for other people whose wishes are very important to me and, while I want things to run smoothly theres always the possibility of some bizarre eventuality you cant predict. But once Ive got the comfort of seeing the successful initial uses of the machine I think Im going to be very pleased indeed.

He suspects the reaction against Sarco has been so strong because the whole ethos of the device flies in the face of the current Western paradigm, which dictates that all human effort and endeavour should be directed towards living longer at all costs, and any death is perceived as some fundamental failure that must be conducted shamefully, privately and in secret.

He thinks technology is affording us the opportunity to consider how the end of life might be reframed as a cause for some celebration or at least a momentous event, as it has been regarded by other cultures and in times gone by.

I ask the obvious question: what a successful death might look like in his own case. It would depend, he says, on the circumstances.But I know what I dont want. I dont want to be stuffed full of tubes with doctors hovering over me, pleased with themselves for keeping my heart beating for another five minutes, eking out every last painful second. That, to me, is dystopia.

Read more:

A design for death: meeting the bad boy of the euthanasia movement | 1843 - The Economist 1843

Pro-lifers gear up for fight against legalization of euthanasia in Ireland – Live Action News

Irish pro-lifers have been embattled ever since the repeal of the Eighth Amendment last year, which legalized abortion. Now pro-lifers in the country are readying themselves for a fight on a new life issue, as a poll by the Journal shows that three in five support legalizing euthanasia.

President of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) lamentedthe creeping erosion of pro-life protections in the Republic of Ireland:We have witnessed dreadful changes in Ireland in recent years in relation to abortion. Now we are seeing a further threat to innocent lives looming on the horizon. We need to combat these threats by exposing the reality of assisted suicide. Evidence from around the world shows that the so-called right to die quickly becomes the duty to die.

The recent media spotlight on euthanasia comes from Vicky Phelan, who is known in Ireland for her exposure of massive deficiencies in a government cervical cancer screening program. Because of these mistakes, she missed a critical diagnosis window and is currently suffering from terminal cervical cancer. Now, 45-year-old Phelan has emerged as the latest face of the euthanasia movement in the country. According to the Journal, the mother of two told the Irish Mail on Sunday that she would avail herself of the procedure, and that she would campaign for others who want it. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are currently illegal in Ireland.

READ:Three reasons a Dutch ethicist changed his mind about assisted suicide

As reported by Extra.ie, Phelan explained that she believes she only has two years left to live. I would be pro-euthanasia, definitely. I would hate to be in a position where I was in a lot of pain or lingering, as can happen a lot, that people are waiting for four or five days for somebody to die, she said. She portrayed terminal illness as intolerable for both family and patient: Its terrible for the patient. Its terrible for the family having to sit and watch their loved one [dying in pain]. Its not a nice sight to see people when theyre dying.

Unfortunately, Phelan isnt a minority here. According to a poll conducted by the Journal, 63% are in favor of assisted suicide or euthanasia, making it the next major pro-life target in Ireland. Just 16% reported they would not support the legalization of euthanasia in Ireland.

What Phelan and supporters dont understand is that legalizing euthanasia always ends up hurting societys most vulnerable. In countries like The Netherlands, euthanasia legalization nearly two decades ago initially began with hard cases like Phelans in mind. But the slippery slope of legalizing euthanasia has led to the endangerment of those with mental illness, the elderly, and even children. Its why former euthanasia activists like Dutch ethicist Theo Boer so ardently warns other countries to avoid going down this path.

A similar case before the high court failed in 2013, but the conversation has since re-emerged and with major countries like New Zealand putting it on the table, it could force the issue in Ireland.

Like Live Action News on Facebookfor more pro-life news and commentary!

Originally posted here:

Pro-lifers gear up for fight against legalization of euthanasia in Ireland - Live Action News

With voluntary assisted dying not an option, Laura Henkel is heading to Switzerland to ‘die with dignity’ – ABC News

Updated December 15, 2019 15:11:40

Laura Henkel is about to embark on the last journey of her life.

While pain and exhaustion have become an inescapable part of this 90-year-old's life, she has not been diagnosed with a terminal illness.

"I think old age is a terminal illness because you can't cure it like a disease, you can't mend it like a broken bone," she said.

