Category Archives: Euthanasia

The second Interdenominational Evangelical Reflection Forum brought together around one hundred Spanish leaders to address the issue of euthanasia.

Through a mixed event, held in person in Madrid, with 52 people, and by simultaneous online transmission with 43 others, the day focused on the recently approved euthanasia law in Spain.

The aim of this forum is to build tools to help us make decisions and deal with this complex issue in the best way possible, said Jess Londoo, director of the missionary association SEPAL Spain and international leader of the 'Back to Europe' movement.

During the event, organised by the Federation of Evangelical Religious Entities of Spain (FEREDE), there were 4 presentations on the following topics: God, life and euthanasia; Euthanasia from science and medicine"; Ethical-legal perspective on euthanasia and Euthanasia: different points of view.

That was followed by the panel Pastoral praxis: what to do when facing euthanasia.

The day ended with the reading of the preliminary conclusions. The final conclusions will soon be published in Spanish in a format accessible to the public.

After a time of discussion, consensus was reached on some key issues, such as the sovereignty of God in the face of life and death, the dignity of human life regardless of its condition, and the need to guarantee a universal law on palliative care.

The participants also reflected on pastoral care in the face of death and the end of life, emphasising the need for training, empathy and sensitivity for the leaders who have to deal with these situations.

They also stressed that it is essential to have a pastoral care that accompanies people in their last moments with love and mercy.

The euthanasia law was passed in Spain in December 2020 with a majority of 198 votes. Spain became the fourth country in Europe and the sixth worldwide to legalise euthanasia, after the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Canada and New Zealand.

According to the law anyone with terminal or incurable illness causing intolerable physical and mental suffering have now access to euthanasia in Spain.

Prior to the approval, the Spanish Evangelical Alliance (AEE) had released a statement, warning that it is dangerous to build a social opinion that says that terminal patients are a burden and calling on the government to promote a model for those that combines access to palliative care with family and economic support.

The Spanish Bioethics Committee also pointed out that there were solid health, ethical, legal, economic and social reasons to reject the transformation of euthanasia into a subjective right and a public service.

Religious groups and medical institutions also raised their voices against the approval of the law and called on for better palliative care measures.

Published in: Evangelical Focus - life & tech - One hundred Spanish evangelical leaders gather to reflect on euthanasia

View post:

One hundred Spanish evangelical leaders gather to reflect on euthanasia - Evangelical Focus

QUEENSLANDS members of parliament voted emphatically to legalise euthanasia last week, reflecting public opinion, but without heeding Church, medical and ethical advice that it signals a life-or-death societal shift.

MPs in the states single chamber parliament backed a Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill (VAD) in a conscience vote 61-30 a move that will legalise euthanasia for eligible Queenslanders from January 2023.

The die is cast and across the Rubicon we go: some kind of victory for the government but a real defeat for Queensland, a victory for death but a defeat for lifenow we await the dark spectacle of unexpected consequences, Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge tweeted soon after the bill passed on September 16.

Over two days MPs debated long into the night, fighting back tears as they told personal storiesand revealing the difficulty of weighing up opposing views on euthanasia and assisted dying.

The new laws will allow people suffering from a disease or medical condition that is advanced, progressive and terminal to access voluntary assisted dying.

Their condition must be expected to cause death within a year, they must have decision-making capacity, and proceed without coercion.

Deputy Premier Steven Miles said the law would ease pain and suffering, but there were some in his own party who begged to differ.

Labors Joe Kelly, a nurse representing the Brisbane seat of Greenslopes voted against VAD. He told parliament that in his professional view good palliative care could provide a dignified death.

Another Labor member, Linus Power representing Logan, said he was disappointed that all 54 amendments were defeated

Dr Christian Rowan the LNP member for Moggil, a former president of the Australian Medical Association of Queensland and the Rural Doctors Association of Queensland said MPs had a duty to consider every legislative clause, all intent, every oversight and review aspect, every clinical process within State and Federal clinical governance health standards, and importantly, every purported safeguard for vulnerable and at-risk individuals.

Dr Rowan said the legislation does not require neither the co-ordinating or consulting doctor on voluntary assisted dying to have any expertise in the particular terminal disease, illness, or medical condition, nor in end of life (or palliative care) of patients.

Quoting a letter signed by 19 former AMA presidents, Dr Rowan said, these lack of requirements were certainly not medical best practice and could not ensure the patient was adequately informed on possible treatments or palliative care options.

Without any amendments the new bill fails to address many key issues.

An amendment that sought so-called institutional conscientious objection would have allowed faith-based hospitals and aged care facilities the right to exclude VAD from taking place in their facilities.

Catholic Health Australia had run a concerted campaign to protect Catholic-run facilities that provide about 20 per cent of hospital and aged care beds in Queensland.

