[assisted--suicide]

[assisted--suicide]

[assisted--suicide]

Euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke suspended by the Medical Board of Australia

Euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke has been suspended by the Medical Board of Australia, which says he “presents a serious risk to public health and safety”.

The board last night voted to use emergency powers to immediately suspend Dr Nitschke, after he admitted to supporting 45-year-old Perth man Nigel Brayley in his decision to commit suicide despite knowing he was not terminally ill.

The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, which provides support to the Medical Board of Australia, launched an investigation into Dr Nitschke earlier this month following reporting by the ABC.

Mental health groups Beyond Blue and the Black Dog Institute believe Dr Nitschke had an obligation to recommended psychiatric help to Mr Brayley, but Dr Nitschke said it was not his role to intervene.

Dr Nitschke, who described the suspension as a “politically motivated deregistration”, told AM it was “clearly stupid” to claim he is a risk to public safety.

"That’s about the most ludicrous thing they’ve said, that … telling me I’m no longer a practising doctor is going to somehow or other change things," he said.

"I mean, we’ve still got workshops, we’ve got heavily booked workshops all over Australia now. People will be coming in their hundreds - I would estimate thousands now - wanting to know how they can end their lives should they get to that point.

"Whether they remove my medical licence or not is not likely to change that one bit, and the idea there’ll be more people somehow or other being influenced to end their lives I think is quite stupid."

Mr Brayley, who was not an obvious euthanasia candidate, died in May this year after taking the euthanasia drug Nembutal, which he illegally imported.

Mr Brayley had sent Dr Nitschke emails in which he stated he was not terminally ill, but was “suffering”.

His friends Kerry and Trish O’Neil could see Mr Brayley’s life spiralling out of control after the death of his wife, Lina, who died at a local quarry in 2011 in what was at first thought to be an accident.

The case was upgraded to a murder inquiry, and while police never named Mr Brayley as a suspect, he told the O’Neils the investigation and the loss of his job had made him depressed.

[assisted--suicide]

"At the Hemlock Society we get calls daily from desperate people who are looking for someone like Jack Kevorkian to end their lives which have lost all quality… Americans should enjoy a right guaranteed in the European Declaration of Human Rights — the right not to be forced to suffer. It should be considered as much of a crime to make someone live who with justification does not wish to continue as it is to take life without consent." - Faye Girsh

This relates to the last post. I agree with Faye Girsh, as I said on the last post, we should not decide for others the value of their lives. I think he makes an important point when he talks about the Declaration of Human Rights, because, after all, it is true and it is an important argument.

[assisted--suicide]

Death with dignity

I took this excerpt out of a website, and it tells about a case which includes euthanasia. “When her case came to trial, Claire Conroy was unable to move from a semi-fetal position. She was severely demented, had heart disease, hypertension and diabetes and her left leg was gangrenous to the knee; she had sores, couldn’t speak, had only a limited ability to swallow, and had eye problems; she had a urinary catheter in place and was unable to control her bowels. She was able to moan and scratch, and occasionally smile when someone combed her hair. Claire Conroy eventually died before the courts were able to decide what to do. She was not a candidate for voluntary euthanasia. She had not made a living will. But her case posed very worrying dilemmas about end of life decisions. Pushing difficult deaths to one side will not make them go away or make them any easier. Exit encourages open discussion of the problems increasingly facing us in society. We care, and we listen with an open mind. We ask you to work with us so that every person can die with dignity in the way that he or she would choose.”

For me, this is one of the main reasons why Euthanasia should be legal. Life obviously has a value, religion says that but everyone also knows it, it is not like life can be wasted, it must be lived. But the next question is, how do we judge if life is being lived or not? When did we get the permission to force someone to live their lives? That's right, never. Life should not be wasted if is being lived, but it's not up to us to decide for others wheter it is or not.

[assisted--suicide]

Euthanasia is a rejection of the importance and value of human life.

People who support euthanasia often say that it is already considered permissable to take human life under some circumstances such as self defense - but they miss the point that when one kills for self defense they are saving innocent life - either their own or someone else’s. With euthanasia no one’s life is being saved - life is only taken.

History has taught us the dangers of euthanasia and that is why there are only two countries in the world today where it is legal. That is why almost all societies - even non-religious ones - for thousands of years have made euthanasia a crime. It is remarkable that euthanasia advocates today think they know better than the billions of people throughout history who have outlawed euthanasia - what makes the 50 year old euthanasia supporters in 2005 so wise that they think they can discard the accumulated wisdom of almost all societies of all time and open the door to the killing of innocent people? Have things changed? If they have, they are changes that should logically reduce the call for euthanasia - pain control medicines and procedure are far better than they have ever been any time in history.

