Euthanasia has long been debated in Australia on both sides, and now former longtime Victorian Premier Steve Bracks has thrown his support behind the Andrews governments campaign to legalise the assisted-dying method.

Mr Bracks, Victorias second-longest-serving premier from 1999 to 2007, is a Catholic and was widely regarded as a conservative during his time in power.

Speaking on the topic, Mr Bracks recognised that during his stint as Premier, the timing wasnt right to put forward to the bill, even though he has long been a supporter.

I think it would be a sensible and appropriate change, done well and considered well, Mr Bracks told The Australian.

I think its good timing, it is an appropriate and sensible reform, one which is not without controversy but one which should go ahead.

His comments come as an Independent panel works on recommendations for a framework that will be Australias first attempt at government-supported legislation on assisted suicide.

This panel is expected to hand down its finding within the next few weeks, and The Australian reports a bill could even be tabled in the Victorian Parliament as early as the week of August 22nd.

There has been a parliamentary committee which has worked on this in Victoria and the product of that work will be extremely useful in finding a way forward and one which can allow for the consideration of parliament.

The proposed legislation would contain strict criteria, with eligibility for euthanasia limited to Australians who are suffering from a serious and incurable condition.

It is expected the legislation would be amongst the most conservative euthanasia models in the world, and those wishing to undertake must request three times to die, including once in writing.

Mr Bracks backed a conservative approach to euthanasia, citing concerns over the potential for families to coerce vulnerable patients into assisted-suicide.

If it is done well and effectively with proper and appropriate referrals that will not be the case and I think that is the experience internationally; across Scandinavia that has not occurred, he said.

Continued here:

Former Premier supports Euthanasia push - Ten Eyewitness News

MATT STEWART

Last updated15:28, July 13 2017

STUFF

The Painless Path website uses a Stuff picture of supporters protesting outside the assisted suicide case of Wellington euthanasia advocate Susan Austen. The site purports to sell the suicide drug Nembutol.

Pro-euthanasia lobby group Exit International is warning its members off a scam website, based in the Ukraine, which is fleecingthe elderly by selling the popular and costly suicide drug Nembutal, which never arrives.

Those falling for the scam are mostly elderly people, many in poor health and with little internet savvy.

They are being gouged about $1100 - the price of a 25gm dose of the drug - and are too frightened to go to the authorities to complain about buying an illegal substance.

GLENN CAMPBELL

Exit International founder Philip Nitschke says scam sites claiming to sell Nembutal are on the rise as the elderly increasingly look for end of life choices.

Exit founder Philip Nitschke said about three of its members were in contact every week about the ripoff as the market for the lethal Class C controlled drug, used in assisted suicide, grows worldwide.

READ MORE: * Jury trial over assisted suicide case to proceed in Wellington for Susan Austen * Elderly importers of lethal drug used in assisted suicide are getting pinged by Customs * Wellington woman Annemarie Treadwell's death trigger for Police euthanasia furore * We know where you've been, police tell 76-year-old who attended euthanasia meeting

The Painless Path website uses aStuffpicture of supporters protesting outside the assisted suicide trial of Wellington euthanasia advocate Susan Austen.

STUFF

Susan Austen leaving Wellington District Court after an appearance in May.

Austen, 66, a Lower Hutt teacher, was charged in October2016with having twice imported pentobarbitone, more commonly known by its trade name Nembutal. In high doses, it causes death by respiratory arrest.

Nitschke was gobsmacked the site offered cheaper rates for teenagers and said the use of a news photo featuring euthanasia lobbyists in genuine protest was perfect for a scam site as it appeared credible and featured people from an older demographic.

Exit's handbook lists a handful of legitimate sites in Mexico, Peru, Venezuela and China but Nitschke says there are nearly 100 scam sites, a number that is growing in parallel with the rising global demand for the drug as an end-of-life option.

ROSS GIBLIN/STUFF

The original Dominion Post photo of supporters of Susan Austen outside the Wellington District Court used by the bogus Ukrainian website Painless Path.

"Luckilythey don't sell anything, just take your money. We'll be alerting members ... the steady growth in internet scams over the past decade is an indication of the growing global market in this drug ," he said.

The handbook had been updated to list bogus sites.

Nitschke said sites like Painless Path relied on those who fell for the scam being too frightened or sick to report it to the authorities.

"This is a vulnerable group who can hardly go to authorities saying I lost money buying this illegal drug. They'd be admitting to breaking the law."

The maximum penalty for importing a Class C drug is eight years' imprisonment.

-Stuff

The rest is here:

Dodgy scam site uses Kiwi pro-euthanasia protest imagery to sell bogus suicide drugs - Stuff.co.nz

Euthanasia push: With the push to legalise euthanasia gaining momentum in states across Australia, its a chilling end-of-life strategy, with grave implications according to Catholic ethicists. Photo: CNS

IT happened in our midst an apparent planned and researched triple suicide on the Gold Coast.

With the push to legalise euthanasia gaining momentum in states across Australia, its a chilling end-of-life strategy, with grave implications according to Catholic ethicists.

To choose to limit ones life to choose to miss out on life with its blend of joys and sorrows this is never a reasonable choice, Queensland priest Fr Kevin McGovern, who until last year was the director of a health ethics centre in Melbourne, said.

On June 27, mother Margaret Cummins, 78, and her daughters Wynette and Heather, aged 53 and 54, took their own lives in a luxury residential apartment on Ephraim Island.

Police reported the husband of one of the daughters found the women dead after returning to the apartment.

He was understandably upset, but not surprised at the discovery.

The women were followers of controversial euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschkes group Exit International, having joined the pro-euthanasia group about six months ago.

Dr Nitschke, the man known as Dr Death, confirmed from Amsterdam that he didnt know them personally, but they had subscribed to the groups online Peaceful Pill eHandbook, which provides research and information on voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide.

The handbook includes practical information about end-of-life strategies such as over-the-counter and prescription drugs, gases and poisons.

Dr Nitschke said the triple suicide pact was unusual three members had never ended their lives at the same time before but the planning and research by the women that took place over a number of months indicated that this was a rational decision.

Each of the women involved was said to have had a diminished quality of life recently.

Wynette suffered brain cancer in the 1980s, and Margaret reportedly suffered dementia.

They chose to electively access a peaceful means to end their lives and obviously carried it out very effectively, Dr Nitschke said.

Respecting a persons rational decision to end their life is fundamental.

Fr McGovern fundamentally disagrees.

In Victoria, euthanasia advocates want assistance in dying for those with a terminal condition who are in the last few months or years of life, he said.

This sad story reveals that if euthanasia is ever introduced, it will not remain limited to a small and narrowly defined group.

None of these women were terminal. Yet euthanasia advocates support their choice.

Paul Russell, a Catholic and the executive director of HOPE: Preventing euthanasia and assisted suicide described it as a marketing ploy for Dr Nitschke and others to say that people commit suicide rationally.

Whereas suicide is generally understood to be characterised by anguish, mental health, loss etcetera, Nitschkes claims are a dangerous and entirely erroneous ploy for legitimacy, he said.

He said Dr Nitschke would have us believe that changing the law to allow assisted suicide or euthanasia was not so much about pain, but autonomy and self-determination.

Fr Kevin McGovern: If we take this big step, there will be many little steps which will extend this assistance to more and more people.

Just days after the Gold Coast triple suicide, University of Notre Dame Australia bioethics professor Margaret Somerville, delivered an address entitled End of Life Choices in which she tackled the same issue, but from the opposite pole, describing euthanasia as an inevitable and perilous slippery slope.

She set out the alternatives facing society in simple, stark terms debate on physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, or PAS-E, involving a conflict between respect for individual autonomy and respect for human life.

Pro-PAS-E advocates give priority to autonomy; anti-PAS-E adherents to respect for life, she said.

Pro PAS-E argue it is an issue of medical treatments, extensions of palliative care.

Anti PAS-E consider doctors killing patients or helping them kill themselves as a disruption of our societal values.

In the Netherlands, psychiatrist Boudewijn Chabot, a PAS-E advocate, now expresses horror at what is happening in his country.

Chabot has written that legal safeguards for euthanasia are slowly eroding away and that the law no longer protects people with psychiatric conditions and dementia.

He recognises we are dealing with a morally problematic act how do you kill someone who does not understand that he will be killed?

We should think of that in relation to vulnerable Australians. The Australian Law Reform Commission has warned that 4 to14 per cent of elderly Australians are abused.

Financial abuse takes the form of early inheritance syndrome the old person lets another person, often their child, handle their financial assets and they use it for themselves.

Imagine early death syndrome added to that.

Professor Somerville described an extreme example of the logical slippery slope unfolding in Canadas Quebec province.

Dr Yves Robert, registrar of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Quebec (the medical licensing authority), was an instigator of the movement to legalise euthanasia, she said.

He regarded it as good palliative care a continuum of good end-of-life care, which included euthanasia.

As in the Australian debate, pro-euthanasia advocates claimed it would be rarely used and estimated about 100 cases a year in Quebec.

In the first year, there were more than 400 cases in Quebec and almost 1500 in Canada.

Some Quebec cases breached the legal requirements in one, the patient probably had just a urinary infection.

