It's election time, so what do you need to know and what's different this time around?

Your playlist will load after this ad

Politicians are spending their last week at Parliament before hitting the campaign trail full time, 1 NEWS political reporter Maiki Sherman reports. Source: 1 NEWS

Stand by for the glad-handing and the selfies, as politicians are spending their last week at Parliament before hitting the campaign trail.

Expect a lot more billboards and election hoardings to go up - but while the election's in your face, the date doesn't seem to be as well advertised.

Advance voting begins on September 5 and goes through until Election Day on September 19; all voting ends at 7pm that night.

It gives voters a two-week window to have their say, with 750 advance voting booths open in the first week and ramping up to 1500 in the second week.

"What we wanted to do was to pull voting forward because there were quite a few queues on voting day, and so on the weekend before on the 12th and the 13th we'll be in those communities across New Zealand," chief electoral officer Alicia Wright told 1 NEWS.

For the first time, that'll include voting booths at three mosques, including in Christchurch.

"Any location you can have that is part of their lives, part of their everyday routine, if someone can just go and vote at that convenient location it just means that they're more likely to vote," politics lecturer Lara Greaves says.

At the last election, the number of people enrolled to vote was around 3.3 million. More than 2.5 million cast their vote, for a turnout rate of 80 per cent.

More than a million voters, around 47 per cent, voted early.

Politicians are raring to go.

"We are putting New Zealanders first and we are putting our country first and that's what people are going to see," National leader Judith Collins says.

"You are going to see a very strong game and I'll be everywhere."

Meanwhile,Labour leader and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is also getting ready.

"The public will continue to hear our plan for the Covid recovery and rebuild and we're asking to keep going. We already have momentum with our five-point plan," she says.

Prisoners serving a sentence of less than three years will now be able to vote, and arrangements are underway for Kiwis in managed isolation.

"We'll be working with the NZDF and MBIE on how we do that in a way that's safe," Ms Wright says.

Around half a million New Zealanders eligible to vote still haven't enrolled; half of them are under the age of 30.

And while Covid-19 means bringing your own pen to the voting booth, it also means voting at the supermarket is no longer possible.

"We're really disappointed about that but what we needed to do was ensure that we had places that were large enough so that people could do that physical distancing," Ms Wright says.

There are also two referendums on the ballot this year -legalising cannabis and euthanasia - giving voters plenty to think about.

View original post here:

What you need to know as election season kicks off - 1News

The acquittal of two right-to-die activists who aided in the suicide of a person suffering from multiple sclerosis may force the Italian government to legalize assisted suicide in the country.

A court in the Tuscan province of Massa-Carrara ruled July 27 to acquit Mina Welby and Marco Cappato for helping Davide Trentini commit suicide in April 2017 at Dignitas, a physician-assisted suicide clinic in Switzerland.

The court judged that no crime was committed by Welby and Cappato because they did not instigate Trentinis suicide.

The day after helping Trentini commit suicide, Welby and Cappato turned themselves over to Italian authorities in a strategic move that seeks to challenge Italys penal code which prohibits euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide.

According to Article 580 of the Italian penal code, assisting or convincing someone to commit suicide is punishable with a sentence between five and 12 years if the suicide occurs, or between one to five years if it does not occur but results in serious or very serious personal injury.

In December, the Italian Constitutional Court delayed a decision that would determine the constitutionality of Article 580. Euthanasia advocates believe that the recent acquittal will help push the court to legalize physician-assisted suicide in the country.

The acquittal mirrors a similar ruling in 2019 involving Cappato after he was acquitted in the assisted suicide of an Italian DJ at the same facility in Switzerland.

In that case, the judge ruled that assisted suicide cannot be punished if the patient requesting to die is kept alive by life support, suffering from an irreversible pathology that causes physical and mental suffering, is receiving palliative care and is still able to make a free and informed decision.

Both Cappato and Welby are members of the Luca Coscioni Association, an organization that advocates the legalization of physician-assisted suicide in Italy.

According to Italian news agency ANSA, the Coscioni Association helped an estimated 268 people commit suicide and has accompanied three people to the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland.

Throughout his papacy, Pope Francis has denounced euthanasia, including at a meeting with doctors and dental surgeons in September.

The pope urged medical professionals to reject the temptation also induced by legislative changes to use medicine to support a possible willingness to die of the patient, providing assistance to suicide or directly causing death by euthanasia.

These are hasty ways of dealing with choices that are not, as they might seem, an expression of the persons freedom, when they include discarding of the patient as a possibility, or a false compassion in the face of a request to be helped to cause death, he said.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, euthanasia constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his creator.

The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded, the catechism states.

Read the rest here:

Controversial verdict may force legalization of assisted suicide in Italy - Grandin Media

Saturday, 25 July 2020, 6:38 pmPress Release: Right To Life

Right to Life commends David Seymour, the architect andsponsor of the End of Life Choice Act for insisting that thepublic be given accurate information on the purpose of hislegislation. He stated on TVNZ One News on Tuesday 21stJuly, his concern that there was a danger that what hewrongly considered inaccurate important questions in arecent poll by Horizon could misinform theelectorate.

Right to Life supports David Seymour inhis desire to ensure that voters are fully informed on thelegislation that will empower doctors to give a lethalinjection to their patients or assist in theirsuicide.

Right to Life believes that David Seymourwould be greatly distressed to learn that a poll conductedby Curia marketing in 2017 found that the MAJORITY OFRESPONDENTS THOUGHT THAT THE End of Life Choice Bill wouldprovide options that were already legal.

85%thought that it included turning off life support

79% thought it includes do not resuscitate (no CPR)requests

67% thought it includes the stopping ofmedical tests, treatments and surgeries.

Similarresults were found in polls conducted in 2015 and2019.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about, nordoes it make legal the action of turning off life support,to make a 'do not resuscitate request (no CPR) or to stopmedical treatment. All of these end of life choices arealready legal, are not euthanasia and this new law, ifpassed, will not change these actions.

The End of LifeChoice Act is NOT about pain relief. Its already legalfor a doctor to give a person enough medication to addresstheir pain and make them comfortable, even if this mayhasten their death as a side effect as the doctor seeks toneither hasten or cause the death of his patient.

Thispoll demonstrates that the public is not yet aware of thecontent and meaning of the End of Life Choice Act. Webelieve that in order to have a fully informed publicreferendum on this critical issue of allowing doctors togive patients a lethal injection or to assist in theirsuicide it is essential that the above information be widelypublicised by the media and shown on the governmentreferendum web site.

Right to Life believes that DavidSeymour, who is a passionate advocate for choice has aserious duty to the community to make a public statement tothe media confirming that the EOLCA does not provide any ofthe above options. We believe that David Seymour would begreatly distressed if voters voted yes for the euthanasiareferendum in the mistaken belief that the legislationprovided for the above options which are already ethical,legal and have been available for many years.

Right toLife requests that the media, which are at the service ofthe community seek from David Seymour his confirmation thatthe above options are not provided for in the End of LifeChoiceAct.

Scoop Media

Become a member Find out more

Read this article:

Right To Life Seeks Informed Debate On Euthanasia Referendum - Scoop.co.nz

Her veterinarian insists she needs rabies vaccination. Why is this necessary, if shes a committed homebody?

A: BarB should be vaccinated for rabies to protect herself and you from the deadly disease.

In the U.S., the cat is the domestic animal that most often tests positive for rabies, and the bat is the most commonly infected wildlife species.

Rabid bats bite indoor cats if they meet on the balcony or when the bat enters the home through a torn window screen or flies down the chimney. Some indoor cats are bitten when they escape for even a short time from the home or car.