I think what this text says is not even near to being acceptable. When he says “what makes the 50 year old euthanasia supporters in 2005 so wise that they think they can discard the accumulated wisdom of almost all societies of all time and open the door to the killing of innocent people?” he is being totally illogical. If it wasn’t for people who think they “know better than the whole past society”, we wouldn’t have achieved half of we have today. If it wasn’t for the people who think they know better than the whole past society, we would still be ten times more sexist than we are today. If it wasn’t for the people who think they know better than the whole past society, black people still wouldn’t be accepted in white people’s places and the opposite, as well. If it wasn’t for the people who think they know better than the whole past society, the whole world would still be homophobic. If it wasn’t for the people who think they know better than the whole past society, we would still use our natural resources much more than we actually can. So, maybe we should thank the people who “think they can discard all the accumulated wisdom from almost all societies”, because these may not be as wise as we once thought they were.

[assisted--suicide]

Legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide leads to suicide contagion.

When the media portrays assisted suicide as a means of “taking control” or claims that someone helping another person kill themselves is “death with dignity,” then society (including teenagers) is receiving the dangerous message that suicide is a legitimate answer to life's problems. I really disagree with what the person above wrote. For me, there is no sense in saying that legalizing Euthanasia would make everyone kill themselves. It would only provide more information and control about the issue, because people would do it legally instead of ilegally or instead of travelling to other countries to do it.

[assisted--suicide]

I am posting this link to exemplify a case where Euthanasia is not well used or well thought of. Even if we were to legalize Euthanasia completely, I think there should be some kind of mechanism, such as some mandatory therapy sessions, which would enable people like this lady to remake their decision, eventually. That is also one of the main reasons why I think Euthanasia should be legalized everywhere, because if it was to be legalized, there would be much more control over lives and deaths.

[assisted--suicide]

By establishing a social policy that keeps physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia illegal but recognizes exceptions, we would adopt the correct moral view: the onus of proving that everything had been tried and that the motivation and rationale were convincing would rest on those who wanted to end a life. - Ezekiel Emanuel

http://mobile.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/ezekielema538071.html

[assisted--suicide]

For me, news like these show improvement, because even though Euthanasia is always really sad and even sadder for people who have not lived as many years of their lives as others, there is no reason why these people should be living in pain just waiting to get to the age limit.

[assisted--suicide]

Today, I am posting the results of a survey I found online, made with 350 people, aged 18 to 65. These results show many aspects of this debate, like the fact that most people have never even thought about the legalization of euthanasia. It also shows that the people who agree with the legalization, are for it only in exceptional cases, which for me is another point on why should euthanasia be legalized. We can also see that people would not euthanize their babies, even if they were to live with a problem for their whole lives. All of these aspects, for me, show why it should be legalized, because people would only use it in exceptional cases, because after all, these are their own lives.

[assisted--suicide]

I am posting this link today, because I loved the way this article was written. I partly agree with it, because maybe we do need the presence of our loved ones, but want to keep our and their well being anyway. I know that it is really difficult to sum up such a controversial topic in four paragraphs, but this writer managed it to do it.

[assisted--suicide]

Tumblr in the classroom

For me, using Tumblr in the classroom brings a really positive outcome. I like it, because Tumblr is so simple and instant, but at the same time, everyone's blog is unique. I prefer Tumblr over many other academical tools, such as tests, papers or presentations. I think this way, we can do things much more easily, as well as check our classmates' work, and I feel like this is the purpose of a journalism class, to share what you've written rather than just handing it in to the teacher. I think Tumblr was the best choice of a tool to use in this class, and we can profit a lot from it.

[assisted--suicide]

Today, I decided to post this video, because it's the best video I found on the subject yet. It talks about every aspect I find important and exemplifies everything in a simple and understandable way. I think this video does the best job in informing people about everything basic about Euthanasia, making they think about it later. I also agree with the final opinion on the video.

[assisted--suicide]

Euthanasia laws around the world

Today, I am going to show the legislation that exists on Assisted Suicide around the world. This text is from "The Guardian"'s website.

Netherlands

In April 2002, the Netherlands became the first country to legalise euthanasia and assisted suicide. It imposed a strict set of conditions: the patient must be suffering unbearable pain, their illness must be incurable, and the demand must be made in “full consciousness” by the patient. In 2010, 3,136 people were given a lethal cocktail under medical supervision.

So-called palliative sedation has also become a widespread practice in hospitals, with 15,000 cases a year since 2005, according to the Royal Dutch Medical Association. Patients with a life expectancy of two weeks or less are put in a medically induced coma, and all nutrition and hydration is withdrawn.

The legislation has provoked a fierce debate over the “right to suicide,” because assisted suicide outside of the criteria set for euthanasia is still illegal and is counted as homicide.

"Around 10% to 15% of the people who come to us looking for information actually commit suicide", says Ton Vink, head De Einder (Horizon), a foundation that advises people contemplating suicide. To avoid prosecution, he never provides the medicine himself his and is not around when somebody takes it. "Most of the people who contact us feel reassured by the information we provide and do not take their life away," he says.

France

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are against the law. The president, François Hollande, promised to look at the “right to die with dignity” but has has always denied any intention of legalising euthanasia or assisted suicide.