But none of this seemed to raise any questions for the College or, I assume, Robert, about whether legalising euthanasia had been a good idea.

Heres what has done so for him. There are now calls to have death on demand declared a constitutional right.

The argument is that if I want to be dead thats my right and having to fulfil certain conditions to access euthanasia breaches my right and is legally actionable discrimination.

Considering this example, does the latest Gold Coast suicide represent a step towards Death a la carte; that is, theres a menu of options for choosing how to die?

Dr Nitschke rejects this latest case was one of death on demand, but rather, acknowledged the womens wisdom in researching the issue so that they could achieved their desired outcome a peaceful, reliable death.

I strongly endorse the words of philosopher Thomas Szasz who said: Suicide is a fundamental human right. That does not mean that it is morally desirable. It only means that society does not have the moral right to interfere, Dr Nitschke said.

Fr McGovern warned against Dr Nitschkes defence of suicide.

Was this choice reasonable? Certainly not, he said.

There are big steps and there are little steps. The big step is to say that its acceptable to help someone to kill themselves.

If we take this big step, there will be many little steps which will extend this assistance to more and more people.

The only way to avoid this is not to take the big step in the first place.

Euthanasia must not be legalised for any circumstance lest it eventually become legal in just about every circumstance.

See more here:

Triple suicide on Gold Coast prompts euthanasia concerns - Catholic Leader

A Humane Society organization in Ohio is working to save 40 dogs from being euthanized, WCMH reported.

The dogs are being sent north from Houstons K-9 Angels Rescue to the Humane Society of Delaware County.The project is being coordinated from Ohio by Natalie Yeager, a former Houston resident, WCMH reported.

Im thinking, I have people asking for puppies to adopt and were having trouble finding enough for all the people who want them here, she told WCMH.

The trip from Houston took 17 hours, and the dogs arrived Thursday night, WSYX reported. Once the puppies are cleared medically they will be available for adoption, WCMH reported. Until then they will reside in foster homes.

We are going to keep adults here. Were going to keep some puppies here also to have them fixed, spayed and neutered, Yeager told WSYX.Some of the younger ones are being sent out into foster until theyve had their shots and theyre ready for adoption.

See the original post here:

40 dogs transported from Texas to Ohio to avoid euthanasia - Atlanta Journal Constitution

3 Jul 2017, 6:47 a.m.

He's a controversial US physician touring Australia to argue the case against voluntary euthanasia.

US physician William Toffler: "Perhaps you should have veterinarians, who have training and skill in giving overdoses to living things, living animals."

RELATED:Central Victorian deaths highlight a desire for voluntary assisted dying to be among options for end of life planning

He's a controversial US physician touring Australia to argue the case against voluntary euthanasia.

But while William Toffler hopes assisted dying is never legalised here, if it is, he wants vets to be responsible for treating terminally ill patients who wish to die not their doctors.

In a parliamentary briefing this week, Dr Toffler urged Victorian MPs not to make the same mistake as his home state of Oregon, where physician assisted suicide has been legal for two decades.

However, if enough MPs vote in favour of reform when the matter is debated at Spring Street this year, his view is that doctors should have nothing to do with the law because it goes against their fundamental obligation to heal people.

"Perhaps you should have veterinarians, who have training and skill in giving overdoses to living things, living animals," he told his audience.

"I'm not recommending this, don't misquote me, but at least you'd keep the House of Medicine from an apparent conflict of interest, and you'd have trust in your doctors."

Dr Toffler is a medical physician, a professor at the Oregon Health and Science University, and a member of the Catholic Medical Association in the US, whose mission is to uphold "the principles of the Catholic faith in the science and practice of medicine."

But he's also a controversial figure, whose views on issues such as abortion (which he is against), contraception (which he doesn't prescribe because of his anti-abortion stance), and euthanasia are seen as too extreme by some.

Dr Toffler's speaking tour around Australia sponsored by Right to Life is the latest sign of the deeply divisive debate the Andrews government faces as it seeks to legalise assisted dying in Victoria.

While the government's legislation is still being drafted, the proposed model is expected to limit access to people who have a incurable disease and face intolerable pain at the end of their life, and still have the decision making capacity to ask their doctor to prescribe a lethal pill.

However, Dr Toffler said that even the term assisted "dying" was a euphemism, when boiled down: "It's assisted suicide."

"If it was assisted dying I'd be in favour of it, because choice, dignity in dying, or options at the end of life are good things. But I'm not in favour of empowering doctors to give massive overdoses to people so they can kill themselves," he told Fairfax Media.

Dr Toffler's parliamentary briefing was organised by Liberal upper house MP Inga Peulich, and attendees included the Sex Party's Fiona Patten, Liberal MPs David Southwick, Robert Clark, Neale Burgess, and Labor backbencher Lizzie Blandthorn.

During his speech, he warned that there were several "myths" that proponents of assisted dying would often push including the view that physician-assisted death was about alleviating intolerable suffering and pain for people with terminal illness.

"In my 40 years [in the medical profession] I am yet to see somebody who we can't get on top of the pain," he said.

Asked about his presentation, MPs had conflicting views. Sex Party MP Fiona Patten, who was part of the End-of-Life choices committee that recommended an assisted dying regime, said she was baffled by Dr Toffler's suggestion that vets should be used to treat terminally ill patients.

"For a doctor he made the curious observations that you couldn't trust the evidence nor could you trust the doctors," she said.

"There is no doubt that his religious beliefs have influenced his position on physician assisted dying yet he warned that anyone who said that was a bigot. Somehow stating that fact is demeaning his beliefs!"

However Ms Peulich, who was also part of the End-of-Life Choices committee but did not support its main recommendation for assisted dying, said Dr Toffler's arguments were "based on reason and evidence".

- The Age

Here is the original post:

Assisted dying: Vets should assist, not doctors, says anti-euthanasia campaigner - Bendigo Advertiser

THERE has been an overwhelming response by concerned conservationists via social media in the wake of reports that up to five dingoes have been euthanised on Fraser Island so far this year.

While three of the dingoes were sick or injured, the other two were considered to be of a high risk or threatening.

Michelle Fischer, via Facebook said "every tourist who feeds a Dingo on Fraser (or any wild animal anywhere) is ultimately responsible for the death of that Dingo.

"Those Dingos then look to people for food and are killed because they've become 'aggressive.'

"I don't understand why Dingos cannot be, for want of a better term, 'used' as another attraction on the island.

"Set up feeding stations and feed them twice a day.

"But no, kill them off, that seems a much better option apparently."

Jenny Montaser shared the concern saying it was a "disgrace" to even contemplating killing dingos for any reason.

"It is their territory, humans need to be restricted in their interaction and be responsible when they are there.

"What happens when you imbalance a closed ecosystem by removing its alpha predator?"

A spokeswoman for the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service said rangers on the island continued to do all they could to ensure visitors and residents were dingo-safe.

During the holidays, rangers increase patrols in and around campgrounds and speak to campers, day tourists, resort management and staff about reducing the risk of negative interactions between dingoes and people.

Visitors can report a negative dingo interaction by calling 4127 9150.

The rest is here:

Outrage over dingo euthanasia - Gympie Times

At its best Roman Catholic piety can be enormously powerful. It offers what we may call a way of affirmationa sacramental understanding of the countless ways in which we meet the holy God in the everyday life of bodily gestures, repetitive prayer, candles, motherhood. And it does this without losing an equally powerful way of negation, which forbids us to suppose we can capture or control the presence of the transcendent God in such ways. But precisely because this intricate system of spiritual practice is so powerful, it can also go bad in powerful ways. Affirmation is safe only when negation is also present. One can become fascinated not so much with God as with ones own experience of candles, beads, genuflection, and a virgin mother. And then one may lose the transcendent otherness of that God in a way that would hardly be possible for, say, a serious Calvinism (which would, of course, have its own way of going bad).

This was, I have to confess, my first thought after reading At His Own Wake, Celebrating Life and the Gift of Death, a recent New York Times article about the death by euthanasia in Canada of a man named John Shields. Clearly intended to elicit pathos in its readers, the account is, by my lights, drowning in bathos. Let me admit straightforwardly at the outset: I dont much like the John Shields portrayed in this article, though he was much loved by some who knew him. I like even less some of the other characters who play significant roles in Mr. Shieldss deathas, for example, Penny Allport, the life-cycle celebrant whose task it was to orchestrate and choreograph the homemade rituals, drawn from countless different (and incompatible) cultural and religious traditions, that shaped Mr. Shieldss last hours and his death. I am not at all fond of Dr. Stefanie Green who, needing a better life-work balance than her practice of maternity and newborn care permitted, turned to a focus on implementing Canadas year-old legalized medical assistance in dying. Birth and death, deliveries in and outI find it very transferable, she says. Both are really intense and really important. (Is it just an accident that the title of the Times article celebrates lifenot the gift of lifewhile celebrating the gift of death? Perhaps the two are not so transferable after all.)