The new VAD law will allow terminal patients at faith-based hospitals and aged care facilities to end their lives there, if they are too sick to be moved somewhere else.

It is deeply troubling for the wonderful men and women who run these hospitals, Opposition deputy and member for Toowoomba South, David Janetzki, said.

Dr Mark Robinson, opposition member for Oodgeroo told the parliament that without this particular amendment thousands of hospital beds in Queensland are at risk.

The leaders of St Vincents and the Mater appealed to MPs not to force them into a position against their convictions, and I think we should listen, he said.

If we dont we may pay a very high price for forcing this on these institutions that have served us well for a very long time.

Many MPs cited a lack of palliative care services available to all Queenslanders as a sound reason to reject VAD.

The Member for Scenic Rim Jon Krause was one of many regional voices to speak against the bill.

We are chipping away at an absolute protection of life, Mr Krause said.

He said palliative care could alleviate most suffering for most people but pointed out it is not easily accessible to many in regional Queensland.He said he was fearful people would access VAD so as not to be a burden on their family.

Treasurer Cameron Dick said he supported passing VAD into law, but did so with a troubled conscience.

Mr Dick said he feared the laws would change how our society viewed the sanctity of life.

Queensland has joined Victoria, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania in passing euthanasia laws. Only New South Wales remains. Its Upper House rejected a VAD Bil in 2017 by just one vote.

More here:

Queensland crosses the Rubicon by passing laws to legalise euthanasia - Catholic Leader

A mission to reunite a baby orca with its pod after becoming stranded near Wellington was always unlikely to succeed, newly released documents show.

Despite this, conservation officials spent nearly $130,000 trying to keep the male calf they named Toa alive.

The Department of Conservation has released vet reports, costings, and communications around the stranding, care and the search for his missing pod, which show reservations over early efforts to look after the orca.

Toa stranded near Plimmerton on July 11 when a wave swept him on to rocks. Significant efforts were made to keep him alive until he could be repatriated with his pod. However, he died on July 23.

READ MORE:* Public efforts to save Toa the orca were worth every cent* 'We are devastated': Toa, the stranded baby orca, dies * Stranded baby orca Toa's pod sighted off Kpiti Coast, but wild weather delays reunion

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

The operation in July to care for and repatriate Toa, the baby orca, with his pod cost nearly $130,000, Department of Conservation documents show. (File photo)

Screenshots of a WhatsApp chat between experts worldwide who were consulted about Toas care show one was horrified he was taken out of the water following the initial rescue.

The total cost of the operation was $129,780. Nearly half, $62,060, covered staffing, while operating costs for expenses, including equipment, helicopter hire, and food for volunteers, came to $67,720.

Euthanasia was mentioned as early as the day after the stranding, because Toa was still entirely dependent on his absent mother.

One expert cautioned against raising public expectations: I agree it is too soon to make plans but it is maybe not too soon to manage public expectations regarding the unlikely ultimate happy ending?

An expert from the International Fund for Animal Welfare said they would euthanise given the likelihood of success was almost non-existent.

Pods don't abandon calves without reason.

Text messages show shooting Toa while under sedation was the preferred method of euthanasia.

Supplied

Cost of baby orca Toas rescue operation.

The orca was kept in a makeshift sea pen at Plimmerton Boating Club, and was briefly moved into a collapsible pool when the sea became rough.

All scenarios mapped by DOC showed none had more than a moderate chance of success.

Experts endorsed the idea of tagging the calf in order to track him if released, but this was never followed through the calf died the next day.

Whale Rescue/Orca Research Trust, which worked with DOC to care for the orca, said Toa died after he rapidly deteriorated and on-site vets were unable to save him.

It came just in time for DOC. A subcommittee of the Animal Ethics Committee reached a unanimous decision that the best ethical outcome for the calf was euthanasia, prior to further deterioration, on July 22 the day before he died.

A postmortem was vetoed by iwi for cultural reasons, and although a CT scan was floated as a viable idea, it was too late to be undertaken.

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

Toa does orca yoga in his pool ahead of a planned move back to the ocean pen. (File photo)

Documents show DOC and Orca Research Trust/Whale Rescue were not always singing from the same song sheet.

On July 20, Whale Rescue posted on Facebook: There have been some disturbing reports in the media of his health deteriorating, we want to reassure everyone he is fine and doing well, these reports are totally false.

However, a statement from DOC the following morning said some of the injuries sustained by the calf during the stranding are healing well, but others require ongoing monitoring.

ROSA WOODS/Stuff

The area of the boat club where Toa was kept while the hunt for his family continued. (File photo)

The calf did display some short-term signs of discomfort in his gut, likely associated with trying to get the delicate balance of feeding requirements right. Vet reports confirm DOCs statement.