If BarBs rabies vaccination isnt current and she is exposed to a rabies-infected animal, your county and state laws dictate what follows. That step may range from a stressful and expensive monthslong quarantine, usually at an animal shelter or veterinary hospital, to euthanasia.

If she bites you, a veterinary staff member or a visitor in your home, the stakes are even higher.

Thats to prevent BarB from transmitting rabies to humans, where the disease causes a gruesome death.

Globally, 59,000 people die every year from rabies. In the U.S., most human cases result from a bat bite inside the home.

In January 2020, the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association published the most recent analysis of rabies data, the reports from 2018, when three people in this country died of rabies.

That January, a 6-year-old Florida boy died after having been bitten by a bat. In August, a 69-year-old Delaware woman died of racoon rabies, despite no known contact. In November, a 55-year-old Utah man died of bat rabies.

Like other people bitten by bats, the man didnt know hed been bitten while shooing bats from his house. If he wasnt aware of the bite, you know BarB wont alert you if a bat ever bites her.

So, keep her rabies vaccination current, even though shes always indoors.

Q: Our veterinarian diagnosed our dog Crew with epilepsy and prescribed medication, which has significantly decreased the frequency and severity of his seizures. About the only time Crew has a seizure is soon after someone visits our home. Is this unusual?

A: Many humans with epilepsy recognize that certain factors, most notably stress but also sleep deprivation, infectious disease and hormonal changes, can precipitate seizures.

The same is true in dogs, where epilepsy is the most common neurologic disorder.

In a recent study, veterinarians questioned families of 50 epileptic dogs about factors that precipitated their seizures. The researchers learned that lifestyle events and whether the dog was sterilized played a role.

Seizures occurred in 42% of females during their heat cycles and in 33% of unsterilized males exposed to a female dog in heat. So, its important to sterilize any dog diagnosed with epilepsy.

Other factors that elicited seizures were visitors to the home (in 30% of dogs); a change in the dogs life situation (27%); changes in the daily routine, altered sleep patterns or going to an unfamiliar place (24%); hot weather (22%); stress or excitement (21%); fear (19%); and intense exercise or illness (16%).

Minimizing whatever precipitating factors affect the individual dog can help improve seizure control.

So, let your veterinarian know about Crews increased seizure frequency when people visit. Your vet may prescribe an additional medication you can give Crew to decrease anxiety and seizures when visitors are expected.

Lee Pickett, VMD, practices companion animal medicine in North Carolina. Contact her at https://askthevet.pet.

View post:

Ask the Vet: Even indoor cats need rabies vaccination - Indianapolis Business Journal

Alexandra Palace is one of Londons most formidable live music venues, looming elegantly over the city. Its strange to know that at some point over the past few weeks, Nick Cave and his crew secretly booked it out to film this spectacular one-man piano performance, a ticketed virtual gig which streamed for one-time only. You know like an actual gig.

And if you happened to spend your Thursday night trying to cast your laptop to your telly so you didnt have to watch the whole thing squinting at a small computer screen, then youll know just how special and unrepeatable this gig, dubbed Idiot Prayer, truly was.

With the Bad Seeds presumably still on furlough, a solo Cave delivers up a career-spanning set with a couple of Grinderman songs thrown in for good measure, one brand new song and a whole lot of his 1997 PJ Harvey break-up album The Boatmans Call. In an ink-black Gucci suit, the Seed-less Cave opens the film by striding through the empty venue as the lyrics to last years Spinning Song are recited in voiceover.

That kind of dramatic opener should be no surprise, but to see the usually heaving, 11,000 capacity Ally Pally totally empty is so disconcerting that it manages to elevate the isolation many of us have been feeling over the past five months into something otherworldly. When he finally arrives in the main room, it looks more like the lavish Palace of Versailles than it does the home of the yearly Christmas piss-up that is the World Darts Championship.

Unlike Jarvis Cockers JARV IS show from earlier this week another pre-recorded COVID-induced concert film, that one recorded in a cave in Derbyshire Cave doesnt have the beauty of nature to fall back on. Neither does he have flashy lazers, a many limbed band, backing singers and tried-and-tested finger-pointing dance moves at his disposal. Rather than deliver spoken intros and Cockers disarmingly casual chatter, Cave doesnt utter a word throughout. Instead we have title cards which arrive at the start of each song, announcing their name as if we were watching a silent movie.

His glossy black grand piano rings out powerful and pure as his fingers, heavy with thick gold rings, put it through its paces, digging deep into the weighty likes of fan favourites The Mercy Seat, Jubilee Street, Brompton Oratory, Into My Arms and The Ship Song. Discarding papers scrawled with lyrics to the floor after each track might seem a poetic affectation, but this is the only clutter here.

Without crowds, chatter and the mess of thousands of human bodies all bumping up against each other, its possible to focus purely on Caves devastating lyricism: religion, death and romance all getting their chance to shine in the golden and purple lights that softly illuminate the room. In this setting perhaps the biggest revelation is the low-key take on surrealist Grinderman love song Palaces of Montezuma, which offers up the most cheering moment of this overly sombre hour-and-a-half.

Bearing a title bleak even for such a prince of darkness, new song Euthanasia slots in gracefully to the deeply emotive 21-song set. I look for you underneath the damp earth / I look for you in the night sky, croons Cave, grief-stricken. But there is hope here too and an eventual feeling of acceptance, of coming-to-terms with it all: In losing it all I found myself / Found myself in time.

Finishing with a stark but lovely Galleon Ship the only full song to be taken from 2019s harrowing Ghosteen tonight Cave stands and silently trots off towards a shaft of light coming in through an open door. He might still be alone, but after a performance like that, were with him all the way.

Nick Cave played:

Idiot Prayer

Sad Waters

Brompton Oratory

Palaces of Montezuma

Girl in Amber

Man in the Moon

Nobodys Baby Now

(Are You) The One That Ive Been Waiting For?

Waiting for You

The Mercy Seat

Euthanasia

Jubilee Street

Far From Me

He Wants You

Higgs Boson Blues

Stranger Than Kindness

Into My Arms

The Ship Song

Papa Wont Leave You, Henry

Black Hair

Galleon Ship

More:

Nick Cave live in London: the breathtaking Idiot Prayer is an exorcism of death, religion and romance - NME

A sedative was detected in the body of a terminally ill Kyoto woman who was allegedly killed by two doctors with her consent, investigative sources said Saturday.

The Kyoto Prefectural Police believe the two doctors, both men, were paid to inject barbiturate sedatives into her gastric fistula, a device used to guide food directly to the stomach.

According to medical sources, the sedative is used to treat epilepsy patients and is not sold on the market. The drug, which has strong side effects and causes dependence syndrome, can suppress breathing and lead to death if injected in large quantities. It is used by suicide-support groups in Europe and the United States.

A prescription is required to buy the drug but doctors can obtain it easily, the sources said. The sedative comes in two varieties, one that takes immediate effect and another that works gradually. The former has been used to conduct euthanasia and capital punishment in the United States. Both come in multiple forms ranging from tablets and powders to injectable solutions and are used often by doctors to induce deep sleep, for example.

Investigative sources said Yuri Hayashi, 51, who had the progressive neurological disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis also known as Lou Gehrigs disease, used a gastric fistula.

The two doctors, Yoshikazu Okubo, who runs a clinic in Natori, Miyagi Prefecture, and Naoki Yamamoto, a doctor in Tokyo, were arrested Thursday on suspicion of assisting death by administering Hayashi a lethal drug with her consent.