These are minor dislikes, however, compared with my reaction to the shameful inability of the Times and its journalist/reporter/essayist, Catherine Porter, to help readers not just to sympathize (as we should) with Mr. Shields in his suffering but also to think critically, distinguishing bathos from pathos. Evidently Ms. Porter was present as a silent participant throughout the events recounted in her article, an article the Times deemed important enough to run on its front page. Indeed, it is hard to detect any critical distance at all in her authorial voice. In the context of our societys deep divisions and confusions about the practice of euthanasia, this article amounts to a puff piece aimed at evoking support for one side of a complicated moral argument. A shorter piece on the op-ed page would have been more honest.

John Shields was evidently a man with great energy and a capacity to take interest in many aspects of life, though also in his own perceived uniqueness. Ordained a priest in the Roman Catholic Church, he left after four years, though not before being prohibited from preaching and teaching at his parish in Austin, Texas. After that he became a social worker and, later, president of the British Columbia Government Employees Union, over which he presided for fourteen years. After his first wife died of lymphoma he eventually married for a second time. He studied some Gestalt therapy, learned dowsing, and came to regard himself as a spiritual cosmologist, believing that the universe was conscious and that everything was inextricably connected. Having left institutional religion for a kind of generalized spirituality strikes me as rather less countercultural than Mr. Shieldss self-image would suggestand certainly far from unique. I come forth at this precise moment to contribute my unique gifts to the great unfolding, he wrote in a memoir. And while this does not exactly bring Hegel to mind, we get the idea and can see why Ms. Allport would call his death his great blooming.

His character was marked by the twists and turns of the several directions his life had taken. He loved rituals, which began with the Catholic Masses of his childhood. To be of service was a central theme in his life, as was the theme of freedom. He was always growing and exploring. Sadly, though, in his mid-seventies he was diagnosed with amyloidosis, a disease in which abnormal proteins accumulate in the bodys organs, eventually causing death. Mr. Shields gradually lost feeling in and use of his arms and legs, finally having to enter hospice care. In his debilities he felt a loss of dignity, a diminished condition that he found demeaning and unacceptable.

As it happened, the man and the moment were well matched. For only a year before Canada had legalized what it calls medical assistance in dying. This permits not just assisted suicide but also euthanasia, in which a physician actually administers the death-dealing drugs. The law does prohibit euthanasia that is nonvoluntarythat is, when the dying person is, for whatever reason, no longer able to consent at the time the drugs are actually administered. This was in fact a worry for Shields and his wife: as his condition swiftly declined, they feared that if he waited too long, he might be unable to give his consent when the chosen day arrived. And, in fact, it is hard to believe that this restriction can long surviveat least in British Columbia where, according to the Times article, an increasing number of patients are eagerly embracing euthanasia. Dr. Green herself, while adhering to the laws limits, suggests that there should be more flexibility in the law, a flexibility that would permit euthanasia for those who requested it before reaching a condition in which they are unable to consent.

The Canadian law also specifies that, in order to qualify for euthanasia, an adult must be in an irremediable medical condition, experiencing suffering he or she finds intolerable, and likely to die fairly soon in any case. It is just as hard to believe that these conditions can hold for too long. Patients with severe but not life-threatening disabilities may well find their condition demeaning and undignified. Why exactly the fact that they are not likely to die soon should matter more than the felt indignity of their condition is far from clear.

In short, the Canadian law tries to ground permission for euthanasia in both compassion for those who suffer and a freedom to make important choices about the course and duration of ones life. But, as Daniel Callahan noted years ago, these criteria are on a collision course. If freedom and self-determination are this importantso important that we have a right to help in ending our lifehow can we insist that such help may be offered only to those who are suffering irremediably? On the other hand, if the suffering of others makes so powerful a claim upon us that we should be willing to cause their death in order to end the suffering, it is not clear why we should limit our merciful help only to those who are still able to request it. After all, fully autonomous people are not the only ones who can suffer greatly. We may safely predict that the limits will gradually be extended.

Here is the original post:

Pathos, Bathos, and Euthanasia - Commonweal

Politicians in the Netherlands are discussing the possibility of legalizing euthanasia for healthy people. The proposed Completed Life Bill would allow any person age 75 or over who decides their life is complete to receive euthanasia. It doesnt matter if they are otherwise perfectly healthy.

Under current Dutch law, a person only becomes eligible for euthanasia when they have a terminal illness and are suffering unbearably. Pia Dijkstra, an MP for Dutch political party D66, is preparing to introduce the Completed Life Bill. D66 spearheaded most of the groundbreaking socially progressive legislation for which the Netherlands is famous. They are historically a smaller partytheyve never had a Prime Ministerbut theyve proven themselves to be politically effective.

D66 would eventually like to legalize euthanasia for any adult who wishes to die. They openly admit that the Completed Life Bill is a step towards realizing that goal. In March, D66 leader Alexander Pechtold was confronted on a political talk show by a 57-year-old man who said he wishes to die. He asked why the Completed Life Bill is only persons age 75 and older. I have to wait 18 more years. I dont feel like waiting 18 years. I want it now, he said.

Pechtold replied, Its my personal opinion that in our civilization dying is an individual consideration. You didnt ask to be brought into the world. He went on to explain that currently there is political support for legalizing euthanasia for healthy elderly persons. If we want to maintain that support and not disrupt the discussion then we have to take it step-by-step. In 2002 we passed the euthanasia law for unbearable suffering. In my view, Pia Dijkstra can now continue persuading parliament and the country toin my own words and personal opiniontake the next step for our civilization.

Ironically, the Dutch public news broadcaster decided to include a notice with the number for a suicide prevention hotline directly below where the video of Pechtolds comments is embedded on their website.

If the Completed Life Bill comes to a vote in Parliament, it will most likely pass. Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Peoples Party for Freedom and Democracy has said he is willing to enact it. The question is whether the bill will be placed on the legislative agenda.

In Dutch politics, no party ever wins a majority of seats in parliament. The largest party has to form a coalition with several smaller ones. National elections were held in March, and Prime Minister Rutte is currently negotiating with D66 and two Christian partiesthe Christian Democratic Appeal and the Christian Unionabout forming a coalition. Both Christian parties are opposed to the Completed Life Bill. The Christian Union in particular is likely to make preventing a vote on the bill a condition of joining the coalition.

While politicians debate such a drastic expansion of euthanasia, the manner in which it is currently being carried out in the Netherlands is coming under fire. Earlier this year, a group of 220 doctors took out an advertisement in a major newspaper saying they will refuse to euthanize patients with advanced dementia who are unable give verbal consent. Under Dutch law, an elderly person who is still compos mentis can write a legal declaration stating that they wish to be euthanized when they develop advanced dementia. They can specify conditions about when they want to die, e.g. when they no longer recognize their immediate family.

The doctors who signed the advertisement say they cannot accept these legal declarations. They write, Giving a deadly injection to a patient with advanced dementia on the basis of their written declaration? To someone who cannot confirm that they wish to die? No, were not going to do that. Our moral abhorrence at ending the life of a defenseless person is too great.

Many of the doctors who signed the advertisement actually administer euthanasia, but they draw the line with patients who are unaware of what is being done to them.

The doctors were motivated by a 2016 case in which the Dutch committee that oversees euthanasia concluded a doctor had acted negligently. An elderly woman with advanced Alzheimers had previously written a legal declaration requesting euthanasia, but her specifications about the point at which she was ready to die were open to interpretation. The doctor who euthanized her began by secretly placing a sedative in her coffee. The woman subsequently woke up wide-eyed and resisted the fatal injection. She was restrained by family members and the doctor proceeded.

The controversy flared up again in June when Boudewijn Chabot, a psychogeriatrician and prominent euthanasia supporter, published a 2,600-word op-ed in which he argued that euthanasia now getting out of hand. He believes that the euthanasia oversight committee is lax in carrying out its duty and also insufficiently transparent about what it communicates to the public. Chabot argued that legal protections for patients have been quietly eroded over time. He is particularly concerned about the way euthanasia is administered to patients with advanced dementia or chronic psychiatric illness.

In 2016, there were 6,091 reported instances of euthanasia in the Netherlands. Of those, 141 were for patients with dementia. That is up from 12 such cases in 2009. Also for patients with chronic psychiatric illness, there were 0 instances of euthanasia in 2009, but by 2016 that number had risen to 60. The numbers are small, you could argue, Chabot writes. But look at the rapid increaseThe financial gutting of the health care sector has particularly harmed the quality of life of these types of patients. Its logical to conclude that euthanasia is going to skyrocket.

Chabot is concerned that the legal guidelines for euthanasia for patients with physical illnesses are applied without any further qualification to patients with dementia and psychiatric illness. He believes that simply doesnt work and can lead to ethical violations.

Speaking to Dutch media, Dijkstra said the concerns expressed in Chabots op-ed have no bearing on the Completed Life Bill. The euthanasia law is being carried out carefully. Its a pity that certain people constantly want to bring it up for discussion. Though, in this instance, it is doctors who practice euthanasia who are saying things have gone too far.

Emily Friere is a freelance writer based in Great Britain. She writes about both English and American culture and politics.

Originally posted here:

Netherlands Considers Euthanasia For Healthy People, Doctors Say Things Are 'Getting Out Of Hand' - The Federalist

by: Bob D Angelo, Cox Media Group National Content Desk Updated: Jul 1, 2017 - 5:55 AM

A Humane Society organization in Ohio is working to save 40 dogs from being euthanized, WCMH reported.