Internal communications between DOC staff raised concerns over Whale Rescues messaging.

Communications by [Ingrid] Vissers organisations have built public expectations that a successful release is possible and that absolutely every effort will be made to make this happen. There is likely to be a very strong negative reaction at site and online.

Here is the original post:

Chances of survival for baby orca Toa were low, euthanasia the 'ethical' choice - Stuff.co.nz

Image via YouTube

THE Archbishop of Oviedo Jesus Sanz Montes, above, set himself up for a fall when he recently declared that Spains socialist-led government provides better protection for bulls than unborn children and the terminally ill.

He was speaking months after euthanasia, supported by a majority of Spaniards, was legalised in March.

According to The Tablet, he was immediately mocked and ridiculed on social media. This so upset his faithful supporters that thousands of Spanish citizens have signed a petition defending Montes.

The petition on the civic Hazte-Oir platform said:

These insults for criticising abortion and euthanasia in a homily have not been long in coming the pro-abortion mob have placed him on their media target list. The radical left does not allow anyone to dare touch the dogmas of abortion and euthanasia whoever dares try gets torn apart, and whoever defends them gets dragged through the mud.

Montez said:

I wish aborted children or the elderly and sick euthanised without palliative care enjoyed the protective legislation now provided to bulls. Instead, some laws are now drawn up without social debate, helped by opportunistic government demagoguery which continues to sow tension by imposing social transformation at the mercy of various ideologies

The Catholic Church makes up 62 per cent of Spains 47 million inhabitants, according to 2020 data, and has criticised laws backed by the socialist-led government of premier Pedro Sanchez, in power since January 2020, facilitating same-sex marriage, secularised education, state-funded euthanasia and abortion.

A draft Trans Law, enabling over-16s to re-register their gender through a court declaration without medical or legal procedures, was also approved for enactment in June, while a Statute of Secularism, enforcing strict separation between politics and religion, law and morality, crime and sin, is to be adopted this October.

More than 20,000 Spaniards have also signed a Hazte-Oir petition to the Cortes parliament against socialist legislation imposing jail terms for pro-lifers who harass or restrict the freedom of women by staging protests or offering help outside abortion clinics.

Both petitions coincided with new data showing Catholic affiliations at their lowest ever in Spain, with four out of ten citizens, and 60 per cent of 18-34s, describing themselves as atheists or non-believers.

A while back, in the comments section of the Freethinker, an American reader asked me whether Spain would be a good choice if he ever decided to leave the US. I replied:

Absolutely. Spain transitioned from a fascist dictatorship that was fully supported by the RCC in 1978. Today the church, to the chagrin of the Vatican, has no say in the running of a liberal, left-of-centre democracy that was the first in Europe to approve gay marriage, banned conversion therapy and, most recently, legalised euthanasia. It is a beacon of tolerance.

It has a first-rate health service, very generous pensions, pays for holidays for the elderly and the cost of living is ridiculously low.

Of course, its not without those especially British expats who hanker after the good old days of Francos rule. These are the same fools who voted for Brexit and are now being extradited back to the UK because they never bothered to apply for Spanish residency permits.

In 2016 a right-wing columnist for a local English newspaper, John Smith, wrote: Like so many other nations, Spain has also entertained a certain amount of political correctness which has to some extent seen a reduction in the machismo of the younger Spanish male and an ability for women to not just be vocal at home but to have a voice which can be heard across the country.

Worse, he said there are now homosexuals with voices, voices so shrill that they can force local authorities into coughing up dosh to fund parades and fiestas at which perverts can flaunt their filthy lifestyles.

When I pointed out to the editor that praising Franco and fascism constitutes a criminal offence, she went into full-on panic mode and asked me to write a rebuttal. The hack was sacked, and his column was taken offline.

I wrote about Smith here.

Hat tip: Keith Porteous Wood

Id love a cup of coffee

Read this article:

Catholics aghast at the pace of positive change in Spain - Patheos

LUTZ, Fla. Lap of Love, an in-home veterinary hospice and euthanasia service, got its start in Lutz.

Dr. Dani McVety-Leinen said she found a passion for this in-home service and it all started off as a part-time job.

Then, she saw the need for this service from the community and now it's nationwide.

"We help close to 500 families a month now in the Tampa Bay area," Dr. Dani McVety-Leinen, Lap of Love Founder said. "So many families, I've been in some homes five and six times over the years. And it's such an honor because you don't see them in between, but then you come back for that end-of-life experience. And it's like a shared experience that you get to hang out with them again and again."

Lap of Love also added a pet end-of-life support team. Click here for more information on their services.