The doctors allegedly got together in the city of Kyoto on the day of her death last November and visited Hayashi at her condominium by pretending to be her acquaintances.

They left about five to 10 minutes later, and the caretaker found Hayashi unconscious soon after. She was transported to a hospital, where she died.

The police opened an investigation after an unfamiliar substance was found in her body. The police believe the doctors made thorough preparations on the day she died so they could leave the scene quickly.

The two were school acquaintances. Yamamoto is suspecgted of writing an electronic book about technology that can be used to let people die without signs of foul play, and the police are investigating the details, including how the book was published.

ALS is an uncurable disease that causes gradual paralysis. There are about 10,000 ALS patients in Japan.

Originally posted here:

Sedative found in body of Kyoto ALS patient who sought medically assisted suicide - The Japan Times

Kyoto prefectural police concluded that the death of a patient with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) could not be regarded as euthanasia and arrested two doctors on suspicion of murder on July 23.

Yoshikazu Okubo, 42, who operates a medical clinic in Natori, Miyagi Prefecture, and Naoki Yamamoto, 43, a doctor residing in Tokyos Minato Ward, are accused of murdering Yuri Hayashi, 51.

Police have not divulged whether the two doctors are admitting to the allegations.

Hayashis blog contained posts that expressed her desire to stop living with a condition that required around-the-clock care. She is believed to have contacted the two doctors through social media.

According to the July 23 announcement by Kyoto prefectural police, the two doctors went to Hayashis residence in Kyotos Nakagyo Ward at about 5:30 p.m. on Nov. 30, 2019, and injected her with a drug that is believed to have killed her.

The two doctors told the care helper who was at the Hayashi residence that they were acquaintances of the woman, police said.

According to investigative sources, Hayashi was in stable condition until the visit by the two doctors. When the care helper realized something was wrong, Hayashis attending physician was contacted and an emergency phone call made.

Kyoto police started their investigation after the autopsy detected a drug that Hayashi did not normally take.

Police decided it was a case of murder, not euthanasia, because the two doctors were not the womans attending physician and they had received payment from Hayashi before meeting her.

They confirmed that Yamamoto received about 1.5 million yen ($14,100) from someone representing Hayashi.

An anonymous Twitter account believed to belong to Okubo contained posts about helping people painlessly achieve their desire to die despite the negative ramifications for the doctor later.

Okubos wife, Miyo, a former Lower House member, met with reporters on July 23 in front of her husbands medical clinic and said he often made short trips outside Miyagi Prefecture to conduct medical treatment.

A 1995 Yokohama District Court ruling that found a doctor guilty of murder by administering potassium chloride to a patient suffering from late-stage cancer laid out four conditions under which a doctor would not be held liable for murder.

The four conditions were: Death was unavoidable and fast approaching; the patient was suffering from unbearable physical pain; all efforts had been made to alleviate the pain; and the patient clearly indicated his or her intention to be euthanized.

Kyoto police concluded that none of those conditions was met in Hayashis case.

According to the blog believed to be Hayashis, she developed ALS in 2011 and subsequently moved to the Kansai region from Tokyo. She made the posts by gazing at a display panel containing a computer keyboard.

In one post, she recalled being dressed after receiving assistance with her bath.

I cannot do anything for myself so I have to wonder how I am protecting myself as an individual human, she wrote.

The last post was dated July 28, 2019: I always feel dissatisfied that doctors of palliative care only focus on cancer patients when debating euthanasia.

Investigative sources said that the anonymous Twitter account believed to be Okubos had a number of posts about euthanasia in November 2019 when Hayashi died.

Okubo is also believed to have posted to another blog, saying he had set up a hospice at his medical clinic to care for cancer patients and those suffering from incurable diseases.

In other posts to the blog, Okubo wrote about the often-conflicting messages he received from patients who wanted to discontinue painful treatments and their family members who asked that everything be done to extend the patients life.

Here is the original post:

Doctors accused of murdering ALS patient who wanted to die : The Asahi Shimbun - Asahi Shimbun

Thursday, July 23, 2020 11:32 p.m. EDT by Thomson Reuters

By Praveen Menon

WELLINGTON (Reuters) - New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's hopes for an easy win in September elections thanks to her success in eliminating COVID-19 have been checked by the emergence of a new opposition leader known to friend and foe alike as Crusher.

Judith Collins was elected only last week to lead the National Party as it reels from a series of leadership changes and scandals that have it trailing in the latest opinion polls, with 38% support against 50% for Ardern's Labour Party.

She has wasted no time in making an impact, booting out a party colleague for sending a lewd image to a woman and going public with an allegation which led to the sacking of the immigration minister for having an inappropriate relationship.

Nicknamed Crusher after she brought in a law as police minister in 2009 allowing for illegal street racers' cars to be confiscated and destroyed, Collins said she preferred to be known for her determination to build a more vibrant economy.

"I prefer 'focused' because thats what I am - absolutely laser-focused on giving businesses in this country the confidence to invest and grow to create more jobs," Collins told Reuters in an email.

"Our focus this election is on delivering an economic plan that gives hope to the more than 200,000 New Zealanders who are currently on unemployment benefits, as well as the tens of thousands more whose jobs are hanging by a thread."

The Labour Party, governing in a coalition with the Greens and the nationalist New Zealand First party, is campaigning on its enviable record of bringing COVID-19 under control and stopping chains of community transmission.

But Collins - whose autobiography released this month is titled "Pull No Punches" - wants voters to think instead about the lacklustre economy, and what she calls Ardern's broken promises to fix a housing crisis and tackle child poverty.

Some analysts agree Ardern's government is vulnerable on domestic issues despite her global standing. The youngest female prime minister when she came to power in 2017, she has won international praise for her compassionate leadership, particularly in the aftermath of last year's massacre of 51 Muslim worshippers in Christchurch.

But she has backtracked on a key capital gains tax promise, while housing projects have floundered and an ambitious social welfare programme to end child poverty has achieved little.

Business confidence is low and economic growth has stagnated despite the relatively quick lifting of coronavirus restrictions.

Ardern's office told Reuters in a statement the government was proud of its economic record, pointing out its investments in health, education and infrastructure "while managing the books to keep debt as low as possible, and well below the levels seen in comparable countries like Australia and the UK".

To be sure, Ardern is popular and polls suggest Labour is on track for a resounding election win, but some analysts see an opening for Collins to make inroads.

"Ardern has domestic issues, and that's always been a problem. Collins will tell voters (Ardern) is a great global leader but a bad domestic one," said Andrew Hughes from the Research School of Management in Australian National University.

NO HOLDS BARRED

In addition to the general election, New Zealanders will vote on Sept. 19 in two referendums on legalising voluntary euthanasia and cannabis.

The National leader has supported voluntary euthanasia but has said she is not in favour of legalising recreational use of marijuana, an issue that could shift some undecided voters her way.

In her maiden speech as opposition leader Collins praised Ardern's communication skills, but said she would not let the prime minister get away with any "nonsense".

Grant Duncan, associate professor at Auckland's Massey University, said Collins could range from charming to tough to deliberately Machiavellian.

"Discontented centre-right voters may see her as an antidote to Arderns genuine warmth and kindness," he said.

(Reporting by Praveen Menon; Editing by Stephen Coates)

Originally posted here:

'Crusher' Collins pulls no punches in bid to oust New Zealand's Ardern - WTVB News

Having cleaned up from the afternoons small chute job out in the country, it was time to settle into an office chair and look through the phone messages our secretary at the vet clinic had for me.