>> Read more trending news

The dogs are being sent north from Houstons K-9 Angels Rescue to the Humane Society of Delaware County.The project is being coordinated from Ohio by Natalie Yeager, a former Houston resident, WCMH reported.

Im thinking, I have people asking for puppies to adopt and were having trouble finding enough for all the people who want them here, she told WCMH.

The trip from Houston took 17 hours, and the dogs arrived Thursday night, WSYX reported. Once the puppies are cleared medically they will be available for adoption, WCMH reported. Until then they will reside in foster homes.

We are going to keep adults here. Were going to keep some puppies here also to have them fixed, spayed and neutered, Yeager told WSYX.Some of the younger ones are being sent out into foster until theyve had their shots and theyre ready for adoption.

2017 Cox Media Group.

See the original post:

40 dogs transported from Texas to Ohio to avoid euthanasia - FOX13 Memphis

Posted July 02, 2017 14:42:28

Conservative Tasmanian Labor MP Madeline Ogilvie has launched a scathing attack on the party's powerful Left faction, claiming unelected representatives are wielding too much power.

A spat broke out yesterday at the annual party conference between the Right and Left of the Labor Party over the decision of several MPs to vote against voluntary euthanasia legislation earlier this year.

The Left believed the issue had been agreed upon as part of the Labor platform and subsequently MPs were bound to support it.

A motion put forward by union representative Adam Clarke called for members who voted against the bill to be disciplined by the party and even expelled, arguing the only issues within Labor that allowed a conscience vote were abortion and same-sex marriage.

Mr Clarke said members who did not support the legislation were in breach of the party's constitution.

"Once we make a decision, that's it," he said.

"That becomes the view of the party unit, it's how we operate on every other issue.

"Once we determine our platform, we go out there as one and we vote for it as one."

The Health and Community Services Union's Robbie Moore backed the move, and went even further to name Ms Ogilvie, David Llewellyn and Shane Broad.

"We are no longer going to accept it," Mr Moore said.

"If you do it again, I will be moving to expel people."

Member for Denison Ms Ogilvie labelled it a "ridiculous suggestion".

"There's some very loud voices in the room, to make that kind of statement is really quite out there, it goes beyond what I'd expect to see at state conference, it's disappointing," she said.

"I take on board all views, I will listen to what people come to say, but when it comes to the exercise of my parliamentary vote that is mine and mine alone.

"If those with the loud voices want to exert more influence in Parliament they ought to get themselves elected."

She said members did not have the power to expel her.

"I think we should bring this to a head, I would like to see them come forward, if they are serious about that then they should put their case on the table and let's have that discussion," she said.

"It's no secret that the Left faction in Tasmania is very strong and very powerful, and I am concerned about that, I am concerned about the balance of power between the moderates and the Left."

Last month, a bill to allow euthanasia in certain circumstances, sponsored by Labor stalwart Lara Giddings and Greens leader Cassy O'Connor, was voted down by the House of Assembly.

Labor leader Rebecca White said a conscience vote was allowed as the legislation was put forward as a Private Member's Bill.

Topics: state-parliament, federal---state-issues, alp, george-town-7253, burnie-7320, hobart-7000

Read the rest here:

Euthanasia vote exposes factional tensions in Tasmanian ALP at state conference - ABC Local

Forty dogs spent 17 hours inside a trailer on the road to get to the Humane Society of Delaware County Thursday night. (WSYX/WTTE)

Forty dogs spent 17 hours inside a trailer on the road to get to the Humane Society of Delaware County Thursday night.

They were all saved from getting euthanized in Houston. The dogs were at shelters in Houston that are overcrowded everyday. The Humane Society of Delaware County is always getting requests for puppies, but many times there aren't enough to go around.

The project started about one month ago when the dog intake coordinator at the Humane Society of Delaware County noticed there was a need in Houston. Natalie Yeager said she used to work at an animal shelter there and knows people with K-9 Angels Rescue, which is also based out of Houston.

Yeager said she noticed the rescue group needed helping saving 40 puppies and dogs from being euthanized. Yeager said the dogs were going to be euthanized because there wasn't enough room in the shelters to keep them.

Cages for the puppies and dogs were donated along with blankets and towels.

"We are going to keep adults here. We're going to keep some puppies here also to have them fixed, spayed and neutered...Some of the younger ones are being sent out into foster until they've had their shots and they're ready for adoption. They can come back and get spayed and nurtured and be ready for their families too," said Yeager.

The puppies and dogs all have pictures and a biography attached to their cage.

If you'd like more information about how to possibly adopt one of the puppies, you can contact the Humane Society of Delaware County.

Go here to see the original:

40 dogs rescued from euthanasia in Houston, brought to Delaware ... - ABC6OnYourSide.com

BLUE SPRINGS. Mo.

A Missouri woman who fostered a pregnant dog that was on a euthanasia list was rewarded Sunday when 18 puppies were born to the mixed-breed dog.

Its heaven. Puppy pile, you cant get any better than that, Ashlee Holland toldWDAF.

Holland fostered Ava, a pregnant golden retriever-chow mix two weeks before the dog was due.

She had no other choice, no other hope, Holland toldPeople magazine.No dog deserves to be put to sleep for space.

I was aware she was having puppies but X-rays didnt show how many, Holland told WDAF.

Holland said her 9-year-old son, a big Kansas City Royals fan, named the puppies after some sports figures.

We got Ned Yost, Dayton Moore, Buck ONeil, Holland said.We got Esky and Royal.

Holland said Ava and her puppies will be ready for adoption in eight weeks, pending medical examinations. She has sincestarted aFacebook page for Ava and her pups.

And just to clarify, I know that a lot of articles are reporting that I adopted Ava, Holland wrote on the page.That is not the case. She is my foster.

Time to end this night with some puppy dreams

See the original post here:

Dog gives birth to 18 pups after woman saves her from euthanasia list - Atlanta Journal Constitution

When is death a duty? Two days ago, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of doctors over the parents in a battle over a baby with a rare and fatal genetic disease. The ECHR followed rulings from British courts, declaring that doctors in the UKs National Health Service could stop life support rather than allow the parents to bring Charlie Gard to the US for experimental treatment:

Born in August, Charlie Gard has a rare genetic disorder known as mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. Caused by a genetic mutation, it leads to weakened muscles and organ dysfunction, among other symptoms, with a poor prognosis for most patients.

Charlie is on life support and has been in the intensive care unit at the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London since October. His doctors wish to take him off life support, but his parents disagree.

Charlies parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, wanted the hospital to release Charlie into their custody so they can take him to the United States for an experimental treatment.

The domestic courts concluded that it would be lawful for the hospital to withdraw life sustaining treatment because it was likely that Charlie would suffer significant harm if his present suffering was prolonged without any realistic prospect of improvement, and the experimental therapy would be of no effective benefit, a press release from the court announcing the decision said.

The couple had raised nearly 1.4 million for that effort, which would have ended NHS involvement in the case, but the courts decided that they and not the parents were in position to decide that death rather than potential treatment was what was best for the child. Now the parentscannot even take the baby home to allow him to die there rather than in hospital, even though they pledged to cover all the costs:

Connie Yates and Chris Gard have been told by Great Ormond Street their sons life support will be switched off tomorrow but he cannot leave the ward.

The couples final wish for Charlie has been blocked and his mother Connie said today in a video for MailOnline: We promised our little boy every single day that we would take him home.

Mr Gard added: We want to give him a bath at home, put him in a cot which he has never slept in but we are now being denied that. We know what day our son is going to die but dont get a say in how that will happen.

Note that there was no disagreement between the parents over the course of care they wanted for Charlie. The two of them have lived at the hospital with their baby, and have been equally united in their desire to try anything to save his life. This is not a dispute between relatives over who should have control over care (as was the issue in the Terri Schiavo case) but whether the state or the parents should have the final say. In a single-payer system such as NHS, the courts have clearly ruled that the state has more standing on whether to allow someone to die than the person or his/her nearest relations. And now, the state through its socialized-medicine providers refuse to even allow the death to take place under the circumstances desired by the family.

While this case does not directly relate to euthanasia laws, there is nonetheless a cultural and moral link to European embrace of utilitarian policies on life. In this case, neither the patient nor the family wanted an end to a life, but the state ruled that compassion demanded the withdrawal of life support even absent the need to conserve resources for care. Critics have long warned that the embrace of euthanasia would eventually transform it from a choice to a duty, and that certainly seems to be what happened in the tragic case of Charlie Gard.

National Reviews Ian Tuttle warns that well see a lot more such cases in the future:

According to the Honourable Mr. Justice Nicholas Francis of the High Courts Family Division, who authored the decision subsequently upheld by the higher courts, death is in Charlies best interests. There was no scientific basis for believing that Charlie would respond positively to the experimental American treatment; meanwhile, there is unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage. If, wrote Justice Francis, Charlies damaged brain function cannot be improved, as all agree, then how can he be any better off than he is now? It was with a heavy heart, the judge said, that he sided with the doctors. Charlie should be permitted to die with dignity. In conclusion, Justice Francis praised the parents he had just overruled: Most importantly of all, I want to thank Charlies parents for their brave and dignified campaign on his behalf, but more than anything to pay tribute to their absolute dedication to their wonderful boy, from the day that he was born.