"It's only going to get worse and there's nothing you can do about it.

"I don't want to put my family through the terrible experience that I had with my own mother, where she suffered for 15 years with dementia and loss of dignity.

"I vowed 40 years ago that I would not die like that."

Voluntary assisted dying in Australia is not an option for Ms Henkel.

While Victoria and Western Australia have passed assisted dying laws, they only apply under a strict set of circumstances.

In both states, applicants must be terminally ill with intolerable pain, and likely to die within six months, or 12 months for neurodegenerative diseases.

It is illegal in all other states and territories.

Determined to end her life on her own terms, Ms Henkel is packing her bags for Switzerland.

"I want to end my life with dignity," she said.

"I would far rather stay here in my home and die here in my home with my family around me, but here in New South Wales I'm not allowed to. I'm not allowed to die."

Ms Henkel's daughter, Cathy Henkel, and granddaughter, Sam Lara, are supporting her decision and will be by her side when she dies.

"Well, of course it conflicts when your mum tells you she wants to die," Cathy Henkel said.

"But she very quickly explained to me that her quality of life had declined to such a degree, and she told me about her own mother and not wanting to end up like her, and I could see that daily suffering."

Ms Henkel has asked her filmmaker daughter and granddaughter to document her euthanasia journey.

It is a challenging task for a loved one grappling with her grandmother's decision.

"I feel a million emotions on an hourly basis," Ms Lara said.

"But in the long-term, I think the upsides to this choice are definitely going to outweigh the challenges.

"The best aspects of Laura's choice have definitely been the chance to say goodbye.

"We've been able to do a lot of bucket-list things."

The three generations of women hope the film will start a dialogue in Australia about the laws around voluntary assisted dying.

"What Laura is doing is forcing us to talk about death and to talk about the end of life for the elderly and what options they have and what options they don't have," Ms Lara said.

"It is incredibly challenging, and I know because I've lived it.

"It is going to bring up a lot of emotion and conflict in people [but] I don't know if that's necessarily a bad thing."

While Ms Henkel has made her position clear, the issue of voluntary assisted dying in Australia is a complex and often divisive issue.

Margaret Sommerville is a professor of bioethics at the Catholic University of Notre Dame in Sydney.

"People believe it's their right, it's their decision and this is what they want to do, but we also have to think about what impact would that have in our society in general," Professor Somerville said.

"We know that people who feel like that, when they get fully adequate care and support, a very large number of them change their mind.

"This is even people who have asked for and consented to euthanasia in jurisdictions where it's legal."

The Australian Medical Association's statement position is that doctors should not be involved in ending a person's life.

It recognises the broad range of views within the medical profession and the broader community, but says laws relating to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are, "ultimately a matter for society and government".

For Laura Henkel, the fear of losing autonomy through a stroke or dementia outweighs the fear of death.

"I don't want to die in hospital, [and] I don't want to die in an old-age home," she said.

"A sportsman is allowed to say, 'Look, I've had enough'. You may say, 'Oh, but he can still play beautifully why does he want to retire?' But he suddenly feels he's had enough, so you accept that, so why not accept that life is the same thing?

"Just about everybody says, 'I would like to die in my sleep', and that's precisely what I'm going to do.

"I'm going to go to sleep, and then I will die."

Topics:aged-care,health-policy,euthanasia,death,pain,community-and-society,ballina-2478,lismore-2480,switzerland

First posted December 15, 2019 09:11:44

Read the original here:

With voluntary assisted dying not an option, Laura Henkel is heading to Switzerland to 'die with dignity' - ABC News

Provincial govt tries to bully Canadian hospice into killing sick patients – Lifesite

DELTA, British Columbia, December 12, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) British Columbias government is threatening to penalize a non-faith-based hospice if it fails to follow its directives and allow its patients to be killed on-site through a medically-assisted death program.

The province could go as far as to shut down the Delta Hospice Society, which operates the 10-bed Irene Thomas Hospice in Ladner, BC, says Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition.

New Democratic Party (NDP) health minister Adrian Dix has given the society until Thursday to produce plans to comply with the Fraser Health Authoritys policy that all its facilities excepting faith-based institutions that can object on religious grounds provide euthanasia, the Globe and Mail reported.