View original post here:

Lap of Love got its start in Lutz - ABC Action News

news, latest-news,

SIX WEEKS after Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall took the issue to the public, Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson will ask the community whether he should vote for a new bill to legalise euthanasia. The MP kicked off an electorate-wide consultation process on a new bill to legalise and regulate medically-assisted suicide on Thursday. Deputy Premier and Nationals leader John Barilaro told media this week that every Nationals MP but one would likely back the Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2021, introduced by Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich. The bill will be a conscience vote, with government MPs not bound by the party to vote either way on the legislation. READ MORE: Mr Anderson said "the majority view of the electorate" will be the position he will take to NSW parliament. He received the final draft of the bill on Wednesday afternoon and, on Thursday, announced he will undertake an election-wide consultation process. The campaign will include a survey on his website, a mail-out, an email blast and an "extensive media campaign". "The Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill covers a very important issue and the community deserves the opportunity to drive the decision making on this," he said. "Significant changes have been made since early drafts of the bill were distributed, which is why I wanted to ensure the final draft, which will be presented in parliament, went to the public for consultation." Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall started his own consultation campaign in August. Of 2,671 responses so far, nearly 80 per cent were in favour of the bill, he said on Thursday. "I have my own strong personal views on this issue and the bill, however, I will be speaking and voting on the bill in accordance with the wishes of the Northern Tablelands community," he said. "That's why I want to hear from as many people as possible, to ensure I can reflect as best I can the overall views of our region." Only people who are terminally ill and diagnosed to die within six months, or 12 months for a neurodegenerative condition, will be eligible for medically-assisted suicide under the bill. The patient must also be enduring extreme suffering that cannot be alleviated. Approval requires two doctors, and both must undertake training to be eligible to assess a patient for eligibility. Want more local news? Subscribe to the Leader to read it here first There will also be multiple assessments to ensure the patient is acting voluntarily, and severe new punishments for people who put someone under duress to die. The bill will also allow doctors and other health practitioners to conscientiously object to the process and exempt themselves from being involved. Mr Anderson encouraged everyone in the community to have their say on the bill. "Thank you to all those in our community who have already contacted my office on this important issue. Please be assured that your voice will be heard," he said. The bill may be introduced to parliament at the end of this year, or in 2022. Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/andrew.messenger/49a75f22-33c9-4cd4-9010-00293eb6e2db.jpg/r0_306_6016_3705_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

September 23 2021 - 3:00PM

SIX WEEKS after Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall took the issue to the public, Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson will ask the community whether he should vote for a new bill to legalise euthanasia.

The MP kicked off an electorate-wide consultation process on a new bill to legalise and regulate medically-assisted suicide on Thursday.

Deputy Premier and Nationals leader John Barilaro told media this week that every Nationals MP but one would likely back the Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill 2021, introduced by Independent Sydney MP Alex Greenwich.

The bill will be a conscience vote, with government MPs not bound by the party to vote either way on the legislation.

Mr Anderson said "the majority view of the electorate" will be the position he will take to NSW parliament.

He received the final draft of the bill on Wednesday afternoon and, on Thursday, announced he will undertake an election-wide consultation process.

The campaign will include a survey on his website, a mail-out, an email blast and an "extensive media campaign".

"The Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill covers a very important issue and the community deserves the opportunity to drive the decision making on this," he said.

"Significant changes have been made since early drafts of the bill were distributed, which is why I wanted to ensure the final draft, which will be presented in parliament, went to the public for consultation."

Of 2,671 responses so far, nearly 80 per cent were in favour of the bill, he said on Thursday.

"I have my own strong personal views on this issue and the bill, however, I will be speaking and voting on the bill in accordance with the wishes of the Northern Tablelands community," he said.

"That's why I want to hear from as many people as possible, to ensure I can reflect as best I can the overall views of our region."

Only people who are terminally ill and diagnosed to die within six months, or 12 months for a neurodegenerative condition, will be eligible for medically-assisted suicide under the bill. The patient must also be enduring extreme suffering that cannot be alleviated.

Approval requires two doctors, and both must undertake training to be eligible to assess a patient for eligibility.

There will also be multiple assessments to ensure the patient is acting voluntarily, and severe new punishments for people who put someone under duress to die.

The bill will also allow doctors and other health practitioners to conscientiously object to the process and exempt themselves from being involved.

Mr Anderson encouraged everyone in the community to have their say on the bill.

"Thank you to all those in our community who have already contacted my office on this important issue. Please be assured that your voice will be heard," he said.

The bill may be introduced to parliament at the end of this year, or in 2022.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

Continued here:

Tamworth MP Kevin Anderson begins consultation on NSW Parliament's Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill as Northern Tablelands MP Adam Marshall reports...