So it was that successive courts in the United Kingdom and in Europe simultaneously found that Connie Yates and Chris Gard had devoted themselves unhesitatingly to their sons welfare for ten months, and also that Yates and Gard could not be trusted to act in their sons best interests.

The question, then, is not what would Charlie Gard want a question no one can answer. The question is what do we owe to people such as Charlie, who cannot speak for themselves? What duty of care do we owe them simply on account of their being human beings, who are by nature possessed of an inalienable dignity? What obligations do we have to those who suffer, and how should we understand their suffering? And, pertinent to this case, under what circumstances should the tightest bonds of affection those between parent and child be subordinated to the judgment of the state?

The precedent established by Charlie Gards case will metastasize, as similar decisions have. It will be made to apply to children with more-familiar illnesses and better prognoses; it will be used to dismiss the input of parents whose values and priorities when it comes to medical care and end-of-life issues do not align with those of the state; it may be used simply to clear beds for worthier patients in a health-care system with very limited resources. This, presumably, will be compassionate, too.

Any day now, theyll kill Charlie Gard. But its in his own best interest. Dont you see?

Youll see it a lot, and eventually not just in Europe, either. Socialized medicine requires rationing by the state rather than by private-market forces, and that will be true in the US if we continue to go down the single-payer sinkhole.

Excerpt from:

Single payer and Charlie Gard: When euthanasia becomes a duty - Hot Air

There are red flags. And then there are really big red flags.

Dr. Boudewijn Chabot is considered the patron saint of euthanasia in the Netherlands, which he still supports. But hes now sounding the alarm that the killing has gone too far.

This should be a glaring wakeup call for Americans who are complacent about physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia, or actually support it.

In 1991, Chabot, a geriatric psychiatrist, thumbed his nose at Dutch law and admittedly euthanized a physically healthy 52-year-old social worker. The High Court found him guilty without punishment. Until recently, he had celebrated the sea change ushered in by his deadly action.

He is now singing a different tune after research revealed how many individuals with dementia are being euthanized. The numbers are skyrocketing among this segment of society that has been the central focus of his professional career. Chabot also is alarmed with whos euthanizing them and the process being circumvented to carry it out.

In the past, advocates of euthanasia have touted three important safeguards governing Hollands euthanasia law: 1) a voluntary and deliberate request: 2) an individual with unbearable suffering without the prospect of improvements; and 3) no reasonable alternative to euthanasia is available.

According to Chabot, these so-called safeguards are quickly falling by the wayside. Silently, the very foundation of the law is being eroded, he said.

He offers evidence to prove his point.

Safeguard No. 1 requires that the person who wants to be euthanized provides a verbal, deliberate request. That has now been substituted with a written a letter of intent which can easily be forged or manipulated to represent the patients wishes. The law also doesnt require that the physician administering euthanasia have a therapeutic relationship with the patient, which makes it difficult at best to know if it is a genuine request. Regardless, Chabot doesnt believe a person in the advanced stages of dementia can authentically request euthanasia when they are unaware of what will actually be happening.

Chabot was further concerned to find out that sometimes when permission isnt given, its not needed. If necessary, physical force is used. He cited a doctor who started the euthanasia process by sneaking a sedative into the patients coffee. The patient resisted the lethal injection and family members held her down as he killed her. In the end, the physician still called her a cooperative participant.

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.

Safeguard No. 2 was scrapped in 2012 when the Review Committee stopped questioning doctors who said their euthanasia patients experienced unbearable suffering without a prospect of improvement. Responding to objections, the committee replied, Who are we to question the doctors? Professionals say it is already difficult to effectively judge unbearable suffering with advanced dementia, and nearly impossible without a therapeutic relationship with the patient.

Safeguard No. 3 was summarily discarded when doctors began to allow patients to reject any available alternatives and still qualify for euthanasia.

Chabot points out that the use of nice-sounding euphemisms had been an effective tool to introduce euthanasia in the Netherlands. He compares the process to how the first abortion law was introduced by saying a woman had to be in an emergency situation to get one. It didnt take long before every woman got a requested abortion if she rejected any other solution. Self-determination around the end of life is for many people as important as in the context of abortion, Chabot observed.

Chabots red flags should be an obvious concern for Americans. He writes, One can easily predict that all of this could cause a skyrocketing increase in the number of euthanasia cases and attributes it to the financial dismantling of care.

We have experienced a similar dismantling in the US, particularly in the wake of Obamacare.

Within the jungle of healthcare, insurance companies are at the top of the food chain. In the midst of the jungle, patients struggle to get through the thick vegetation of obstacles planted by insurance providers, when its the patients who should be the priority in the healthcare process.

Individuals living in states that have passed physician assisted suicide laws are most vulnerable. Insurance companies have rejected patients needs for expensive life-saving treatment, while offering to cover the cost of toxic drugs to end their lives.

Learn how to protect yourself with free end-of-life resources.

In the Netherlands, End of Life Clinic Foundation is the Planned Parenthood of the euthanasia industry. They kill patients who have been turned down by their own doctors, many of them suffering from dementia. By 2016 they performed 75 percent of all euthanasia cases involving chronic psychiatric patients. The foundation views euthanasia as virtuous labor. This sounds eerily familiar to Planned Parenthoods Care. No matter what.

The evolution of euthanasia in the Netherlands has caused Chabot to ask, What happens to doctors for whom a deadly injection becomes a monthly routine?

In summary, Chabot asks another question, Where did the euthanasia law go off the tracks? He then provides a clear cut, three-part answer.

1) When the existence of a treatment relationship was no longer required.

2) When patients with dementia were no longer required to make a definitive verbal request.

3) And particularly when the Review Committee concealed the fact that incapacitated people were being surreptitiously killed.

The former full-throated euthanasia activist doesnt see how they can get the genie back into the bottle. But, he says, It would mean a lot if wed acknowledge hes out.

America beware. It didnt take the Netherlands long to advance to their extreme euthanasia policies.

We are already quick on their heels.

Nursing Times magazine reports one in four nurses admits to injecting terminal patients with drugs to speed their dying. Two-thirds want to legalize euthanasia.

The Oregon State Senate recently approved amending their advance directive to in some cases allow withholding food and water from patients with dementia and mental illness against their will. The insurance industry was a chief advocate.

Charles D. Blanke, MD, participates in Oregons physician assisted suicide program. Yet he is surprised by how few of his colleagues (5 percent), first refer patients to psychiatrists. Depression often disqualifies an individual from receiving the lethal drugs.

He is also concerned only 17 percent of these physicians are present during an assisted suicide. Blanke offers himself to all of his patients and 100 percent of them have said yes.

Evidence shows that like abortion, the patient isnt the top priority during the killing process. The question is, can America learn from our friends across the pond before its too late?

LifeNews.com Note: Bradley Mattes is the executive director of Life Issues Institute.

Continue reading here:

He Was Considered the Patron Saint of Euthanasia. Now He's Having Second Thoughts - LifeNews.com

A vocal member of the QandA audience expressed her own feelings on euthanasia in Australia. Courtesy: ABC

William Toffler is touring Australia campaigning against euthanasia. Picture: Facinglife.tv/Youtube

AN ultraconservative, anti-euthanasia campaigner with extreme views on abortion and contraception is this week touring Australia and meeting with senior MPs.

US doctor William Toffler believes abortion can lead to breast cancer, contraception is against Gods plan and suicide is a sin. Now hes here on the dime of a Liberal politician to convince some powerful people not to legalise assisted dying, which has been legal in his home state of Oregon for 20 years.

Im here to educate people its probably not great to make Oregons mistake, he told news.com.au. Theres a shroud of secrecy, its corrupted the practice of medicine, violating the trust between doctors and patients.

The paradigm of situational killing is anathema to end-of-life care.

This is the perfect murder. Its very flawed, very dangerous and impossible to circumscribe.

William Toffler is touring Australia campaigning against euthanasia. Picture: Facinglife.tv/YoutubeSource:YouTube

Dr Toffler who is this week addressing MPs in Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide and Perth says there are no adequate psychiatric tests for people who want to end their lives and that they are not asked whether they have life insurance or who the beneficiary is.

He lists a number of anecdotes about people who did not have appropriate mental health checks, about a woman absconding with her euthanised partners $25,000 and about medical staff failing to administer lethal doses properly.

While the statistics from Oregon indicate all is well, Dr Toffler says thats because cases are not properly investigated.

Victorian MP and Leader of the The Australian Sex Party Fiona Patten told news.com.au Dr Toffler was providing a lot of misinformation and misrepresenting the situation in Oregon.

She said she supported his right to free speech but that he had no evidence to support his theories and she felt he was trying to force his views on others.

Ms Patten said she had visited Oregon, where there had not been one case of litigation, and gained a very different picture from doctors and patients.

Im hoping people look at the evidence and listen to the experts in this area and vote on its merits, she said. I dont think Professor Toffler is very helpful in that respect.