Its the latest turn in a long-running battle that began in September 2016, when Fraser Health Authority adopted its policy on euthanasia, euphemistically referred to as medical aid in dying (MAiD), which the Justin Trudeau Liberal government legalized that June.

Hospice founder and then-executive director Nancy Macey refused to allow euthanasia at Irene Thomas, arguing that patients would need to be transferred to another facility to be killed because lethally injecting them was incompatible with palliative care and violated the hospices constitution, which states that it will not hasten a patients death.

The hospice is under contract with the health authority, which funds it $1.3 million annually, or slightly less than half its operating budget the rest of which comes from private donations and owns the land on which the building sits, which it leases to the hospice, according to the Vancouver Sun.

Fraser Health Authority then issued an edict in February 2018 that the hospice provide euthanasia onsite, but the society said it would not do so.

Macey and Janice Strukoff, an administrative leader for society, told the Vancouver Sun at the time that euthanizing patients not only is against the hospices constitution, but also stoked fears and anxieties of vulnerable patients and would traumatize not only them, but also staff and volunteers.

Hospice palliative care is not about hastening death and we object to the bullying currently taking place in B.C., Strukoff said.

The health authority then mandated in September 2018 that hospices could not transfer a patient to another facility to be euthanized, according to the Vancouver Sun.

And in September 2019, the hospice board fired Macey and voted to allow euthanasia, it reported.

However, following a membership drive, a new board was elected at the November 28 annual general meeting. It voted to reverse the policy to allow euthanasia, arguing that doing so was against the societys constitution, dismissed the acting executive director, and appointed a new one.

The Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians and Canadian Hospice Palliative Care Association backed the Delta societys decision in a joint November 27 Call to Action.

Hospice palliative care and MAiD substantially differ in multiple areas including in philosophy, intention and approach. Hospice palliative care does not seek to hasten death or intentionally end life, the statement said.

MAiD is not part of hospice palliative care; it is not an extension of palliative care, nor is it one of the tools in the palliative care basket. National and international hospice palliative care organizations are unified in the position that MAiD is not part of the practice of hospice palliative care, it added.

Fraser Health Authority responded to the decision by insisting the hospice had to comply with its policy and met with members of the board on December 5. Now Dix is suggesting the province will pull funding if not more drastic punishment if the hospice doesnt bow to the euthanasia rule.

[W]e do live in a free society, Dix told the Globe and Mail.

Delta Hospice Society can decide that it doesnt want to continue to receive support from the Fraser Health Authority in its mission. They can choose to do that. You can absolutely have it your way. But you cant have it both ways.

But Schadenberg says the minister and the health authority are overstepping their roles by forcing and bullying the hospice to provide euthanasia.

He has launched a petition to Dr. Victoria Lee, president of the Fraser Health Authority, and to minister Dix supporting the society.

The results of this battle will be far-reaching, Schadenberg told LifeSiteNews.

If the Delta Hospice closes, the residents of Delta will lose the 10-bed hospice that is known for providing excellent end-of-life care, he said.

If the Delta Hospice is forced to do euthanasia, then all Canadian hospice groups will be forced to do euthanasia.

To sign the EPCC petition supporting Delta Hospice, go here.

Continue reading here:

Provincial govt tries to bully Canadian hospice into killing sick patients - Lifesite

Over Three Fourths Of Icelanders Support Right To Assisted Dying – Reykjavk Grapevine

Photo by

Christian Bickel/Wikimedia Commons

A poll conducted in November this year shows that 77.7% of Icelanders support the practice of assisted dying. The study was made by Lfsviringar (Life of Dignity), an Icelandic association for the education about assisted dying, and conducted by Maskna. Icelanders also showed to favour the Dutch method for the practice.

In 2017, Lfsviringar was born with the purpose of creating awareness and bring forward discussion and education into the subject of euthanasia. The theme was not new to Icelandic society, for already in a 2015 poll 75.5% of the respondents showed support for the practice. Also in 2017, seven members of Parliament, from different parties, came forward in an effort to legalize assisted suicide in the country. For their proposal to be successful they needed 58 letters of support, they received some, including one from the National Association of Senior Citizens, but failed to go forward with the bill.