In 2005 the Léonetti law introduced the concept of the right to be “left to die”. Under strict conditions it allowed doctors to decide to “limit or stop any treatment that is not useful, is disproportionate or has no other object than to artificially prolong life” and to use pain-killing drugs that might “as a side effect, shorten life”.

Two recent high-profile cases have made the headlines: a doctor accused of administering drugs that hastened the deaths of seven elderly patients was acquitted, and France’s high court authorised doctors to stop treating and feeding a young man who had been in a vegetative state on life support for six years. In the latter case, the patient’s parents have appealed to the European court of human rights and are awaiting a decision. A parliamentary report on the subject is expected at the end of this year.

United States

Doctors are allowed to prescribe lethal doses of medicine to terminally ill patients in five US states. Euthanasia, however, is illegal. In recent years, the “aid in dying” movement has made incremental gains, but the issue remains controversial.

Oregon was the first US state to legalise assisted suicide. The law took effect in 1997, and allows for terminally ill, mentally competent patients with less than six months to live to request a prescription for life-ending medication. More than a decade later, Washington state approved a measure that was modelled on Oregon’s law. And last year, the Vermont legislature passed a similar law. Court decisions rendered the practice legal in Montana and, most recently, in New Mexico.

In 2013, roughly 300 terminally ill Americans were prescribed lethal medications, and around 230 people died as a result of taking them. Some patients choose not to take the medication.

Germany and Switzerland

In German-speaking countries, the term “euthanasia” is generally avoided because of its association with the eugenicist policies of the Nazi era. The law therefore tends to distinguish between assisted suicide (beihilfe zum suizid) and “active assisted suicide” (aktive sterbehilfe).

In Germany and Switzerland, active assisted suicide – ie a doctor prescribing and handing over a lethal drug – is illegal. But German and Swiss law does allow assisted suicide within certain circumstances. In Germany, assisted suicide is legal as long as the lethal drug is taken without any help, such as someone guiding or supporting the patient’s hand. In Switzerland, the law is more relaxed: it allows assisted suicide as long as there are no “self-seeking motives” involved. Switzerland has tolerated the creation of organisations such as Dignitas and Exit, which provide assisted dying services for a fee.

In a recent survey, two-thirds of Germans said they would support a law that enabled active assisted suicide too. But the government has announced it wants to tighten the law around assisted suicide, with the health minister, Hermann Gröhe, stating that he wants to ban organisations like Dignitas in Germany.

Belgium

Belgium passed a law in 2002 legalising euthanasia, becoming the second country in the world to do so. The law says doctors can help patients to end their lives when they freely express a wish to die because they are suffering intractable and unbearable pain. Patients can also receive euthanasia if they have clearly stated it before entering a coma or similar vegetative state.

Assisted suicide is not mentioned in the law, which does not specify a method of euthanasia. As Jacqueline Herremans, president of the Association for the Right to Die with Dignity, says: “We don’t make a distinction in the semantics.” However, the physician has to be present at the bedside of the patient to their last breath, unlike the Oregon model where the doctor gives only the prescription of drugs.

Belgian euthanasia cases rose to 1,807 in 2013, compared with 1,432 in 2012, 708 in 2008 and 235 in 2003. Just over half of cases last year were aged 70 or over, and 80% of the applications were made by Dutch-speakers.

High-profile euthanasia cases have included a 44-year-old transsexual woman whose botched sex-change operation left her with physical deformities that she felt made her look like a “monster”; and 45-year-old identical twins who were deaf and going blind and believed they had nothing left to live for.

This February, Belgium became the first country to legalise euthanasia for children. There is no age limit for minors seeking a lethal injection, but they must be conscious of their decision, terminally ill, close to death and suffering beyond any medical help. They also need the assent of their parents to end their lives. So far, no such cases have yet been reported to authorities.

[assisted--suicide]

The disabled view

While scrolling BBC's website, I found a report on disabled people's views on Euthanasia, and it's the most interesting thing I have read until now.

They say that part of the problem is that able-bodied people look at things from their own perspective and see life with a disability as a disaster, filled with suffering and frustration.

Some societies have regarded people with disabilities as inferior, or as a burden on society. Those in favour of eugenics go further, and say that society should prevent ‘defective’ people from having children. Others go further still and say that those who are a burden on society should be eliminated.

People with disabilities don’t agree. They say:

All people should have equal rights and opportunities to live good lives Many individuals with disabilities enjoy living Many individuals without disabilities don’t enjoy living, and no-one is threatening them The proper approach to people with disabilities is to provide them with appropriate support, not to kill them The quality of a person’s life should not be assessed by other people The quality of life of a person with disabilities should not be assessed without providing proper support first

[golifelovers]

[assisted--suicide]

I find this picture really idiotic. I feel this way, because they treat it as it was a really simple problem, as if the people who think about euthanization are living their lives to the fullest and “seizing the day”. Clearly, that is not what happens. Most people who think about it seriously are not really living their lives, so what the poster says is inappropriate.