Sex Party leader and Victorian MP Fiona Patten said Dr Toffler was trying to force his views on others. Picture: Mark StewartSource:News Corp Australia

The Catholic Church and Right to Die are very well funded. I know privately an enormous number of MPs would like to see physician assisted dying approved.

We received over 1000 submissions to our inquiry. I dont think anyone with compassion could have heard them and not want to give patients at the end of their lives and suffering some kind of autonomy.

She said the alternatives to assisted dying were often violent suicides, unregulated euthanasia or Dr Tofflers recommendation of sedation, in which patients died of starvation or dehydration.

Polls show around 80 per of Victorians and, it is believed, Australians nationwide support a law for voluntary assisted dying.

Shayne Higson, Vice President of Dying with Dignity, told news.com.au that the law in Oregon had been working safely and effectively for 20 years, supported by the public and medical profession, which was why similar laws are now in place across six states in America.

Hopefully the parliamentarians of Victoria and NSW will not be persuaded by scaremongering, she said. It is a challenge when groups like Right to Life bring people here and put them forward as experts. I dont think Dr Toffler would be considered an expert in Oregon.

Hes Catholic and represents a very small minority of people.

His views are not really credible. Its disappointing that Australians, especially the Victorian Parliament, are going to be exposed to his views. We deserve a better, evidence-based debate.

There is no slippery slope, and no evidence of widespread abuse.

Dr Toffler says that while the law currently only allows assisted dying for terminally ill, mentally competent patients, there is no reason this would not be extended if people were suffering for longer periods of time.

Andrew Irving, holding a photo of wife Marilyn, who passed away after a long illness, at a rally supporting a voluntary assisted dying bill. Picture: Luke BowdenSource:News Corp Australia

Claiming dignity by taking a massive overdose is specious, he said. I was married for 40 years my wife died 13 months ago with cancer of the uterus.

The reality is because my wife and I knew she was going to die there was suffering, but also great joy. Our days together all more special because we knew they were numbered.

I wouldnt trade it for a nanosecond. To say an overdose is dignified, what does it say about my family, my wife, who chose to live her life fully with support from family and doctors?

Many advocates for assisted dying have spoken out against Dr Tofflers visit, which comes as the debate heats up in Australia, particularly in Victoria and NSW, where Voluntary Assisted Dying Bills have been tabled to the state parliaments.

While Premier Daniel Andrews, most of his ministers, the Sex Party and the Greens are in favour of reform, some are not, including such as Deputy Premier James Merlino, Opposition leader Matthew Guy and socially conservative Liberals and crossbenchers.

Anne Gabrielides from NSW is terminally ill and campaigning for the right to die on her own terms.Source:News Corp Australia

A spokesperson from Go Gentle Australia told news.com.au in a statement: Dr Toffler is a controversial member of the religious right and was part of a very small minority in the Oregon Medical Association who opposed a womans right to choose abortion and did so because God told him so. He has publicly aligned himself with the discredited view that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, a view opposed by, among others, the Australian Medical Association, the Cancer Council of Australia and the Breast Cancer Network, Australia.

Toffler is being sponsored in his visit to parliament by Liberal MLC Inga Peulich. Ms Peulich was one of two dissenting votes on the Cross-Parliamentary Inquiry into End-of-Life Choices Committee. Their recommendations (6-2 in favour) laid the groundwork for the voluntary assisted dying bill to go before Parliament later this year.

Along with the other dissenting voice Labor MP Daniel Mulino Ms Peulich chose not to travel with the Committee to Oregon, or other jurisdictions where assisted dying laws exist, to learn how they work.

Instead, she has chosen to sponsor a speech to MPs by a doctor with extreme religious views. A doctor whose opposition to Oregons Death with Dignity law not only predates its existence, but also flies in the face of its widespread acceptance after more than 20 years of operation.

The people of Victoria deserve better from Ms Peulich than the introduction of a religious extremist into this important public health debate.

Here is the original post:

Anti-euthanasia campaigner touring Australia with some very extreme views - NEWS.com.au

Physician-assisted suicide is facing New Yorks high court, with a ruling due sometime this summer. We can already see the inherent doublespeak that is far too common among supporters of legalizing physician-assisted suicide.

In U.S. News & World Report, attorney Edwin Schallert, the representative of an advocacy group known as End of Life Choices New York, literally said, We dont view this as suicide Its a medically and ethically appropriate treatment. Schallert and his associates, as reported in Newsday, prefer to use the term aid in dying.

Here is the problem. Aid in dying implies that the individual requesting the treatment wants to die. The aid that is being procured is the result of that desire. When someone does not request aid in dying but receives aid in dying anyway, we call that euthanasia or murder.

The intent is clearly what differentiates these two situations, and, to be fair, advocates of physician-assisted suicide understand this. Perhaps they do not understand how their policies can be abused to cover up murder, but very few people would ever advocate that any type of aid in dying should be received by someone who does not want to die and did not request that aid.

However, using the language of aid in dying and operating under the assumption that this aid is only to be provided when the individual with the terminal illness explicitly requests it brings the defender of physician-assisted suicide into yet another explicit contradiction about the situational acceptability of suicide.

When a particular individual is requesting aid in dying, presumably this individual is not able to do it him- or herself. Suicide is an epidemic-level problem in our society today, and with productions like 13 Reasons Why influencing teenagers all over our country, it is obvious that many people do commit suicide without any assistance from anyone else.

Again, though, we need to look at the intent of this situation. We consider an intentional, self-inflicted death to be a suicide in all other situations, but in this particular case, Schallert wants to call this particular act anything but a suicide. Therefore, euthanasia advocates chose the much more positive-sounding aid in dying. This is supposed to be seen as something that helps people get where they want to be. For an individual who is voluntarily seeking out physician-assisted suicide, the end target is death.

The previously mentioned contradiction is rather blatant. It says suicide is permissible in certain situations, and we might call it something else, such as aid in dying. However, it is still a form of suicide based on the fact that an individual is seeking to terminate his or her own life. That is the definition we use for suicide in every other context.

Society teaches it is unacceptable for someone to choose to terminate his or her life when he or she is a teenager enduring bullying and sometimes horrific harassment from peers. In these situations, we provide counselors to help these individuals overcome their suicidal tendencies, and this is a good thing without a doubt.

That same society, by affirming physician-assisted suicide, is teaching that it is acceptable for someone to choose to terminate his or her own life, most commonly in cases of terminal illness. The suicidal tendencies in these individuals minds are apparently not wrong as, rather than bring in the professional counselors to try to help these people overcome their suicidal thoughts, they are allowed to act on them. They want to commit suicide, so because of their particular situation in life, it is somehow magically acceptable to basically not bother trying to prevent this decision.

This contradiction is exactly why Schallert and his camp cannot allow physician-assisted suicide to be called suicide, as it really ought to be classified. The minute they admit that it is suicide, they have to answer the above contradiction, and there is no good reason for saying that one life is valuable and worth support while another life is not. There is no legitimate reason for saying that a teenager needs counseling while saying an elderly, terminal cancer patient does not. One life is clearly seen as valuable and worth preserving, while another is not. It is hard to simultaneously affirm that we believe in equality yet not provide everyone the same supports.

How far do you think any type of physician-assisted suicide legislation would get if it were not covered in doublespeak? Proponents speak about being compassionate, but they are actually agents involved in dehumanizing individuals with terminal illness.

For all of the talk about death with dignity, it is interesting that these individuals are deprived of the human dignity we give to any other individual contemplating suicide. Because they have inherent value as human beings, we seek to help them overcome these destructive tendencies and affirm the value in their lives. By acknowledging physician-assisted suicide for the suicide that it really is, we are stripping these individuals of the dignity they naturally deserve. They deserve our best efforts to help them affirm the value of their own life, just like any other individual who seems to be moving towards suicide.

Helping any suicidal individual to choose life is a true affirmation of the dignity of each person no matter what. Aid in dying and its associated euphemisms do just the opposite and destroy human dignity.

Continued here:

Why It's Incoherent To Support Euthanasia And Oppose Suicide - The Federalist

share

pin

email

At 14 years old, Barky, our family dog, had survived cancer and blood disease thanks to a combination of heroic veterinary efforts and just plain good luck. Then, she developed congestive heart failure.

Congestive heart failure is a terrible condition. The dog's heart can't pump blood through the body very well. It leads to coughing, exhaustion, a swollen belly and eventually, the dog's lungs will fill with fluid, and she will essentially feel as if she is drowning in her own body.

Barky at the author's parents' house in Rhode Island

We didn't want Barky to experience a terrifying, painful death. We thought it was kinder for the veterinarian to end her life before that happened peacefully, at home, surrounded by the people who love her.

My family and I were devastated to lose Barky, devastated to think of her dying, and unsure about whether we were making the right choice. Should we wait? Had we already waited too long?

This is the price we pay for loving animals, and for living with animals: being responsible sometimes for deciding when and how to end their lives.

But how do we know how and when to do it, so that we have done right by our pets, and honored their places in our family? TODAY reached out to veterinarians for guidance to help answer some of our deepest and, frankly, sobbiest questions about pet euthanasia.

Generally, the veterinarian will give your pet two shots. The first is a sedative.