The Dutch method is the one that retains more popularity between voters. The Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedures) Act is in practice in The Netherlands, Belgium, Colombia, and Luxembourg. The Dutch were the first to legalise the practice in 2002, making assisted suicide viable if a physician holds the conviction that the request by the patient was voluntary and well-considered if he holds the conviction that the patients suffering was lasting and unbearable, and if the patient holds the conviction that there was no other reasonable solution for the situation he was in.

From the 2015 poll to the one conducted this year, there were changes in the way that the question was asked, making it more detailed. While in 2015, Icelanders had to answer to Are you in favour or against that an individual can get help to end their life if he has an incurable disease (palliative death)?. This year, the people surveyed were asked to respond the following Do you agree or disagree that an individual can be helped to end their life (assisted dying) if they are suffering from a condition or disease that has been assessed incurable and that they are experiencing to be unbearable?.

Granted that, in 2019, the majority chose to respond positively, 6,8% said they were highly or rather opposed, and 15.4% were not sure. When questioned about why they opposed assisted suicide, some of the respondents said that it was contrary to the moral and professional obligations of doctors (23.5%), others believed that palliative care was sufficient to alleviate suffering (21.7%), some even stated it was against their moral beliefs (20.4%), but only 3.6% claimed religious reasons. The top concern between participants was that the legalisation of the practice would lead to the misuse of it.

Curiously, people from different age groups, locations and even political parties responded very differently to the survey. While 85% of 18 to 29-year-olds responded in agreement, only 63.4% of people older than 60 years were on the same page. People in Reykjavk represented the biggest percentage of people answering in favour (80.7%), while it was in the citys neighboring municipalities where the lowest percentages were seen (74.4%), followed by the north of the country (75.5%). Regarding the political views of the participants, a great percentage of The Pirate Partys voters (86.8%) were positive to the poll in contrast with the voters for The Progressive Party (68.3%).

Assisted suicide raises a lot of questions from all sides of the subject. While some believe it shouldnt be done by medical professionals because they consider it goes against the Hippocratic oath, others would say that if these professionals swear to do no harm, the assisted suicide of patients in irreversible pain is in agreement with the oath.

In 2017 an Australian reader of The Grapevine responded to one of our articles on the same subject with his own experience. He wanted other readers to know that enforced prolonged life, when the quality of life is lost, is a fate far worse than death.

Related

Link:

Over Three Fourths Of Icelanders Support Right To Assisted Dying - Reykjavk Grapevine

Priest reminds public: ‘Honor the sanctity of life’ – INQUIRER.net

Fr. Prudencio Operiano calls on the public to honor the sanctity of life during the fourth day of Misa de Gallo on Thursday, December 19, 2019, at the National Shrine of Saint Joseph in Mandaue City. CDND Photo / Raul Tabanao

MANDAUE CITY, Cebu Thursday mornings homily on the fourth day of Misa de Gallo here centered on the Catholic Churchs teachings against suicide, abortion, and euthanasia or mercy killing.

Fr. Prudencio Operiano of the National Shrine of Saint Joseph in Mandaue City reminded parishioners on Thursday, December 19, that taking ones life in any way is a sin because it disregards the sanctity of human life.

Ang kinabuhi gikan sa Ginoo. Ang kinabuhi sagrado ug sumala pa ni (Life comes from God. It is sacred and according to) Pope Saint John Paul II: All stages of life, from womb to the tomb, is sacred,' Operiano said.

While it is the mothers who carry unborn children, Operiano said their lives still belong to God.

The priest also emphasized that ending ones life is also a sin.

Tungod kay sagrado ang kinabuhi sa tawo, angay kining tahuron. Dako kaayong sala ang paghikog. Dako kaayong sala ang pag-abort o ang pagkuha sa kinabuhi sa bata,Operiano said.

(Because life is sacred, it must be respected. Its a mortal sin to commit suicide. Its a mortal sin to abort or end the life of a child.)

Operiano also called on families to refuse to perform euthanasia or mercy killing for their sick family members.

The priest also called on parishioners to give value to every life in the society regardless of economic status and other social standards.