AUSTIN (KXAN) Negotiations between Austin Pets Alive! and the city of Austin have stalled for a new long-term land-use agreement that would allow APA! to continue operating at the citys old animal shelter, the two parties tell KXAN.

Since 2011 Austin Pets Alive! has occupied the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) on Cesar Chavez Street in exchange for taking in thousands of at-risk animals from the city. The nonprofit aids the city in its goal to be no-kill. Under city of Austin standards, no-kill means a minimum of 95% of homeless animals who enter shelters must leave alive.

The city says its current rate is at 97%.

The two sides have been working under a short-term agreement, allowing APA! to continue occupying TLAC. However, this agreement ends Nov. 23, and the organization says it may have to move its operations outside city limits if the partners cant reach an agreement.

Significant changes in animal services at the city that jeopardize the sustainability of No Kill, as well as the declining state of the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) property, create the need for immediate council action to ensure Austin stays No Kill now and for evermore, reads a post on APA!s website from Sept. 15.

Austin Pets Alive! notes a potential move out of Austin is more than a threat. The organization plans to tour nine facilities in the next week; APA! said that all are at least 20 miles outside city limits.

In an interview with KXAN, APA! President and CEO Dr. Ellen Jefferson added: We recognize theres a high likelihood that were going to have to find another property and build elsewhere.

At the heart of the disagreement between the two sides is how many animals APA! will agree to take in from the city, along with the organizations interest in helping at-risk animals from outside the Austin area.

We have been helping shelters battling high kill rates all over [Texas] for 11 years and in rarecircumstances like Hurricane Ida, we take from beyond Texas, said an Austin Pets Alive! spokesperson. This is nothing new. We are asking for our agreement to allow us to utilize the resources we have at our future building to treat any animal, even if not from the greater Austin area, which is currently not allowed.

In an additional statement to KXAN, APA! implicated that the city was trying to micromanage it.

ACL is not restricted to only hire bands from Austin for their shows, said the statement. Here at Austin Pets Alive! we only ask that we be given the same respect as other organizations using city land.

The organization is appealing to City Council to approve a new agreement with terms more favorable to it, since [city] staff will not agree to the License Agreement terms.

Austin Animal Center has a different perspective.

The current facility is on City owned land which ultimately was paid for with tax dollars. APA! is using that land for free, in exchange for helping AAC and pulling animals, said an Austin Animal Center spokesperson. They are asking to help AAC less and use the same tax-funded property to help animals from other cities and states.

She added: The current license agreement allows animals from a five-county region to be housed at TLAC. But not animals from beyond that region.

We asked Austin Animal Center about their nonprofit partners claim that the city would be in jeopardy of losing its no-kill status if it werent able to come to an agreement with Austin Pets Alive!

Austin will remain No Kill regardless of the outcome of these negotiations, the department spokesperson said. We are sure that AAC will remain No Kill, first and foremost, because we are committed to doing the right thing for the animals in our community. We are also required by City Council to maintain a 95% live outcome rate.

Earlier this summer, the Austin Animal Center reported not having any additional capacity to house animals and that staff is doubling up dogs in each suite. A June 25 memo from Chief Animal Services Officer Don Bland said staff may possibly need to resort to euthanasia.

Last week, the citys Animal Advisory Commission voted unanimously to form a committee to monitor and provide oversight over Austins no-kill policy. City Councils Audit and Finance Committee will need to approve the commissions request to change its bylaws for this to happen.

Visit link:

Austin Pets Alive! says it may have to move amid stalemate with city - KXAN.com

RANCHO SANTA FE (KUSI)-

The 9th annual Remember Me Thursday brought to you by the Helen Woodward Animal Center was held virtually and people from all over the world took part in sharing stories about pet adoption and shined a light on the importance of saving pets lives.

Over 1 million pets are euthanized annually and the Helen Woodward Animal Center hosts Remember Me Thursday for all of those animals who never got a chance at a better life. It is proven that the more awareness brought to orphan pets results in: 1) Adoptions Increasing, 2) Euthanasia Decreasing, and 3) Puppy Mill Sales Decreasing.

KUSIs Kacey McKinnon spoke with CEO/President of the HWAC, Mike Arms about the life saving work the center has continued to do. Arms says, This day is so special. When we first started it, we had no idea how many people it would touch. Now, people from all over the world tune in each year on Remember Me Thursday.

Continued here:

The 9th annual Helen Woodward Animal Center 'Remember Me Thursday' shines a light on orphan pets - - KUSI

WATCH Shelter workers rescue pets after Texas storm

Austin shelters saved hundreds of pets from being euthanized after the Texas freeze and will be transporting them to shelters across the country.