"This provides for a gentle transition from consciousness to unconsciousness, and the only sensation a pet will experience following this injection is falling into a deeper and deeper sleep," explained Dr. Shea Cox, a hospice and palliative care specialist with Bridge Veterinary Services in Northern California.

This period will likely last between five and 10 minutes, with the pet falling into a deeper and deeper sleep, "at which time they become no longer aware," said Cox.

When the family is ready, the veterinarian will then administer the second injection. The most common drug used during that stage is pentobarbital, another anesthetic that will cause the pet's heart to slow and then stop.

The injection is given either intravenously, which will bring on death in seconds, or directly into the abdomen, which may take up to 15 minutes and "is more gentle and slow," said Cox but in either case, the pet, having been sedated, will not be aware of this part of the process.

The only discomfort the pet should experience throughout is a possible pinch when the first injection is given. This is in keeping, Cox said, with the true meaning of the word "euthanasia," coming "from the Greek word euthanatos, which means 'good death.'"

People often ask Dr. Dani McVety, founder of the home-based veterinary hospice and euthanasia service Lap of Love, when is the "right" time for euthanasia. She prefers the term "best," instead.

McVety feels this word better encompasses the truth, that there is usually no 100 percent, objectively correct time for euthanasia. Rather, "we, together, are making the best decision that we could make," she said.

Barky was very loving and patient even when some people insisted in dressing her up like a babushka.

Deciding when to end a pet's life involves the owner and their veterinarian weighing a number of factors: the animal's current quality of life, what type of disease he or she may be suffering from and how it is likely to progress. Another consideration is what the family is able to endure; if they want every possible second with their pet and will undergo expensive or uncertain treatments, or if they want to forestall their pet's suffering.

If the pet has a condition like congestive heart failure, or untreatable brain cancer a disease that will, unchecked, lead to a painful death the recommendation may be for euthanasia sooner instead of later.

Even then, by and large, your pet won't tell you for sure that it's time; don't expect a clear-as-day sign to let you know. "Theres a subjective period of time in which euthanasia is a good decision," said McVety.

It's important that you and your vet can have open, honest conversations about euthanasia, to help guide this hard part of the process.

"In general, I also tell people to trust their instincts. They know their pets better than anyone," said Dr. Lisa Lippman, a house-call veterinarian in New York City. "Are they eating? Do they get up to greet you like normal? No matter what any veterinarian says, they know their pet best."

It's normal for your pet to have good and bad days, toward the end. Texas veterinarian Dr. Fiona McCord, founder of Compassionate Care Pet Services, stresses that owners shouldn't feel as if they have done something wrong if the euthanasia takes place on a day their pet is feeling well.

"I would much rather somebody plan we had a good day, went to the park, came home, had the ice cream sandwiches and we let that pet go than to say, 'OK, lets play it day by day,' and suddenly I get a call, 'My dog is in distress, can you come today?'" she said. "Its OK to be a good day. There is no perfect time. Nobody will ever know the perfect time."

Some veterinarians specialize in at-home euthanasia, or incorporate that into their practice. Being at home means not having to get a sick pet into the car, not having to bring them to the veterinarian's office, which may be associated with anxiety or pain.

"Allowing a pets final moments to be spent in their familiar home setting, surrounded by the comforts and smells they have known all their life, is a final gift we can give," said Cox.

The price varies widely among veterinarians and clinics. Some vets may not charge at all for euthanasia, only for cremation services. Lap of Love's Tampa Bay location charges $250 for the euthanasia itself, with additional costs for cremation. Other veterinarians have quoted prices of double and even triple that amount. You'll have to ask your vet about prices.

When the procedure cannot be done in your home, your veterinarian may have a back entrance and quiet room set aside for euthanasia, so that you and your pet can avoid the loud waiting room. In that case, Dr. Michael Dix of the Jacksonville Veterinary Hospital in Oregon suggests bringing along "their favorite toy, bed or blanket with the pet when the actual euthanasia is taking place."

"It is also nice for people to give special things to their pet as the time nears," Dix said. "This may be a special treat, like ice cream or hot dogs. Not too much, though, as they can get uncomfortable."

The most important thing is to help your pet feel calm and not increase their stress, says Dr. Katy Nelson, a veterinarian with Belle Haven Animal Medical Centre in Alexandria, Virginia, and host of "The Pet Show With Dr. Katy."

For example, if your pet wears a collar, leave it on until they have passed, since "taking it off can be excitatory," Nelson said.

And stay with your pet through the process and to the end. "While it may be hard, it would be harder knowing that the last face that your precious one saw was that of a stranger," said Nelson. "Theyve always been there for you in life. Be there for them in death."

You may feel comforted by being able to celebrate and honor your pet at the different stages of this process.

For example, perhaps you have sufficient opportunity to prepare, create and then go out and fulfill a bucket list of experiences for your pet. Or revisit their favorite places, and give them their favorite foods.

Then on the day of, you can try to have people and things around you that will foster a peaceful and meaningful experience. McCord recalls an elderly Labrador retriever whose owner invited several friends to come to her house to be there for the dog's euthanasia.

The group had flowers, lit candles and sang. The owner's friends "read a couple of really awesome poems. They did a little prayer," said McCord. "This then allows that person to deal with this death in whatever way is appropriate for them."

Your veterinarian may cry with you. In fact, it's common enough for this to happen that there's a kind of rule of thumb that the vet should ensure not to cry harder than the pet's owner.

For McVety, even with the sadness, what she mainly feels is that it is "an honor" to be part of a family's life during this time.

Cox shares this perspective. "While it is true that the nature of the appointment is a situation of sadness and loss, there is no other time in my relationship with that pet and family that is more impactful and meaningful than those moments we spend together," she said. "To be able to make a final journey as meaningful as the life lived is not just a gift to the pet and family, but a gift to me."

You have a lot of options as to what you want to do with your pet's body after euthanasia.

Your veterinarian can tell you about pet cremation services available in your area. You will generally have to specify if you want your pet cremated alone, and for their ashes to be returned to you.

There are countless urns and other specialty memorials you can buy for containing your pet's ashes. A chain of pet funeral homes called The Pet Loss Center is currently expanding through Texas and Florida; other similar operations may be opening in your city. In some jurisdictions it is legal to bury your pet in your backyard, and in some others, you can even make arrangements for you and your pet to be (eventually) buried together in a cemetery.

But before all that, many veterinarians will allow you to spend time alone with your deceased pet in the room at their animal hospital if that's where the euthanasia occurred, or in your home before the veterinarian takes away their body. McCord said she's even had pet owners ask for their pet's body to be left at home overnight.

"Thats OK; we dont have to push bodies away or hide them or cover them up the minute they passed," she said.

McVety recommends saving a lock of your pet's fur, and keeping their collar, especially if you have other animals at home. They will smell these tokens, and it will help them grieve, too.

"They dont grieve in a human way, so we cant expect them to act the same way that we do. But they get the circle of life better than we do," she said. "They understand this. Were the ones that have a problem with it. So even watching your pet and how they get through the process is, I think, such a great example for us humans on how we can continue moving forward in life in a moment-by-moment basis."

Be sure, finally, to give yourself time and space to grieve. Consider joining a pet loss support group. A pet's death can be as traumatic and difficult as the loss of a human family member.

"It is not a sign of weakness to love a pet," Nelson said. "And its certainly not a sign of weakness to mourn their loss."

Barky was spoiled rotten until her last day.

It was about five years ago now that I flew to Rhode Island where my parents live, and where they had taken such good care of our beloved dog to see Barky one last time.

Barky's final day was bright and sunny. We spent hours outside with her in her favorite spot in the yard, so she could keep a good eye on all invading squirrels. Her face was white with age, her fur was warm from the sun. We gave Barky as many biscuits as she wanted to eat.

When the vet arrived that afternoon, my parents and I sat with Barky on the couch where she'd napped so many hundreds of times that there were dog-sized white spots worn into the otherwise tan leather. My brother and his wife, who were living in Turkey at the time, joined us by Skype.

After a long time of saying goodbye, while my family and me cried into Barky's fur, the veterinarian administered the shots. We hugged her and told her we loved her as she left us. Maybe there are things we might have done differently today, given the chance. We did our best.

My mom claims to still hear Barky walking around the house from time to time. I still think of her daily. Sometimes I sit my other pets down and tell them about their Auntie Barky.

They never really pay attention, but it makes me feel better to say it.

Follow this link:

What veterinarians wished you knew before euthanizing your pet - Today.com

Hospice veterinarian Dr. Jessica Vogelsang became acutely aware of her communication shortcomings when she had to explain euthanasia to her own childrenan experience that completely transformed how she now counsels parents in the same situation.

My favorite situations are when you have kids whove been prepared early on and who want to go through some sort of ceremony beforehandmaybe theyll write a letter or light some candlesand youll just see them really involved in the process. Its beautiful for them, and its absolutely astonishing to watch the calming effect it has on the parents. Jessica Vogelsang, DVM (Shutterstock.com)As a hospice veterinarian at Paws into Grace in San Diego, California, Jessica Vogelsang, DVM, is an expert when it comes to end-of-life veterinary care. But until somewhat recently, she wasnt so skilled at having euthanasia conversations with kids.