I dreaded returning the call at the top of the list. It was a long-time client whose dog Id examined a couple days ago. Buddy, their 13-year-old black Lab had been steadily but rapidly declining over the past week. Cataracts were clouding his vision, and arthritis made it a struggle to get up after lying down. Now Buddy had lost control of his bowels and urination. The writing was on the wall, and wed had a very sad and frank conversation about Buddys prospects. On the phone, Buddys owners confirmed my suspicions theyd made the decision to euthanize Buddy.

As a special favor, our vet tech and I went out to the family farm to perform the procedure. After the barbiturate had gone through Buddys bloodstream and his body fell limp, tears flowed from every one of the family members present. Their decision was an excruciating one to come to, but all knew it was the right thing to do.

The Veterinarians Oath mandates that veterinarians use their skills and knowledge to, among other duties, relieve animal suffering. We use preventive medicine, medical treatments and surgery to accomplish this for our patients, but at the very end of lifes road lies possibly our most important procedure: that of euthanasia.

The word euthanasia translates to good death. When animals face irresolvable pain and suffering, it is the one last merciful action that we as humans can grant them a good death. Its a procedure unique to veterinary medicine and the part of a veterinarians job that gives students the most apprehension about entering the profession.

In offering this relief to patients, veterinarians shoulder the responsibility of ensuring that euthanasia is truly a good death as peaceful and painless as possible. For companion animals we usually use heavy doses of barbiturate anesthetic to shut down the animals system. As far as we can tell, it is truly as peaceful as the animal going to sleep. For cattle and other large animals, barbiturates often arent options, since residues of that drug in the carcass make rendering impossible. Captive bolt and gunshot performed properly can be acceptable. Our veterinary association has an extensive set of guidelines regarding euthanasia of different species all of them provide for the animals immediate unconsciousness prior to death. Anything less is not a good death. The last thing we want is for an animal to experience even more pain as we attempt to put it out of its misery.

The veterinary logistics surrounding euthanasia are relatively straightforward compared with making the actual decision. For farm animals, some guidelines exist. For example, swine veterinarians recommend euthanizing a pig when there is no response to treatment over a two-day period or if there otherwise is no prospect for recovery. One could probably apply this to other food animals as well.

But in the case of a long-time family companion such as a dog or cat, strict guidelines dont exist. Sometimes the decision to euthanize is obvious: a catastrophic injury or rapid onset of a painful terminal illness. Most of the time, particularly with older pets, its much less clear. Ive had some owners put off the decision while the animals probably suffered longer than they should have. Others maybe were a bit quick to come to the decision. Its not a call I can make the family has to come to peace with it on their own time. I provide the best input I can mostly medical but sometimes philosophical. A veterinarian I know asks his clients to name three things the pet really enjoyed doing during their life. Maybe it was going out hunting the first day of pheasant season. Or jumping up in the pickup cab for a ride to town. Whatever that list is for that animal, the thought was, when theyre no longer able to do those things, it is time to consider euthanasia.

I dont know any veterinarian who doesnt dislike euthanizing animals, but I also dont know any who arent grateful they have that ability to relieve an animals suffering in that manner.

Russ Daly, DVM, is the Extension Veterinarian at South Dakota State University. He can be reached via e-mail at russell.daly@sdstate.eduor at 605-688-5171.

Here is the original post:

Animal Health Matters: Euthanasia When it's time to say goodbye - Farm Forum

If gassing doesnt always work, why is it an approved method of depopulating farmed animals? Award-winning veterinarian Dr. Jonas Watson explains.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

If gassing doesnt always work, why is it an approved method of depopulating farmed animals? Award-winning veterinarian Dr. Jonas Watson explains.

In a July 8th Facebook post, Winnipeg Chicken Save, part of the global Animal Save Movement, provided important context to the story of the two chickens found at the landfill, who are now safe at a local animal sanctuary called The Good Place.

Egg farms have been mass culling chickens throughout Manitoba due to COVID-19, from restaurants not needing eggs. Chickens are killed en masse from gas suffocation, corpses thrown onto a truck and dumped at a landfill. Yesterday afternoon, after another dumping of a truckload full of murdered chickens, a friend of The Good Place/Employee noticed a chicken standing under a nearby shelter. Terrified and alone but alive.

The landfill employee contacted local animal rescuers, who went to retrieve the chicken, now named Lola, only to be called back later that day for a second, now named Phoenix.

Dr. Watson does not consider gassing to be a humane form of euthanasia, although it is still an industry-standard practice. According to him, there are many variables at play that could lead to an animal not dying when gassed, including inappropriate gas concentration, inadequate gas flow rate, inappropriate numbers or sizes of animals in the chamber, and insufficient duration of gas exposure. Indeed, in one undercover video captured by PETA in 2016, a fur farm worker gassing minks in a metal drum describes how one animal stayed alive for twenty minutes by hiding under carcasses in pockets of clean air.

For animals who endure gassing, which works by replacing oxygen with either CO2 or nitrogen causing asphyxiation, suffering is almost certain. Gases used to kill chickens commonly cause head shaking, gasping, and convulsions prior to the cessation of electrical brain activity, says Dr. Watson. And pigs killed with gas, he says, very likely experience fear and stress, and possibly physical pain, as evidenced by squealing, open-mouthed breathing, changes in heart rate, incoordination, and efforts made to escape. He can only imagine what it would be like for those animals who dont die.

These chickens survived being gassed, buried among their sisters, transported, dumped in a landfill, then managed to climb their way out through corpses and were spotted by humans who wanted to help, not hurt them, reads the Winnipeg Chicken Save post.

So why is gassing an approved method of mass depopulation on farms? Dr. Watson says, despite evidence of animal distress and aversion, inhaled gases continue to be administered because the benefits are perceived by industry to outweigh any welfare concerns associated with their use. In other words, its simply convenient. Gases like CO2 are readily available, inexpensive, usually fast-acting, less psychologically-traumatizing to use by the humans involved when compared to alternative methods, and do not leave toxic residues in animal tissue from which food is produced, he says.

There are also no laws in Canada overseeing the treatment of animals on farms, with standard farming practices typically exempt from any federal and provincial animal cruelty laws. The voluntary, industry-created code of practice regarding mass depopulation on poultry farms requires that all birds be confirmed dead before disposal. This rule is not always honored. Time and again, even before COVID-19, investigators visiting these farms find animals in dumpsters still alive. As a result, piles of unprofitable, dead and living animals continue to be dumped in landfills like trash.

Dr. Watson does believe, however, that the general public is slowly waking up to the truth about animal gassing. Despite how frequently gases like CO2 are used to asphyxiate animals, concerns by the public about the humaneness of this approach are increasing, he says. As such, a society genuinely concerned with the welfare of its animals would be wise to evaluate alternative methods when faced with the task of killing large groups of animals.

Or, perhaps more visibility and transparency around these mass killings will prompt consumers to reevaluate why the food system requires entire sheds of animals to be killed to begin with.

See the rest here:

When Gassing Animals to Death Doesn't Work - Sentient Media

Having cleaned up from the afternoons small chute job out in the country, it was time to settle into an office chair and look through the phone messages our secretary at the vet clinic had for me.

I dreaded returning the call at the top of the list. It was a long-time client whose dog Id examined a couple days ago. Buddy, their 13-year-old black Lab had been steadily but rapidly declining over the past week. Cataracts were clouding his vision, and arthritis made it a struggle to get up after lying down. Now Buddy had lost control of his bowels and urination. The writing was on the wall, and wed had a very sad and frank conversation about Buddys prospects. On the phone, Buddys owners confirmed my suspicions theyd made the decision to euthanize Buddy.