Chelcey Adami, Wochit

In a move that couldjeopardizeAustin's commitment against killingsheltered animals, the nonprofit Austin Pets Alive has threatened to pack up and leave town unless changes are made to itslicense agreement with the city.

Since 2011, Austin Pets Alive has partnered with the cityby taking in stray and surrendered animals from the Austin Animal Center, which is Austin's taxpayer-funded shelter.

Austin Pets Alivedoes not accept money from the city, but is allowed to operate a downtown shelter on city-owned land on West Caesar Chavez street.

With the nonprofit's help, Austin has managed a 97% save rate through adoptions,, which is above the 90% national standard needed to be considered a no-kill city and also above the city's 87% save ratein the year prior to the partnership begining. The only pets now being euthanized have incurable medical conditions or were responsible for severe injuriesin an unprovoked attack.

But the partnership between Austin Pets Alive and the city has deteriorated, raising questions about if the city can maintain no-kill standards should its longtime ally go elsewhere.

More: Mix of heartbreak, outrage as Georgetown community mourns dogs killed in pet resort fire

The fight is overrestrictions that prevent Austin Pets Alive from housing animals that come from outside five Central Texas counties Travis, Bastrop, Caldwell, Hays and Williamson. The nonprofit wants to expand that reach to bring in animals from other jurisdictionsthat do not have no-kill protections.

Austin Pets Alivealso wants to discontinue an annual requirement that it accept 3,000 animals from the city shelter that are at risk of being killed.

The cityhas refused both demands, suggesting Austin Pets Alive should continue to serve only local pets as long as it continues to operate on city-owned land. That has led to a stalemate that neither sideseemsconfident will be resolved by thecontract's expirationon Nov. 23.

"More and more resources are added to the city budget, so fewer and fewer animals should fall through the cracks and onto our plate," said Dr. Ellen Jefferson, president of Austin Pets Alive.

More: Pet surrenders spike as end of eviction moratoriums loom, Austin shelters say

She said Austin Pets Alive would bewilling to accept any animal on the city shelter'seuthanasia list typically about 1,500 to 2,000 per year but objects to accepting animals not on that list, preferring to reserve kennel spacefor at-risk animals from outside of the immediate area.

"We'd rather take ones that are actually going to die, because that's our mission," she said.

After negotiations broke down with city staff, Austin Pets Alive recently turned toMayor Steve Adler and requested that the Austin City Council direct the city's shelter to agree to the changes sought by the nonprofit. Adler's office declined to comment for this story.

Council Member Leslie Pool said she is pushing to schedule an executive council session to determine the legality of Austin Pets Alive's proposals.

"If what staff is saying is indeed correct then we will have to in fact part ways," Pool said. "I see that as more of a negative for the city than APA because APA is going to be successful wherever with their mission. Their leaving would be a big void for the city of Austin."

As of Monday, the city shelter had taken in 9,241 dogs and cats this year. During that same period in 2019 the most recent year not impacted by the coronavirus pandemic it tookin 14,109 dogs and cats. The shelter's budget for next year is $16.4 million, a 20% increase from three years ago. Jefferson saidit's the highest budget for animal services per capita in the country.

In rejecting the demand to expand Austin Pets Alive's reach outside of the five-county territory, Don Bland, the city's chief animal services officer, said the protection of Austin-area pets must continue to be the focus.

"The citys primary goal is to ensure that city taxpayer investments are focused on supporting animals found in the citys jurisdiction," he said.

As for the 3,000 pet intake requirement: "Removing that provision entirely would negate the reason for free use of the property," city spokeswoman Jennifer Olohan said. "The city values its partnership with APA, which is why we have been open to negotiating that number of animals."

Olohan said the city made a counteroffer in July after rejecting Austin Pets Alive's demands. Austin Pets Alive then rejected the counteroffer, which Jefferson said would have required the nonprofit to accept 2,000 dogs with behavioral issues. Austin Pets Alive declined, she said, because she thought it was important to protect a wider selection of animals that were at risk of being killed.

The disagreement comes just months after the city sounded alarms over a spacing crises at the city shelter. In late June, Bland wrote a memo to the City Council saying the shelter had no additional capacity to house animals and discouraging residents from bringing in stray animals. Bland threatened euthanasia for animals with behavioral concerns that have been housed in the shelterfor a long period.

More: 'Nobody forgot the animals': How Austin put lost, rescued pets before themselves in a crisis

At the time, the city said it was forced to house about 30 animals in back rooms at the shelter, out of public sight. That number was down to 16 this week, the city said.

A city ordinance approved in 2010 requires the city to have a 95% save rate. Austin Pets Alive's departure could make it difficult for the shelter to hit that mark without assistance, Jefferson said.

"If our agreement expires and a new one doesn't go into effect there is no formal mechanism on the books to comply with the ordinance," she said.