My shortcomings were revealed when I had to explain euthanasia to my own upset and confused kids, says Dr. Vogelsang. I had no idea what I was doing. Pulling from my Catholic school background, I tried to explain the concept of heaven, to which my son responded, Whos Kevin, and why does he have our dog? (Dr. Vogelsang later drew on that experience when she published her first book.)

It became painfully clear to Dr. Vogelsang that she wasnt doing clients any favors by giving them her default how-to-tell-the-kids advice: Tell them whatever feels right. Her clients didnt know what was right. They didnt know where to start or what was appropriate. They needed more concrete guidance.

Dr. Vogelsangs first piece of advice is to start early. As soon as you know a pet has a terminal illness, start talking about the end-of-life process, she says. Plant the seed by saying, I know you have kids. Have you thought about how you want to handle telling them? Most people wait until the day of the euthanasia to talk to their children, which is a difficult time to start laying the groundwork.

The next step is to provide tools, like this handout on general communication tips, age-specific advice and ideas for celebrating and memorializing pets. Help parents see they have an opportunity to teach and model appropriate grieving to their children, who may be encountering bereavement for the first time.

My favorite situations are when you have kids whove been prepared early on and who want to go through some sort of ceremony beforehandmaybe theyll write a letter or light some candlesand youll just see them really involved in the process. Its beautiful for them, and its absolutely astonishing to watch the calming effect it has on the parents, says Dr. Vogelsang.

You dont always have the luxury of planting a seed early on, but you can still be ready to provide advice and support on the day of the euthanasia. If you end up being the one to break the news to a child, the same general communication tips from this handout apply. Dont sugarcoat whats happening with vague expressions like, Spot is going to sleep for a long time. Say, Ive done everything I can do, but Spot wont get better. I will give him a shot that stops his heart from beating. He wont feel any pain.

Explain to parents that up until almost age 5, kids are typically more in tune with their parents emotions than their own, says Dani McVety, DVM, owner ofLap of Love Veterinary Hospice and In-Home Euthanasiain Lutz, Florida. They may not want their child present during the euthanasia so they can experience their emotions in full without worrying about their childs interpretation.

Dr. Vogelsang has a box of crafts on hand for every euthanasia appointment where children are present. Its full of things children can do to express themselves and stay occupied, like collage, drawing and letter-writing materials and bubbles. I let them pick what feels most comforting, she says.

A peek into Dr. Jessica Vogelsang's box of crafts for euthanasia appointments. (Image courtesy of Dr. Jessica Vogelsang.)According to Dr. McVety, Teenagers can be one of the most difficult age ranges to talk to because they have an altruistic view of society and want to fight through whats happening. I try to talk to the teenager directly because you can see parents get very defensiveparticularly when theyre already grieving.

Dr. McVety tries to meet teenagers where they are by saying something like, I understand you feel like were giving up. But lets talk about what we cant do and what we can do. We cant keep coming back to the emergency room. We cant risk a potentially difficult passing. We can provide the most peaceful euthanasia, and thats why Im here.

Helping parents and children in this way may seem difficult to juggle in addition to your other tasks, but Vogelsang sees it as a veterinarians duty: If we are asking people to take on the responsibility of making this decision for their pets, we owe it to them to provide tools to manage the emotions involved. (We also owe it to clients to help them know when it's time. Here's a client-facing video that can help owners navigate this difficult decision).

See the original post here:

When a child's BFF can't live up to its title: Talking to kids about euthanasia - dvm360

A Welsh professor of palliative medicine and cross-bench member of the House of Lords has arrived in New Zealand to challenge David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill.

Ilora Finlay says that the End of Life Choice Bill is dangerous because it isn't at all restrictive. Photo: RBZ

The ACT leader's euthanasia bill was pulled from the members' ballot earlier this month to go before Parliament.

The End of Life Choice Bill would allow for assisted dying in cases where people are terminally ill but still mentally sound.

Ilora Finlay said that going by what had happened in Oregon and Belgium, the legalisation of assisted suicide in New Zealand would lead to 120 cases a year, while legalising euthanasia would lead to around 1200.

Baroness Finlay said Mr Seymour's bill was dangerous.

"It isn't restrictive at all, it also goes beyond physician-assisted suicide and it goes to euthanasia, but you do fundamentally change the relationship between the doctor and the patient when you go down that road."

Ilora Finlay will take part in a public panel discussion at Parliament on Wednesday.

Read the original:

ACT's euthanasia bill 'dangerous' - professor - Radio New Zealand

26 Jun 2017, 7:08 a.m.

Your morning wrap of news, sport, and weather around Sydney.

Goodmorning and welcome to the Morning Buzz for Monday, June 26. Its set to be sunny today,withexpected highs of about 18degrees.Enjoy your day!

Dr Anne Jaumees, an anaesthetist based in western Sydney. A poll of doctors and nurses into what they think about euthanasia has just been conducted. Photo: Dominic Lorrimer

Most NSW doctors and nurses support a controversial medical euthanasia bill headed for Parliament, according to research that could prompt new debateabout the medical fraternity's willingness to accept changes to assisted suicide laws.

A bill, to allow patients to apply for medically assisted euthanasia in specific circumstances when older than 25 (an age when informed consent is deemed reached), will be introduced to the NSW upper house in August for a conscience vote.Read more.

ATO scandal claims first scalp as controversial lawyer Sevag Chalabian quits the profession

Sevag Chalabian has quietly quit the legal profession. Photo: Daniel Munoz

Controversial lawyer Sevag Chalabian, who has been accused of involvement in a blackmail which resulted in $24 million going into his trust account, has quietly quit the legal profession.

Mr Chalabian, 47, was named in recent court documents in connection with what is alleged to be the nation's largest tax fraud. Read more,

A man has been charged with a number of offencesfollowing an eight-hour standoff with policein Newtown on Sunday.

A 38-year-old man allegedly broke into a house on Church Street before climbing from a second-storey balcony on to the roof at around 9.15am.According to police, he then started throwingbricks andtiles at police, pedestrians and cars below. Read more.

Kaufland is believed to need at least 15 to 20 stores to make its Australian investment viable . Photo: Supplied

German discount department store Kauflandhas demonstrated its commitment to expanding in Australia by inking deals to buy land.

Kaufland is part of the Schwarz Group, one of the world's largest retailers, which also owns discount supermarket Lidl. Read more.

Witnesses saw the woman dragged into a car, which has been captured on CCTV. Photo: NSW Police

Police are appealing for people to come forward after a woman was allegedly dragged into a car on Saturday morning.

Witnesses have told police they saw thewoman being dragged by a male into a white Holden Rodeo ute that was stopped at an intersection in Blackett, in Sydney's west.Police were alerted by residents who heard the woman screaming for help and beeping a car horn. Read more.

Police have raised their first Facebook AMBER Alert to help locate missing girl Milena Malkic.

The first alert comesaday after the national roll-out of the system, which police describe asa vital toolto find and return abducted children.

Urgent information appears on a person's Facebook feed if they are within 160 kilometres of where the child goes missing or is suspected to be. Read more.

Group 4 boss Mick Schmiedel. Photo: Supplied

A plain-talking country rugby league boss has bemoaned the dramatic drop in junior league players graduating to the senior ranks and has laid the blame on "lazy" parents and "soft" children.

With the Group 4 rugby league competition in northern NSW in danger of becoming a wasteland in the under-16 and under-18 ranks, president Mick Schmiedel, a former long-standing player who is a veteran administrator and coach, said parents needed to get "off the couch" and get their kids involved in league.

"I put the blame, and they won't like this, squarely at mums and dads," he said. Read more.

Tough going: Sharks prop Andrew Fifita made little impact against the dominant Manly pack. Picture: Chris Lane

It was billed as one of the games of the round. Two bitter arch rivals in front ofa packed house for Sunday afternoon footy in the shire.

Unfortunately, the clash between the high-flying Sea Eagles andthe reigning premiers was almost over before it began.

Manly ran in three tries in the opening quarter to blow Cronulla away at Southern Cross Group Stadium on Sunday, with the Sea Eagles eventually running out deserved 35-18 winners. Read more.

What a comeback: St George Illawarra came from 18 points down at half-time to beat Newcastle at Kogarah on Sunday. Picture: Chris Lane

St George Illawarra produced 22 unanswered second half points as they launcheda stunning comeback to score a 32-28 win over Newcastle.

The Dragons were booed off at half-time trailing 28-10 to the second-last placed Knights at UOW Jubilee Oval, Kogarah on Sunday.

But St George Illawarra produced their second best comeback in club history to snap a two-game losing run and strengthen their place in the top eight. Read more.

Jarrad McVeigh is a chance to return for the Swans match against Melbourne on Friday night. Photo: Steve Christo

Former captain Jarrad McVeighis pressing hard for a senior recall with the resurgent Sydney facing several big selection calls as it pushes for a remarkable finals berth.

And youngster Isaac Heeney has a blunt warning for the Swans' next opponent, Melbourne: bring it on.

Rocked by injuries to their senior ranks early in the season, the Swansare closing in on a clean bill of health heading into Friday night's vital clash with the in-form Demons at the MCG. Read more.

See the original post here:

Morning Buzz: Sydney news, traffic and weather for Monday, June 26 - Blue Mountains Gazette