As a special favor, our vet tech and I went out to the family farm to perform the procedure. After the barbiturate had gone through Buddys bloodstream and his body fell limp, tears flowed from every one of the family members present. Their decision was an excruciating one to come to, but all knew it was the right thing to do.

The Veterinarians Oath mandates that veterinarians use their skills and knowledge to, among other duties, relieve animal suffering. We use preventive medicine, medical treatments and surgery to accomplish this for our patients, but at the very end of lifes road lies possibly our most important procedure: that of euthanasia.

The word euthanasia translates to good death. When animals face irresolvable pain and suffering, it is the one last merciful action that we as humans can grant them a good death. Its a procedure unique to veterinary medicine and the part of a veterinarians job that gives students the most apprehension about entering the profession.

In offering this relief to patients, veterinarians shoulder the responsibility of ensuring that euthanasia is truly a good death as peaceful and painless as possible. For companion animals we usually use heavy doses of barbiturate anesthetic to shut down the animals system. As far as we can tell, it is truly as peaceful as the animal going to sleep. For cattle and other large animals, barbiturates often arent options, since residues of that drug in the carcass make rendering impossible. Captive bolt and gunshot performed properly can be acceptable. Our veterinary association has an extensive set of guidelines regarding euthanasia of different species all of them provide for the animals immediate unconsciousness prior to death. Anything less is not a good death. The last thing we want is for an animal to experience even more pain as we attempt to put it out of its misery.

The veterinary logistics surrounding euthanasia are relatively straightforward compared with making the actual decision. For farm animals, some guidelines exist. For example, swine veterinarians recommend euthanizing a pig when there is no response to treatment over a two-day period or if there otherwise is no prospect for recovery. One could probably apply this to other food animals as well.

But in the case of a long-time family companion such as a dog or cat, strict guidelines dont exist. Sometimes the decision to euthanize is obvious: a catastrophic injury or rapid onset of a painful terminal illness. Most of the time, particularly with older pets, its much less clear. Ive had some owners put off the decision while the animals probably suffered longer than they should have. Others maybe were a bit quick to come to the decision. Its not a call I can make the family has to come to peace with it on their own time. I provide the best input I can mostly medical but sometimes philosophical. A veterinarian I know asks his clients to name three things the pet really enjoyed doing during their life. Maybe it was going out hunting the first day of pheasant season. Or jumping up in the pickup cab for a ride to town. Whatever that list is for that animal, the thought was, when theyre no longer able to do those things, it is time to consider euthanasia.

I dont know any veterinarian who doesnt dislike euthanizing animals, but I also dont know any who arent grateful they have that ability to relieve an animals suffering in that manner.

Russ Daly, DVM, is the Extension Veterinarian at South Dakota State University. He can be reached via e-mail at russell.daly@sdstate.eduor at 605-688-5171.

See original here:

Animal Health Matters: Euthanasia When it's time to say goodbye - AberdeenNews.com

OPINION: The question Id like to ask is this: does the End of Life Choice Act actually solve this issue? Or does it bring a whole wad of new problems instead?

In September we will be asked to vote by referendum on whether or not we thinkthe End of Life Choice Act is the right law to put in place for this purpose.

The truth is that we are not deciding on whether or not Kiwis should have the right to die with dignity, we are not voting on just a concept here.

We need to take a step back and realise that we are not voting on 'euthanasia',we are voting on the End of Life Choice Act, which if it is voted through, will be rolled out in New Zealand without any possibility of making any changes or adding any safeguards.

READ MORE:* Euthanasia referendum: Will you support the End of Life Choice Act?* Euthanasia referendum: The most important voices in this debate are the terminally ill* Euthanasia referendum: This is it - the End of Life bill will stand or fall exactly as it is

If we are going to vote on this Act, then surely it would be wise to know exactly what we are voting on. We need tobeaware of what this law would allow, not just gowith a gut feeling or voteemotively.

"Making a law based on emotions is well thought out and completely safe", said no-one ever.

It is clear the End of Life Choice Act is not comparable to other euthanasia laws around the world. The New Zealand document is actually less than half the length of the Victorian euthanasia law. Why?

To me, this begs the question -what is lacking in our proposed law? What safeguards do they have in Victoria that we wont have here in New Zealand?

Perhaps this is exactly why more than200 lawyers in New Zealand have banded together with Lawyers for Vulnerable New Zealanders to tell us that this law is too dangerous and puts too many people at risk.

Just twolawyers would be enough for me to consider what they have to say, over 200 would certainly convinces meI need to listen up.

Are people aware that a grandparent could receive a terminal diagnosis, decide that life-prolonging treatment will cost too much, not want their kids to miss out on inheritance and the family would find out when they are handed the death certificate?

Or worse yet, the grandparent could be pressured by their family to consider this in the first place.Not hard to imagine this scenario happening either, as our elder abuse stats are appalling in New Zealand.

The Act states that both doctors must simply 'do their best to detect any coercion'. This would not stack up in any other area of law, so why is this sufficient when it comes to a life and death decision?

Iain McGregor/Stuff

"We need to be aware of what this law would allow, not just go with a gut feeling or vote emotively."

If there are greater safeguards in place to protect our property and assets against coercion, why are we not putting even greater safeguards in place to protect someones life against coercion?

Are people also aware that the End of Life Choice Act has no 'cooling off period' before the prescription is written? An eligible patient could request euthanasia and be dead just three days later. There is no safeguard to ensure that a person has had adequate time to make sure this is what they truly want to pursue, and process any grief or trauma they might have received due to being given a terminal diagnosis.

I dont believe in making laws that have this much collateral at stake. I dont believe there is any dignity in a law that would allow for any misuse or abuse.

Until we have addressed some of the real issues in society, and until we have ensured that every single Kiwi has equal access to all of the options available, then a law like this is careless and dangerous.

The End of Life Choice Act does not fix any problems, it just creates more.

This reader report has been edited to remove objections to the proposed law which were incorrect about eligibility for assisted dying. The criteria for eligibility is explained here.

Read more:

Euthanasia referendum: The End of Life bill won't fix problems but create them - Stuff.co.nz

KYOTO Two male doctors were arrested Thursday on suspicion of assisting a woman suffering from a terminal disease to die by giving her a lethal drug.

Yoshikazu Okubo, who operates a clinic in Natori, Miyagi Prefecture, and Naoki Yamamoto, a doctor in Tokyo, allegedly administered a sedative to the woman at her home in Kyoto in November last year with her consent, investigative sources said.

The woman, who had the progressive neurological disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis also known as Lou Gehrigs or motor neurone disease is believed to have wanted to die.

Okubo, 42, and Yamamoto, 43, were not her attending physicians and are suspected of helping her die for money, the sources said.

Okubos wife Miyo, a former House of Representatives lawmaker, 43, told reporters in Natori that her husband often engaged in part-time medical work.

The woman transferred over 1 million ($9,300) to Yamamotos bank account, according to the sources. There were signs that she had contacted Okubo via social networking services to request euthanasia.

The sources said the womans ALS had progressed, and while she could talk, she could hardly move her body.

ALS is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that causes gradual paralysis. Approximately 10,000 people are affected by the disease in Japan.

On the day of the incident, the woman had told her caretaker that acquaintances are coming, and invited the two doctors into her home.

They left about five to 10 minutes later, and the caretaker found the woman unconscious soon after. The woman was transported to a hospital where she died.

Read the original:

Two doctors suspected of getting paid to help Kyoto woman die - The Japan Times

New Zealanders will get the chance to vote on the End of Life Choice Act at this years General Election in September.

The Act gives people with a terminal illness the option of requesting assisted dying.