As Christmas Day draws near, Operiano said one of the greatest blessings a person could receive is the guidance to see how valuable other persons are.

Makakakita gani ta sa atong silingan nga tawo, atong hinumduman nga siya angay respetohan, angay higugmaon, tabangan ug kaluy-an, Operiano said.

(When we see our neighbors as fellow men, let us remember that he deserves respect, love, help and compassion.) / celr

Read Next

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

Read the rest here:

Priest reminds public: 'Honor the sanctity of life' - INQUIRER.net

New policy could allow doctors to euthanize Alzheimer’s patients without their active consent – TheBlaze

The government of the Canadian province of Qubec is considering allowing doctors to euthanize people suffering from Alzheimer's, dementia, and other disease where the patient is unable to provide their consent.

According to LifeSiteNews, a Canadian health minister, Danielle McCann, said at a press conference earlier this month that the recommendation to allow the practice of euthanizing patients without their consent came from an "expert panel" that spent 18 months studying the issue.

However, McCann says that Qubec will launch its own non-partisan public consultation process before deciding whether to allow the practice.

"We have heard the the heartfelt appeal of Quebecers who are suffering and calling for a widening of the rules," McCann said, the Montreal Gazette reported. "Qubec society is evolving on this sensitive issue and we have a moral duty to respond. all together."

The advance assisted death directed would have to be authorized by the patient while they are still mentally able to decide. However, family members who disagree with their loved one's decision would "not have a veto," a committee member said at the meeting. Opponents of the measure also say that if someone were to change their mind, they could have no way of stopping their own death.

In the event a person suffers from a disease where they could lose their decision-making abilities, the Canadian panel recommended that patients formally designate a third party while they are still mentally capacitated who would inform doctors of the existence of a prior consent to be euthanized. The third party authorization would be kept in a government registry.

That third party would represent the patient should they lose their faculties due to diseases like Alzheimer's or dementia, but the final decision to euthanize the patient would rest in the hands of a physician.

The Gazette noted that a person in good health would be ineligible for requesting in advance to be euthanized should they were to suffer an unforeseen health incident, such as a heart attack or a car accident that leaves them paralyzed.

Under Qubec's current law, residents can only be euthanized if they meet all of the following criteria, according to LifeSiteNews:

McCann said the new measure gives patients "the freedom to decide and we do this while respecting their will, values and dignity."

Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, disagreed and warned that the new policy may result in people being killed against their will.

"This is absolutely crazy, because it will allow euthanasia of someone who may never have wanted it, who might have in fear in an earlier state felt this was what they wanted, and when the time comes, they lose their right to change their mind," he told LifeSiteNews.

See more here:

New policy could allow doctors to euthanize Alzheimer's patients without their active consent - TheBlaze

Euthanasia – American Life League

When we talk about euthanasia, what exactly do we mean? Today, we usually hear about euthanasia in the health care context. For our purposes, euthanasia amounts to doing, or not doing, something to intentionally bring about a patients death. Because theres so much confusion surrounding the term, lets make sure we understand what euthanasia is not.

It is not euthanasia to administer medication needed to control painthats called good medical care. It is not euthanasia to stop treatment that is gravely burdensome to a patientthats called letting the patient exercise the moral option to refuse extraordinary medical means. It is not euthanasia to stop tube-feeding a patient whose diseased or injured body can no longer assimilate food and waterthats called simply accepting death.

In these circumstances, pain control, refusing extraordinary means, and stopping feeding may all allow death. Butand this is crucial to our understandingunlike euthanasia, their purpose and intent is not to bring about death.

Actually, euthanasia could be called a form of suicide, assisted suicide, or even murder, depending on the patients level of involvement and consent. To define euthanasia this way, though, seems to diminish its threat. After all, arent there laws or, at the very least, strong social taboos against suicide, assisted suicide, and murder?

Unfortunately, when it comes to the sick and disabled, this is no longer entirely true. And, the rationale and cultural forces behind the movement that brought this about threaten even more to tear down the legal and social barriers to killing.

Most of us know about Jack Kevorkian and his efforts to help ailing people commit suicide. Many of us may not realize, though, that Kevorkians maverick image masks a serious crusade that is building on emerging legal and cultural trends. Our society is poised to accept euthanasia on demandand worse. What we dont know about that could kill us.

