Category Archives: Euthanasia

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich The Kent County Animal Shelter took in 678 cats and dogs during the month of October alone.

"We've been steadily increasing since July," said KCAS program supervisor Namiko Ota-Noveskey. "We can't really explain why that is."

On top of a high intake number, the shelter has also been working to bring down its euthanasia rate, which means there are more animals in the shelter at any given time.

"We are moving animals as quickly as we can, but we are struggling to maintain the overall health of a large number of animals," Ota-Noveskey said.

Read more: Kent County shelter euthanized most dogs and cats in Michigan during 2017

KCAS gained attention last year for having one of the highest euthanasia rates in the state during 2017. Ota-Noveskey, who was brought on in May of this year, said they are constantly working to reduce that rate.

She said the current live release rate for cats is nearly 80% and the live release rate for dogs is close to 70%.

A 90% live release rate is the requirement for shelters that are considered 'no-kill.'

With help from rescue groups and other shelters, KCAS has been able to transfer animals more frequently to keep up with intake. The shelter has also offered fee waivers on cats for months at a time. With dogs, Ota-Noveskey says the staff is doing more extensive behavior assessments to determine the best type of home for each pet.

The longer the animals stay at the shelter, though, the more prone they are to things like upper respiratory infections and stress, Ota-Noveskey said.

"We are doing what we can," she said. But, they need adopters.

Bissell Pet Foundation is hosting an Empty the Shelters event on Nov. 22 and 23 solely to help KCAS adopt out more animals.

"Shelter dogs are not damaged dogs," Ota-Noveskey said. "I am pretty certain you will find one you like, and they all need a home. A shelter is just a temporary place this cannot be a home."

Long term, Ota-Noveskey hopes the shelter can work with community members to understand why intake numbers continue to be so high.

"Are people losing housing? Are they not financially able to care for [their pet]? Are landlords still discriminating against certain breeds? There are some things I think we can address as a community," Ota-Noveskey said.

HOW TO HELP:

Click here to learn about volunteering at KCAS

Click here to learn about adopting from KCAS

RELATED VIDEO:

Emma Nicolas is a multimedia journalist. Have a news tip or question for Emma? Get in touch by email, Facebook or Twitter.

Make it easy to keep up to date with more stories like this. Download the 13 ON YOUR SIDE app now.

Visit link:

Kent Co. Animal Shelter is overflowing due to high intake numbers coupled with lower euthanasia rate - WZZM13.com

Of the 142 amendments still on the notice paper, only 53 are from Mr Goiran.

The rest a total of 89 are from other MPs and include 12 proposed by the government itself, including six announced by Health Minster Roger Cook just yesterday.

Just a few weeks ago, Premier Mark McGowan said Mr Goiran's behaviour was "disgraceful", accusing him of "just trying to wreck the bill with these ridiculous, endless amendments".

But if the government's bill was as pure as the driven snow, why did it need more amendments yesterday? And this doesn't include five the upper house has already agreed to, including a variation of one previously proposed by Labor MP Margaret Quirk in the lower house?

As 6PR's Gareth Parker pointed out on Twitter: "I know Nick Goiran is supposed to be public enemy no.1 with horns growing out of his forehead, but is anyone going to reflect on the fact the McGowan Government now WILL amend its supposedly unimpeachable VAD Bill in the Upper House?"

Before yesterday, the government's bill as it stood would have permitted any health practitioner to suggest euthanasia to a dying patient. That included optometrists, pharmacists, a podiatrist, a dental hygienist or a Chinese medicine practitioner.

Of the five amendments agreed to by the upper house on Tuesday, only one was from the government.

An amendment moved by Mr Goiran to ensure people in the regions had the same level of access to palliative care as those in Perth came close to passing, falling short by a hair-raising one vote.

Luckily for the government, Nationals MPs came to the rescue to oppose it.

Also under scrutiny are claims by the government that the Australian Medical Association is now supporting its euthanasia bill.

President Andrew Miller has not said his association supports the legislation.

"There's a range of things that the AMA suggested in amendments that the government are saying would be more appropriate to address in the guidelines or the implementation phase, so we'll have a look at that," Dr Miller said.

"The AMA hasn't pledged anything, what we've said is we're welcoming these amendments.

"We're not going to tell anyone how to vote, we're just saying we're hear to provide information, we're here to provide feedback from doctors on the ground and we want it to be safe for patients."

Far from a glowing endorsement of the bill from the profession who will be expected to implement it.

And while the government has introduced an amendment to reduce the number of people who can propose euthanasia, the change still falls short of Labor MP Tony Buti's proposal to bring the laws into line with Victoria's.

Dr Buti, a supporter of the bill, wanted the laws to prevent anyone proposing euthanasia to a sick patient, including doctors and nurses.

"I've spoken to Tony Buti and explained to him the amendments that go to the heart of his concerns. He's very pleased with the compromise that's been struck," Mr Cook said on Tuesday.

"He said that while he prefers his amendment, but in the event that that is not successful he's very satisfied with the actual compromise that's now been reached."

This would be astonishing, given Dr Buti proposed the change to protect people with disabilities and Aboriginal people considered vulnerable because of language or cultural differences.

Loading

All this just goes to show the upper house still has its work cut out dealing with this legislation.

The state government's bill is complex, not perfectly understood even by the government itself, which is still discovering reasons it needs to be changed and some upper house MPs are waveringin their support.

Putting pressure on MPs by forcing it through by Christmas might make tactical sense for the government, which hasn't really been able to explain the rush, but it might make for bad legislation.