Last November, Parliament passed the End of Life Choice Act by 69-51 votes, sending it to a referendum and putting the decision in the hands of the public.

Assisted dying, or euthanasia, is defined in the End of Life Choice Act as a doctor or nurse practitioner giving a person medication to relieve their suffering by bringing on death, or, the taking of medication by a person to relieve their suffering by bringing on death.

READ MORE:* Euthanasia referendum: What is assisted dying? The End of Life vote explained* Canadian researchers find majority who chose euthanasia were receiving palliative care* End of life choice Bill to affect society's vulnerable the most says hospice doctor

To be eligible for assisted dying under the Act, a person must be suffering from a terminal illness that is likely to end their life within six months.

123RF

You will get the opportunity to answer Yes or No on election day.

See the original post here:

Euthanasia referendum: Will you support the End of Life Choice Act? - Stuff.co.nz

A Dutch MP has submitted a long-awaited bill to offer healthy Dutch over-75s the right to ask for euthanasia.

Pia Dijkstra, medical ethics lead for D66, promised to go forward with the controversial bill at the end of January, after government research revealed that around 10,000 people over 55 have a serious death wish.

But the bill proposal, handed in on Friday, is likely to stoke conflict in the government because the two Christian parties in the coalition are radically opposed to it.

Free vote

Although the right to choose death is supported in theory by Mark Ruttes VVD, and a previous attempt at legislation in 2016 also had the support of the PvdA labour party and GroenLinks, it is unclear whether Dijkstras bill would win over the majority of MPs which it would need, as it would be a free vote.

Her proposed law would mean healthy over-75s with a strong death wish for at least two months could have the assistance of an end-of-life supervisor to die. But opponents of the law including the KNMG Royal Dutch Medical Association believe it could undermine the strict due care conditions of the existing euthanasia law, arguing that lonely and impoverished older people should have help, not the choice of an early death.

Benjamin Meijer, a spokesman for D66, told DutchNews.nl that his party had agreed with the coalition to wait for the publication of research into the group of older people who want help to die, and was then busy with the joint effort against the coronavirus.

Sensitive

Everyone in The Hague in politics was busy trying to battle this huge crisis, he said. The target audience of this law is very different from those who died from corona but it is always a sensitive subject.

He said that the proposal would now go to the Raad van State judicial advisory committee for review, a process which will take three to six months, before it can be refined and scheduled for debate and a vote. The hope is that it comes before parliament before the next general election in March 2021, he said.

These kinds of law proposals with very divisive subjects are not voted on according to party lines, but by free choice, added Meijer. We cant be in peoples heads to know if they have decided or would change their opinion.

Dijstra has said that for D66 the law is about having the choice at an advanced age, if people consider their lives complete, to be able to die with dignity, with careful help. It was inspired by a 2010 citizens initiative that gained 117,000 supporters.

Unacceptable

But the ChristenUnie a government party with five seats has said the proposal is insensitively timed and completely unacceptable. Gert-Jan Segers, party leader, said in a post: I find it extraordinarily painful that at a time when old people feel extra vulnerable, D66 submits a proposal that we know will cause many of them increased insecurity and worry, he said. This is a path that the ChristenUnie absolutely will not tread.

The CDA, the other Christian party in government with 17 seats, is also against the proposal, suggesting it could undermine existing euthanasia law. When the research on the unhappy older people was published, now-CDA leader and health minister Hugo de Jonge made an appeal to tackle loneliness and social problems. This groups death wish is serious and the report underlines the need for action, he wrote in a parliamentary briefing. It is our task to make every effort to ensure that these people find the meaning of life and meaning in life again.

However, the NVVE, a pro-euthanasia membership body which campaigned for the 2002 euthanasia law, has said it is pleased with Dijkstras proposal. If the proposal becomes law, help to die from care staff other than doctors, such as psychologists, psychotherapists and nurses, would no longer be punishable, it said in a reaction online.

It added that many of this group who are done with life do not qualify to request euthanasia under the existing law because they do not have severe medical complaints.

The DutchNews.nl team would like to thank all the generous readers who have made a donation in recent weeks. Your financial support has helped us to expand our coverage of the coronavirus crisis into the evenings and weekends and make sure you are kept up to date with the latest developments.

DutchNews.nl has been free for 14 years, but without the financial backing of our readers, we would not be able to provide you with fair and accurate news and features about all things Dutch. Your contributions make this possible.

If you have not yet made a donation, but would like to, you can do so via Ideal, credit card or Paypal.

Continued here:

Euthanasia law proposed for healthy over-75s who feel their lives are complete - DutchNews.nl

UNSPLASH

"Our families struggle to accept that a disease is going to take us away from them, but the disease is going to take us anyway - we don't have an option or say in that." (File photo)

OPINION: As a passionate advocate for thislegislationand as someone living with incurable stage IV metastatic breast cancer I am, unfortunately, fully conversant with how my disease plays out, and it isn't for the faint-hearted.

I was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 1997 and then again in 2002.

I continueto take each day as it comes, along with surgical interventions, chemotherapy and radiation.

When the terminal metastatic breast cancerdiagnosis came in 2016, even as an advocate for this legislation, I wanted to do what I could - but on my terms and within my own boundaries when it comes to treatment and its side-effects.

READ MORE:*Assisted dying referendum: why NZ's law lacks necessary detail to make a fully informed decision*Act 'offers choice, not compulsion'*End of life choice comes down to compassion

The reason I am alive is because of chemotherapy and hormonal drugs. I'm on my third line of treatment now. The nature of my disease means that each treatment eventually stops working.

Metastatic breast cancer is one of the crueller cancer diseases;ask anyone who has lost a loved one to this insidious disease. The extent to which it progresses knows no bound: all major organs, the brain, the stomach, the eyes, the bones, the spine.

I'm a member of a private support group of 6000 women from all over the world. Each day we read and share the extent of the suffering, including many photos inquiring 'is this normal?' due to radical side effects from treatments.And then, the dreaded posts from a family member who advises that their loved one is no longer with us.

Readingthefear and anxiety ofthose dealing with metastatic bone disease when they start to experience fractures and need tohave steel rods surgically inserted to support ravaged bones is extremely tough. This is the reality of my disease.

I will not apologise for asking not to have to go right to the very end of all that this disease has to offer.

Every terminally ill New Zealander deserves the voluntaryright to choose the option of an assisted death during the last sixmonths of their lives.Currently those who oppose have it their way - those who are walking the terminal cancer walkdon't have any options.

We should be able to take the good days, the quality days and enjoy them, having peace of mind that when we've had enough we can say we've had enough.

The most important voice of all in this debate is the voice of the individual who has to travel this journey.

The Act offers the voluntary option to say when "enough is enough" and, trust me, the suffering comes way before the last sixmonths of life.

The issue is that as a society we find it difficult to come to terms with having conversations about death.

Our families struggle to accept that a disease is going to take us away from them, but the disease is going to take us anyway - we don't have an option or say in that.

The very least we can hope for is to say we don't want our suffering to be prolonged, outside of what our disease is going to dish out, or what the chemotherapy, radiation and other chemical cocktails do to our bodies.

I am a wife and a mother, and my family respects my wish for an assisted death.

When there is talk about families and their input - I can assure you that I would rather my children watch me die peacefully than have to live with the trauma of remembering, for years, how my own parents died.

Assisted dying is not about ending life, it's about ending suffering when you no longer have the option of living - you haven't made that decision, itwas taken out of your hands.

The very least you can expect is to be able to call it a day when your disease and treatments cause nothing but pain and suffering.