In sum, it is vitally important to understand that everyones most basic rightthe right to lifeis in jeopardy when our law and collective morality no longer view all persons as equally worthy of life, solely on the basis of our common humanity. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is also in our own best interests to protect and cherish weak and vulnerable members of our human family.

In order to do that, we must educate ourselves and others about the growing threat of euthanasia, vigorously oppose its legalization, and pray for the wisdom and compassion to properly comfort, care for and dissuade those considering suicide.

The information on euthanasia is a PowerPoint Presentation (2007) prepared for American Life League by Julie Grimstad, Executive Director of Life is Worth Living, Inc.

View original post here:

Euthanasia - American Life League

Right to euthanasia for people tired of life supported by most Dutch – The Irish Times

For the first time a majority of the Dutch population supports the idea of euthanasia for those who say theyre tired of life although they remain physically healthy, a survey shows.

In 2002 the Netherlands became the first country in the world to legalise euthanasia as a form of painless escape for terminally ill patients with the emphasis on those experiencing hopeless and unbearable suffering.

The procedure remains tightly controlled. Two doctors are required to agree independently in each case that the legal conditions have been met. However, theres a growing debate about whether or not availability should be broadened to include those who feel their lives are at an end.

As a result, controversial new legislation is to be tabled in parliament by the centre-left party D66 early next year that would make euthanasia available to citizens over 75 who believe their lives are complete and who wish to have control over how and when they end.

The new representative survey by the national statistics agency will be good news for D66 because it shows clearly for the first time that public attitudes to euthanasia are changing, and that that change is very much in line with the partys proposed new guidelines.

They survey shows the same overwhelming support for euthanasia as before, with 87 per cent of the population favouring its availability in certain controlled circumstances, 8 per cent opposed to it in all circumstances and 5 per cent with no opinion.

In religious terms, the greatest support for the procedure at 98 per cent comes from those who describe themselves as non-religious, with the greatest opposition from Muslims and orthodox Protestants.

However, within those broad parameters theres been an important shift, with 55 per cent of those surveyed now of the view that euthanasia should be available in cases where people feel tired of life while being in good physical health. Thirty-two per cent remain opposed to this.

As regards other specific hard case situations, 80 per cent agreed with its provision in cases of advanced dementia where the wish had been made known in advance.

Seventy-five per cent were in favour for terminally ill children and people with severe mental disorders.

The lower age limit for assisted suicide is currently 12, and while a third of respondents said they believed the age should be lowered to include younger children in distress, roughly half said they felt age should play no role in the decision at all.

The survey confirms that although it remains controversial and some cases become high profile, euthanasia is still used infrequently. There were 6,126 deaths by euthanasia in 2018, amounting to 4 per cent of the people who died in the Netherlands last year.

See the original post here:

Right to euthanasia for people tired of life supported by most Dutch - The Irish Times

Euthanasia – Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Euthanasia is when a person's life is ended because of disease or pain, which has made them suffer. This is different from assisted suicide, where a person helps someone kill themselves. It is also different to murder, where the reason is not suffering, but to kill for the killer's own ends. Euthanasia can be voluntary, where the person who dies asks for help in ending their life. Where the person is unable to make their decision known, it is usually called non-voluntary euthanasia. Where someone is killed against their will, it is usually called murder.

Euthanasia is illegal in most countries. It is permitted in a small number of countries, such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Victoria, Australia.[1] Where it is permitted there are many rules, and only in cases where the patient is terminally ill. Though euthanasia is not legal in the United States, doctors can assist people to kill themselves. This is legal in Washington, Oregon, and Montana. Physician Assisted Suicide (PAD) is different to euthanasia; it is about who gives the medication to end a patients life. The World Federation of Right to Die Societies says physician-assisted suicide means "making lethal means available to the patient to be used at a time of the patients own choosing." In these cases the patient takes the legal dose of poison themselves, it is not given by the doctor. It is euthanasia when the doctor has the main role in ending the patients life by giving the poison.

Euthanasia can be active or passive, and voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary. Many people see important differences and they can accept some types but not others.