Olohan, the city spokeswoman, said the city has tentative plansif it fails to reach a renewal agreement with Austin Pets Alive, but said "we are not ready to release those just yet."

If it can resolve the dispute with the city, Austin Pets Alive says it is looking to sign a 75-year agreement. The nonprofit said it has plans to renovate the downtown shelter but first needsassurances it would be there for a long time.

Jefferson said that even if Austin Pets Alive ends up leaving the city, the nonprofit hopes to continue to assist Austin in a informal relationship by accepting animals from the city shelter that are at risk for euthanasia. She said Austin Pets Alive is looking at properties on the outskirts of the city, a challenge, perhaps, for some of the nonprofit's volunteers who are accustomed to a short drive downtown.

Continued here:

Austin Pets Alive threatens to leave town over disagreement with city - Austin American-Statesman

My parents were both very supportive of euthanasia. They felt strongly about ending your life when you feel it is not up to your own standards any more. They made this known in 2014, while they were both healthy and in their 60s, by signing a euthanasia declaration with their GP. They agreed that euthanasia was an option in case of intolerable suffering, terminal illness and dementia.

his was in the Netherlands, where euthanasia has been legalised for competent adults and emancipated minors since 2002. The same is the case in Belgium, where I grew up, where I met my Irish husband and where our children were born. Every year, fewer than 5pc of deaths in these countries are from euthanasia, and 85pc of these are patients with a terminal illness. GPs are actively involved.

In 2018, my mother was diagnosed with bowel cancer and she received excellent care. Surgery to remove part of the bowel was a success and she began a course of chemotherapy. Six weeks later, she developed pain radiating from her spine which stopped her from sleeping. It took a while to get a final diagnosis. At first, it was thought that this pain was due to the operation and not the cancer. After weeks of uncontrollable pain, however, it became more and more apparent that the cancer had spread throughout her body. At the start of 2019, she was told treatment could only be palliative. It started off with morphine patches.

This news was a hard blow, for her and for my father in particular, but also for my siblings, whose lives changed dramatically. Both my sisters are qualified nurses and lived near my parents. They decided to take on her care. From that moment on, my mother became a full-time patient, with my father and sisters providing 24-hour care so she could stay at home. Living in Ireland, I only observed this from a distance, with infrequent visits and regular phone calls.

My mothers health got progressively worse. Yet at another level, she had the time of her life. She always loved being the centre of attention. It was something she had craved since she was shipped off to boarding school at the age of eight, a traumatic experience. Her cancer, strangely enough, gave her an unapologetic approach to get this attention, from my father as well as my sisters.

My brother was in charge of all practical arrangements. He also showered her with flowers. The house was always full of them and she loved it. Yes, my mother, fighting her cancer, certainly made the most of the attention, and she loved every moment of it.

By June, the pain started to take hold of her and morphine patches could not control the pain any more. She was provided with a morphine pump and the dose was slowly increased every week. Her belly started to show the growth of the cancer. Even though other parts of her body showed weight loss, her belly swelled.

Throughout her medical journey, her GP was very close and guided her every step. He would check in with her, weekly in person and whenever necessary over the phone. She was very fond of him and it helped he was very young. She liked that. But by the end of July, her conversations with him changed, from What can be done next? to This is getting too bad.

They talked about passive euthanasia, which would mean increasing her medication, stopping her food and water intake and inducing coma so she would die peacefully. Considering the amount of fluid retention in her belly, however, this could take weeks if not longer and was dismissed. Passive euthanasia would result in secondary conditions, such a bed sores, and the care required without her being mentally present would weigh on all her family. Her condition was bad, and my sisters and my father were tired. A decision was made to hire a night nurse, so everyone could at least get a good nights rest.

Only days later, my mother summoned the GP. After he talked to her, he called a meeting. My mother wanted to start the conversation about active euthanasia. She was at the maximum morphine dose, her pain was increasing all the time and relief was only occasional. She was really suffering. It was decided to trigger the active euthanasia process.

Her declaration was in place with the GP, but to proceed with euthanasia, an independent SCEN (support and consultation with euthanasia) doctor has to meet the patient to confirm their wish. These doctors have been trained in the legal aspects of euthanasia, to support GPs and to provide an independent observation of the patients wish to die.

My father rang me on a Friday afternoon, a call that I had been expecting for a long time but caught me off guard at the same time. He told me they had decided to start the procedure, and asked if I still supported this decision. Even though it is not the familys decision, and they cannot overrule or change the patients wishes, having their support is important.