Every man and his dog has an opinion or view on this legislation, but it's not every man and his dog who are going to die the way others have to die.

More here:

Euthanasia referendum: The most important voices in this debate are the terminally ill - Stuff.co.nz

New Zealanders will be able to have the final say on whether assisted dying should become law in Septembers election.

Last November, Parliament passed the End of Life Choice Act by 69-51 votes, sending it to a referendum and putting the decision in the hands of the public.

Here we break down what assisted dying is, what the End of Life Choice Act proposes, and how the referendum will work.

READ MORE:* New Zealand will vote on two referendums on election day, but won't know result for 13 days* End of Life Choice Bill 'not about disability', David Seymour says* Assisted dying conscientious objection questions too early - court

WHAT IS ASSISTED DYING?

Assisted dying, or euthanasia, is defined in the End of Life Choice Act as a doctor or nurse practitioner giving a person medication to relieve their suffering by bringing on death, or, the taking of medication by a person to relieve their suffering by bringing on death.

In the Act, medication means a lethal dose of the drugs used for assisted dying.

To be eligible for assisted dying under the Act, a person must be suffering from a terminal illness that is likely to end their life within six months.

They must have significant and ongoing decline in physical capability, and experience unbearable suffering that cannot be eased.

Crucially, they have to be able to make an informed decision about assisted dying showing they can understand and remember information about it, and have the ability to communicate this decision in some way.

A person would not be eligible if the only reason they give is that they are suffering from a mental disorder or mental illness; have a disability of any kind; or because of their advanced age.

A health practitioner is not allowed to suggest that a person consider assisted dying while providing a health service to them, it must be a call made by the patient.

Iain McGregor/Stuff

On September 19, New Zealanders will vote in not just the general election, but two referendums including whether assisted dying, or euthanasia, should be passed into law.

WHEN IS THE EUTHANASIA REFERENDUM IN NEW ZEALAND?

The euthanasia referendum is one of two being carried out on general election day, Saturday, September 19.

The other will ask people if they support the Cannabis Legislation and Control Bill.

You will be given a voting paper for the election and a voting paper for the referendums.

If youre in New Zealand, you will be able to vote when advance voting starts on September 5.

If youre overseas at the time, you can vote from September 2.

CHRISTINE CORNEGE/Stuff

You will get the opportunity to answer 'Yes or No on election day.

WHAT IS THE QUESTION IN THE END OF LIFE CHOICE ACT REFERENDUM?

The voting question being asked is: Do you support the End of Life Choice Act 2019 coming into force?

You can choose one of two answers:

Coming into force means the Act would start operating as law in New Zealand, 12 months after the final result is announced.

Supplied

A person would not be eligible for assisted dying simply because they are elderly. People must be suffering from a terminal illness that would end their life within six months.

WHAT WOULD THE END OF LIFE CHOICE BILL ALLOW?

If it does start operating as law in New Zealand, eligible people could start the assisted dying process with their doctor.

In a nutshell, two doctors the person's doctor and an independent doctor must agree the patient meets the criteria, including being able to make an informed decision about assisted dying. If either is unsure of the persons ability to make that decision, a psychiatrist needs to assess the person.

If the person is eligible, they choose a method, date, and time for taking the lethal dose of medication.

At the time the person has chosen, the doctor or nurse practitioner must ask the person if they still choose to take the medication before it is given. The doctor or nurse practitioner must remain with them until they die.

If they change their mind, the medication is taken away.

Ross Giblin/Stuff

ACT MP and proponent for the End of Life Choice Bill, David Seymour, at its third and final reading in November 2019.

HOW WOULD IT BE POLICED?

If the law is passed, a number of roles and agencies will be set up within the health sector to oversee the operation of the Act.

This would include the Support and Consultation for End of Life in New Zealand (SCENZ) group, established by the Director-General of Health.

SCENZ would be responsible for making and maintaining a list of doctors, psychiatrists and pharmacists willing to take part in the assisted dying process.

It would also be responsible for preparing standards of care, advising on the required legal and medical procedures and providing practical assistance around the administration of medication.

Robert Kitchin/Stuff

If the Act became law, Ministry of Health Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield would be responsible for setting up key roles to oversee the law.

An End of Life Review Committee, made up of a medical ethicist, a doctor specialising in end-of-life care and one other health practitioner, would also be appointed by the minister of health.

The committee would consider reports provided by the doctor or nurse practitioner about the assisted death of a person, report to a registrar a person within the Ministry of Health, appointed by the Director-General on whether the information complies with the requirements of the Act.

The registrar would check the processes of the Act have been complied with; establish and maintain a register of approved forms and reports received from the review committee and made to the minister.

The registrar would receive and refer complaints to the appropriate authority, such as the Health and Disability Commissioner or Police.

They would also be responsible for providing annual reports to the health minister, who would present them to Parliament.

Christine Cornege/Stuff

The majority of New Zealanders will cast their votes on September 19, but advance voting and overseas voting start much earlier.

HOW DOES THE EUTHANASIA REFERENDUM VOTE WORK?

Casting a vote in the referendum is simple.

On your voting paper, vote by placing a tick next to your answer - either Yes or No to each referendum question.

WHEN WILL WE KNOW THE OUTCOME OF THE EUTHANASIA REFERENDUM?

Although voting takes place on election day, referendum votes will not be counted that night.

Preliminary referendum results will be released by the Electoral Commission on Friday, October 2.

The final, official results will be released on Friday, October 9.

123RF

The Act, if passed into law, would allow people with a terminal illness to relieve their suffering through assisted dying.

WHEN WOULD IT COME INTO EFFECT IF PASSED?

If more than 50 per cent of New Zealanders vote Yes in the referendum, the End of Life Choice Act will come into force 12 months after the final votes are announced.

If more than 50 per cent of people vote No, the Act will not become law.

If the majority vote in opposition to the Act or there is a tie and another referendum is not held, the Act will expire on November 16, 2024, five years to the day after it received royal assent.

For more Stuff coverage on the euthanasia referendum, click here.

Read the rest here:

Euthanasia referendum: What is assisted dying? The End of Life vote explained - Stuff.co.nz

I am pro-life. What does that mean? Simply put, it means I believe that all life is sacred, inviolable and a gift from God. That reverence for life includes a desire to care for the unborn child in the womb, the elderly person in danger of euthanasia, the refugee starving on the border, the L.G.B.T. youth tempted to suicide and the inmate being readied for execution on death row.

To that list of sacred lives you can add: the woman standing in line at the grocery store checkout counter, the elderly man seated in a church pew or the office worker who has just stepped aboard public transportation.

Advertisement

Surely everyone would consider all these lives worthy of protection.

So why arent all Christians convinced that wearing a mask, maintaining social distance and taking the necessary precautions to prevent the spread of the coronavirus are pro-life moves?

Why arent all pro-lifers pro-maskers?

[Dont miss more stories like this one.Sign up for our newsletter.]

This should be a no-brainer.

I am sure you know the statistics. Wearing masks helps to dramatically reduce the spread of airborne droplets that contain the coronavirus. Standing six feet apart greatly lessens the chance that others will become infected. Washing your hands for 20 seconds (two Happy Birthdays) helps to kill the virus.

These precautions have been confirmed over and over again by places like the Centers for Disease Control and Protection, in many university studies and by prestigious medical journals like The Lancet. By now these public health guidelines are posted in drugstores, on street corners and at public transportation stops.

In fact, the director of the C.D.C. said recently that if everyone in the United States wore masks, the virus would be under control within weeks.