Passive euthanasia means letting a person die. A terminally ill person is allowed to die, even if treatment could help them to live longer. This includes removing life support, such as a ventilator which is being used to keep the person alive, or by not giving them food or water. Active euthanasia means doing something to end a person's life. This could be giving them an injection or pills that will cause their death.[2]

Some people see passive euthanasia as a more acceptable choice, because it is not a deliberate act to kill. However, others argue that once someone has decided to allow another person to die, they should make it as fast and as painless as possible, and then act to bring about their death. This is also known as mercy killing.[3]

Voluntary euthanasia is when someone asks to be allowed to die or to be killed. This is often seen as the best option by people who believe in euthanasia, because it is clear that the person wants to die. If the person can not say that they want to die, but people think that they would ask to die if they could, then it is non-voluntary euthanasia. Non-voluntary euthanasia is a choice for people who are in a coma or who are very young, as they can not say what they want. Involuntary euthanasia is when someone is killed even though they asked not to die, or when they could have asked to die but did not.[4] Many people think that this is murder, not euthanasia.[5]

These types of euthanasia can be mixed. If someone asks to die, and another person gives them an injection that will kill them, then it is active voluntary euthanasia. Someone in a coma who is kept alive with a ventilator, and the doctors turn it off and they die, would be passive non-voluntary euthanasia.[6]

Some people believe that euthanasia should be allowed, and some people think that it should not.

Some people believe that allowing euthanasia will result in bad things happening. If it is allowed for people asking to die, then it might be allowed for people who are very sick but are not able to ask to die. If that happens, then maybe it would be allowed for people who are very sick and will not recover, but do not want to die. This is called the "slippery slope" argument.[7]

People who believe in the slippery slope argument point to times when this happened. In Germany, Adolf Hitler allowed disabled children to be killed, and called it euthanasia. People now agree that this was wrong, but if euthanasia was allowed it could happen again. They think it is too big a risk to allow euthanasia at all.[7]

Other people say there is a big difference between killing a very sick person who asks to die, and killing a child with a disability. They do not think euthanasia will lead to bad things. They say that Hitler's actions were not euthanasia.[7]

The American Medical Association (AMA) and other doctors believe it is a doctor's role to help, not kill people.[source?] In one study 76% of doctors said they would not carry out euthanasia, even if it was legal.[source?] They feel patients would not trust them. In the Netherlands where euthanasia is legal, 60% of older people in one study were scared that their their doctors would kill them.[source?]

Palliative care is when people who are ill and going to die are given special care to make them more comfortable. It may include hospice care, when the patient is sent to a special hospital for people who are dying. Palliative care can involve pain relief and help for the patient and family to come to terms with death. In some cases, doctors will give patient drugs which make them stay asleep, so that they will not feel pain.[8][9]

Palliative care is not perfect, and so it is not always seen as a replacement for euthanasia. There is still some pain, and there can be other side-effects, where the patient can still feel very sick. Palliative care is not available for all people, and not all people who wish to die through euthanasia are so sick that they will die soon. Some people have healthy bodies, but they are suffering in other ways, and palliative care will not always help them.[7]

The principle of double effect was first described by Thomas Aquinas over 700 years ago. It says that it is sometimes alright to do a bad thing if something good happens, and if a bad ending was not wanted.[10] Aquinas used the example of self defense: sometimes a person will kill someone who attacks them, but killing was not what the person was trying to do. They only wanted to protect themselves. So even though killing someone is bad, wanting to protect themselves was not.[11]

Some people say that doctors may treat a person to reduce the their pain, and as a result the person will die sooner. If the doctor gives the treatment in order to help the patient die, then it is euthanasia. But if the doctor gives the treatment in order to stop the pain, and does not intend for the patient to die, then it may not be euthanasia, even if the doctor knew that the treatment would kill the patient.[11]

Suicide is when a person kills themselves. Sometimes when a person is very sick they need help to die, and this is called assisted suicide.[12] In some countries people are allowed to help as long as they do not kill the person,[13] and it can be seen as a more acceptable option because it must be the person's own decision.[12] Because the assisting person did not kill, it is not always considered to be euthanasia. [7]

[1]

Originally posted here:

Euthanasia - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is there tikanga around euthanasia? – RNZ

Debate has emerged as to whether euthanasia has a place in te ao Mori, with some saying it doesn't sit with the Mori worldview of death, and others saying whnau should have the choice.