As in many families, we often have different opinions, but in this, we all recognised my mothers wish and supported her. My dad called again on Saturday, and told me the SCEN doctor was coming on Monday. He was concerned because my mother was on such a high dose of morphine that it was difficult to counteract this with another drug, Haldol, to keep her present. He was worried she wouldnt be able to tell her story coherently, thereby stopping the process. We had to trust the process, and the SCEN doctor, who would have seen many patients in her condition. I booked my flight.

Monday came. I left Galway on the airport bus while the SCEN doctor sat with my mother for more than two hours. She left without talking to the rest of the family. The GP confirmed the next day that the SCEN doctor approved active euthanasia. My mother asked for a priest. The GP ordered the medication. The day and time were set: Wednesday at 1pm.

It was decided that only her children and my father would be told of the timing. We agreed that her grandchildren, her sisters and brothers, all other family, would only be told after. My mother had spent the past months saying goodbye to everyone, and shed had enough. We needed our energy and attention to support her, and were grateful for this decision: no distractions.

The GP came by again on Tuesday and he had a brief conversation with my mother, confirming her wishes once again. My father wanted to be alone with her that evening and it was decided we would meet at 10am the next day. Each of us had a task. My eldest sister was in charge of the medication. She talked to the nurses who maintain the morphine pumps, on how to keep my mother present without her freaking out. She got it right. My youngest sister would dress her. I was to wash her and make food. My brother got the flowers.

Wednesday morning. My mother was surprisingly calm and content. My father was trying very hard to keep it together. He made a rule. The room in which my mothers bed was set up was going to be a dry room. By which he meant, you do your crying outside there; once in, youre there to support your mother. Fair enough. He also wanted to have coffee and a slice of cake at 11am, after which they would go to my mothers room and get her settled. We were then to join them. The plan was set.

Jobs done, 11am came, coffee and cake was served. Only my mother ate the cake. Her cancer had kept her appetite roaring throughout and now was no different. She even finished some of the other slices, commenting on how nice it tasted. We had to laugh.

Then my father got up and said: Its time. That was an intense moment, fighting the tears; the memory still brings them on even now. We were left sitting with the leftover cake, a bit stunned. Half an hour later, we were called into the dry room. By then, we were all settled. The mood was positive. We checked with each other, with my father, and then for the last time, with my mother. Mam, are you sure? She was calm and together, holding my fathers hand. Yes, she was sure.

Sometimes, situations just throw you. The GP and his colleague, in true Dutch fashion, arrived on their bikes and locked them. The locking of the bike hit me with a surreal feeling; it was such an ordinary thing to do in such extraordinary circumstances.

It was a beautiful sunny day. They came in and we were asked to leave the room. The GP was with my mother on his own, briefly, I imagine to confirm with her again, to make sure. He called us back in and started setting up. My father took his place on the bed, holding my mother. My eldest sister was holding him. My brother and my youngest sister were on the other side of the bed, holding her hand. I was at her feet. Earlier that day the nurse inserted a port. Everything was ready.

Then the GP broke down. It was his first euthanasia, which was why his colleague was with him for support. My mother had the kindest response it is amazing what these situations bring and she told him to take his time, that she really appreciated all her time with him and that she was ready when he was. He was very apologetic, but we all laughed and asked my father: So this dry room thing does not apply to him? My father smiled and shrugged his shoulders. The GP got his emotions under control again. We all said a last goodbye and my mother confirmed for the last time. He first gave her something to put her to sleep. Her head fell against my fathers arm and she gave one last loud snore. He then administered the medication to stop her heart. At 1.03pm she was gone; we closed her eyes.

The GP left for a moment and we slowly took in the situation. He came back in to confirm her death and then moved on to call the police, who had been informed in advance. Euthanasia is still classified as an unnatural death and a coroner has to confirm it and make sure all the paperwork has been done as part of the legal process. Once that was done, and after sitting around for a while, still stunned, we informed the rest of the family. The grandchildren started dropping in, the funeral directors dropped by, many phone calls were made.

We were lucky, not only because my mother had this as an option, which she chose, but also because we all supported her in this decision. But, in saying that, none of us could have stopped the process. It was her decision and hers only. Having a supportive family surely made this a shared experience, but without her strength and conviction, this would not have been possible.

My mother was brought up a Catholic and remained loosely connected to the church. She would always watch the Pope at Easter, and make sure she would hear his Urbi et Orbi, but she did not go to church. Many candles lit in churches had to make up for this. She was also a practical woman, who understood that the end of her life would become increasingly painful. And finally, she loved attention and drama but realised she was getting too tired to enjoy it. For her, euthanasia was an option. This is not the case for everyone, but we are grateful she could avail of it. For my father, my sisters, my brother and me, however strange this may sound, it is a positive memory.

Read more:

'My mother died by euthanasia. For my family, that day is a positive memory' - Independent.ie