Is it inconvenient? Of course. I wear a mask every time I step out of my Jesuit community residence in New York City, where these days it is hot and muggy. During the colder months it took some time to figure out how to wear one without getting my glasses fogged up, and today it is uncomfortable wearing one while jogging through Central Park in the 90-degree heat.

Some people think these precautions are not just inconvenient but an infringement on their civil liberties. I could give you all sorts of arguments about all sorts of other public health measures designed to protect peoplefood-safety rules, turn signals on cars and so onthat people seem fine with. But in these politicized times, even caring for the other person has become political. Wearing a mask is not seen as contributing to the common good but as an affront to personal liberty. (I am not including people who cannot wear a mask because of their own health conditions.)

Think about it this way: Would you allow someone to smoke in a hospital? Would you allow someone to carry a gun into a nursery school? Those are civil liberties we are willing to curtail to allow others to remain healthy and alive. It is, again, part of contributing to the common good. Why is it different with masks?

But instead of those arguments, lets look at this from a Christian point of view.

In the Parable of the Good Samaritan, in Lukes Gospel, Jesus offers us the story of a man who is going down from Jerusalem to Jericho on a notoriously dangerous road and is beaten by robbers.

After the man is beaten, two people pass him by, a priest and a Levite. Finally, someone stopsthough doing so would have been not only inconvenient but also dangerousand helps the man. He dresses his wounds and takes him to an inn. Jesus is clearly praising this mans actions and condemning those of the two who passed him by.

Why didnt the other two stop to help? Either they were afraid of being robbed or, just as likely, they just couldnt be bothered. They were too lazy to help save a life.

The Jesuit theologian James Keenan, S.J., once described the way Jesus saw sin in the Gospels as a failure to bother to love. This is where Jesus usually locates sin: not where we are weak and continually trying to do better, but where we are strong and cannot be bothered. The two men on the road couldnt be bothered.

So the question comes down to this: Are you really pro-life? Do you reverence all livesthe checkout clerk as much as the unborn child? The man standing in the grocery store as much as the man in danger of euthanasia? The woman on the subway as much as the terminally ill child?

Do you really want to help save lives? Then start to bother. Wear a mask.

Excerpt from:

Father James Martin: Wearing a mask is pro-life - America Magazine

Dive Brief:

Even though processing plants are returning back to normal production levels, the pandemic is still causing financial and logistical challenges for pork producers expected to continue into next year. The industry's major trade group is urging congressional action to help struggling producers.

This month, lawmakers in the Senate introduced the Relief for Producers Act of 2020that would give compensation to farmers who are euthanizing their animals because of the pandemic. The NPPCsaid it "strongly supports this legislation" and is pushing for Congress to act quickly.The group also supported additional federal assistance being backed by Rep. Collin Peterson, the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee.

"Its imperative that Congress act now, or else thousands of farmers could go out of business, leading to consolidation and contraction of the U.S. pork industry,"Howard Roth, a Wisconsin hog farmer who is NPPC's president, said in a statement.

The government has already issued some help to the industry.The U.S. Agriculture Department said it would spend$3 billion to buy fresh produce, dairy and meat that will be sent to food banks after the closure of foodservice and restaurants during the pandemic have significantly hurt demand.

This year has taken a drastic and dire turn for the pork industry after initial optimism. Facing hardship caused by trade disputes and labor shortages in recent years,U.S. pork farmers entered 2020 expecting to post a profit.But when the pandemic hit, processing plants started to shutter as coronavirus spread among workers, causing the supply chain to back up and leaving hog farmers with no where to send their animals.

The pandemic has infected thousands of plant workersin the meat industry and forced more than 40 plantsacross the country to temporarily close down or reduce production. In April,President Donald Trump issued an executive orderusing the Defense Production Act to keep facilities open and prevent shortages. Labor unions have strongly criticized the ordersaying it puts workers at risk, while industry groups, including the NPPC,praised the move for helping get the supply chain moving.

Despite improvements,this new analysis showed the backlog is still prevalent.Many producers have turned to euthanasia to quell the overcrowding on farms.The U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust division announced in Mayit wouldn't challenge the proposed efforts of the NPPCto work with the USDA to euthanize hogs because of the oversupply caused by the pandemic. The NPPCtold the DOJ that euthanizing potentially 700,000 hogs per week "will be unavoidable."Millions of chickens also have been killedas closures diminish demand for poultry.

As the pork industry continues to face challenges, the NPPC is hoping the proposed bill in Congress, which would compensate hog and poultry producers while increasing funding for animal health surveillance and laboratories, will pass and help struggling producers stay afloat.

Go here to see the original:

Pork producers face $5B in losses with surplus of hogs - Food Dive

By Ryan Nickerson, Staff writer

Homeless animals get a chance for a better life thanks to the volunteers at Rescued Pets Movement.

Homeless animals get a chance for a better life thanks to the volunteers at Rescued Pets Movement.

Homeless animals get a chance for a better life thanks to the volunteers at Rescued Pets Movement.

Homeless animals get a chance for a better life thanks to the volunteers at Rescued Pets Movement.

Rescued Pets Movement saves more than 53,000 animals

Freya wagged her tail as she boarded her kennel inside a Rescued Pets Movements van. It wasnt long ago that she was considered homeless after she was tossed from a truck along with her puppies in front of a Houston animal shelter.

Its a peculiar moment for Houstons Rescued Pets Movement. Shelters can only handle a limited intake of dogs and cats, demand for household pets is on the rise, and Houstons homeless animal population is still high.

RPM is a nonprofit that partners with animal shelters across the country by transporting potentially euthanized cats and dogs in Houston to areas of the country with high demand for adoptions. As of June this year, RPM has saved 53,487 animals.

Due to COVID-19, many Houston animal shelters like BARC are operating under special conditions and the process for residents to drop off animals is now through appointment only (except for sick or injured animals). BARC is encouraging residents to not pick up any stray animals unless they are prepared to care for them at home.

It may take a couple of days, it may take a couple of weeks before you can get an appointment, said RPM president and co-founder Cheryl Perini. Not only has this led to Freya being tossed from a truck but some have been abandoned and found leashed to BARCs fence.

RPM steps in and takes animals from BARC and provides medical care for them in their facility and ideally puts them in a foster home. If no fosters are available, they stay in RPMs temporary shelter until their transport date.

On Thursday, RPM boarded 112 cats and 41 dogs into their vans to be transported to rescue shelters in Colorado and California. They stop every six hours to walk and feed the animals, and they dont stay in hotels.

Its actually been hard to get dogs from the shelters because so many are closed because of COVID-19, said Perini. If you find a stray you need to prepare to keep it long term because you dont know when you would be accommodated.

I also think with the economy being bad there are more people needing help with their pets. Maybe they have to move, they cant care for them, its a really strange time, said Perini.

Perini has worked in traditional pet rescue starting in the early 2000s. She moved to New Mexico in 2008 and volunteered with local animal shelters there. When she moved back to Houston in 2013 she saw how many adoptable pets were on BARCs euthanasia list and they all needed help.

By September 2013, the RPM was created.

Nobody was coming for the moms and so many puppies were on the euthanasia list, said Perini. Now I would say probably 100 percent of the moms and puppies get out of BARC alive.

In September 2013, BARCs live release rate was 48 percent, according to their Asilomar report. At the end of 2019, BARCs live release rate was 88.5 percent.

With RPMs rapid growth, their need for animal foster homes grows too; there are always more animals than there are fosters.

If interested in becoming a foster parent, go to http://www.rescuedpetsmovement.org/.

ryan.nickerson@hcnonline.com

Go here to see the original:

Rescued Pets Movement saves more than 53,000 animals - Chron