A Taranaki urup. Photo: RNZ / Robin Martin

The End of Life Choice Bill, which would allow people to end their lives if they have six months or less before they die, passed its third reading last week, with the public set to vote at a referendum next year.

Maata Wharehoka, from Parihaka, has been reviving traditional methods of death and burial, with her whnau-run business, Kahu Whakatere Tppaku.

She said that based on the knowledge of her whnau, there was a form of euthanasia in pre-colonial Mori society, which involved speeding up death for people who had become wholly dependent on others for their needs.

"They didn't have food and water, and they were put outside and regardless of the weather, that's where they were placed, now, what I do know, if they didn't die immediately they were then put out into wharemate, and the wharemate was built for them to die in."

She supports legalisation of euthanasia because it would help the wairua of the person dying, leave the world faster with less pain and suffering.

"I believe that we should never have to endure the pain that some people have to go through, that we should be able to choose a time to pass over."

Ngti Porou anglican priest, Reverend Chris Huriwai, who opposed the bill, said euthanasia went against the Mori worldview on death.

"When I hear conversations and krero around euthanasia, straight away my mind flicks to how we as Mori frame our tangihanga rituals, how we understand death, and fundamentally this idea of death as something that is unwanted, something that is an aitua or an accident or something unfortunate, and I wonder how that impacts on our tikanga when we start to express more agency in that space.

"So if a whnau or a person elects for that to take place, then how do we reconcile that with our acceptable practice and tikanga around tangihanga as it stands now."

The End of Life Choice Bill passed its third in Parliament last week and puts the issue to a referendum next year. Photo: RNZ / Dom Thomas

He said that from what he had learned from the tohunga Papa Amster Reedy, euthanasia was foreign to the tikanga of Tairwhiti, but he said this might not necessarily be the case for Mori across the country.

"I think it's important we don't just call it all tikanga Mori, because tikanga Mori doesn't exist."

"We're diverse, we're fluid, we're not a homogenous group of people, so those conversations need to happen on levels smaller than tribal levels, so hap conversations need to happen and whnau conversations need to happen around what our accepted tikanga is."

Dame Iritana Twhiwhirangi agreed there was no one tikanga, and she supported the right for whnau to make a decision for themselves.

"Our people, from what I remember, made the decision together. They didn't rely on outside determinations for them and together that was their tikanga, that's what they focused on, they made their decisions and I support that."

New Zealand Nurses Organisation kaiwhakahaere Kerri Nuku said Mori nurses were polarised on the issue, but agree that it should be up to whnau Mori.

Mori nurses were looking to set up hui at different marae after Christmas, where Mori could discuss what legalisation of euthanasia would mean for them and their whnau, similar to consultation that occured around changes to the Coronial Act.

Whangarei MP Shane Reti said during the third reading debate that he opposed the bill, both as as a doctor and a Mori.

Tmaki Makaurau MP Peeni Henare supported the bill Photo: RNZ / Richard Tindiller

He singled out many of the Mori Labour MPs who supported the bill, asking them what their "Mori heart' was saying.

Tmaki Makaurau MP Peeni Henare responded by saying that historically, Mori had ways of speeding up the process of death if a disease or sickness was incurable.

He said that to him, tikanga is mana motuhake - Mori being to make the decision which is right for them.

MP for Te Tai Hauuru Adrian Rurawhe said that the overwhelming majority of people in his electorate told him at eight public hui they did not want this bill.

"We talk about kaupapa Mori, terms that just roll of our tongue - manaakitanga, rangatiratanga, aroha - it even frames our international identity but will it frame what we want for our families in this bill, I say it will not, because it is fundamentally opposed to those kaupapa."

List MP Willie Jackson told Parliament that three high-profile Mori leaders, he had spoken with said "they were tired of hearing this was a violation of our culture".

"All were unanimous that in their view tikanga evolves, tikanga changes and there is no one tikanga," he said.

Go here to see the original:

Is there tikanga around euthanasia? - RNZ