Let's pray the upper house takes its time to get the balance right.

Nathan is WAtoday's political reporter.

Originally posted here:

Reality check: Most changes to WA's assisted dying bill now not Goiran's - Sydney Morning Herald

The City of Long Beach may soon allow residents to have up to six pets in their homes, two more than it currently allows.

Gerardo Mouet, director of Long Beachs Parks, Recreation and Marine Department, stated in a Nov. 15 memo to the city manager that next month the city council will consider amending an ordinance to increase allowed pets from four to six and also regulate animals brought into the city for adoption.

The purpose of the amendments is to promote the Long Beach Animal Care Services (LBACS) Compassion Saves approach designed to minimize the number of animals euthanized, Mouet said.

According to the memo, LBACS already reduced the number of its animals euthanized by 82% between 2010 and 2018, dropping from 5,651 to 1,044. It also increased pet adoptions by 370% from 144 to 677 during that period.

Courtesy City of Long BeachA table from a Nov. 15 memo to the Long Beach city manager showing how Long Beach Animal Care Services (LBACS) reduced animal-euthanasia rates and increased adoptions between 2010 and 2018.

As recent as 2012, LBACS started seeing less animals coming into the shelter due to effective population-control efforts, Mouet said in the memo, adding that it reduced euthanasia rates with the help of a 2015 spay-and-neuter ordinance and partnering with adoption organizations.

Mouet further stated that city staff plans to work with spcaLA (the Los Angeles Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) which is housed in the same facility as LBACS in negotiating a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to maximize the effectiveness of LBACSs Compassion Saves approach.

That approach stems from an April 16 LBACS study session showing the positive impact of animal population-control efforts. The City had created a task force the previous October following results of a two-phased city-auditors report on LBACS completed last year. The City also hired a new LBACS manager, Staycee Dains, last February.

Along with deficiencies in LBACS operations, the audit noted that though they maintain separate leadership and identities, both LBACS and spcaLA are housed at the P.D. Pitchford Companion Animal Village in Long Beach, with a 55-year lease-back agreement expiring in 2053. LBACS leases part of the facility from spcaLA for its shelter operations and the City pays spcaLA 50% of the total facilitys operating expenses, according to the audit.

And though LBACSs live-release rates (LRR) of animals have increased, the audit found that the LRRs and impound improvements strained LBACSs resources and spread thin the shelters staff.

It also found deficiencies in LBACSs standard-operating procedures, resulting in inconsistent decision-making, conflicting shelter practices and changes implemented without proper direction and explanation.

No killThough Mouet said the three proposed steps are designed to aid LBACSs effectiveness in reducing euthanized animals, Dr. Patricia Turner of No Kill Long Beach, an advocacy group calling for no animal to be put down unless it has untreatable pain or illness, told the Signal Tribune that the steps are too limited.These actions dont go far enough, Turner said, adding that the real problem is LBACSs physical and operational proximity to spcaLA.

The MOU must establish LBACSs independence from spcaLA [] as its own entirely city-operated animal shelter and facility so that they can operate at scale to meet the needs of the people of Long Beach, she said.

Turner said that such a separation would allow LBACS to operate full-service adoption and foster programs and a robust volunteer program.Ideally, spcaLA would not be associated with the City of Long Beach, she said. They are on taxpayer land.

Turner also said that the MOU should require transparency by spcaLA about the outcome of animals under its care, such as how many it euthanizes or sends out to adoption, foster care or to other shelters.

That MOU is the most important thing, Turner said when comparing the three steps.

The step of limiting the number of animals brought into the city for adoption is a response to the general perception that spcaLA brings in animals from other places, Turner said, but noted that the memo doesnt specify that organization as the problem.

Nothing in this memo, in regards to animals being brought into Long Beach, mentions spcaLA, she said. It applies to anybody.

Turner said therefore a person who finds a kitten in Lakewood couldnt by law bring it to the Long Beach shelter, nor could a rescue organization that finds a dog in neighboring Compton bring it in for adoption.

It places a burden on these rescue organizations who are already overburdened, under-resourced and theyre doing the work that LBACS should be doing of adopting animals out, she said. LBACS is not adopting large numbers of animals out because spcaLA doesnt want them to. Its just foisting the problem back on the community.

She remarked that the 677 adoptions LBACS reports is small next to comparable cities like Sacramento, whose shelter managed 5,000 adoptions. That citys website states that the shelter sent out 5,037 dogs and cats for adoption last year and 4,321 as of October this year.

And regarding the proposed ordinance amending the number of pets people can have, Turner said her organization advocates for eight rather than six but said such laws dont impact animal welfare by themselves.

If youre concerned about animal welfare, the laws dont do anything in terms of changing human behavior except to deter responsible people who would take good care of a larger number of animals from having them, she said, adding that Sacramento allows up to 10 pets per household. Sacramentos website states that residents can harbor up to three dogs and seven cats.

Public opinion supports a no-kill policy and stronger adoption efforts, Turner said, but also noted that LBACS and spcaLA practices affect all pet owners.If your dog gets out, your dog could go to the shelter, Turner said. And if he gets sick, [] he could be killed.

Shelter progressDespite these concerns, Staycee Dains, LBACS manager, told the Signal Tribune that she collaborated with Mouet on the steps and is hopeful for continued progress.She said that the City has already made great strides in reducing its stray-animal population following the four-year-old spay-and-neuter ordinance.

Courtesy City of Long BeachGraph from Phase 2 of the City of Long Beachs audit of its animal-care services showing increases in live-release rates of animals in recent years

The City increasing its limit of how many pets residents can have will further reduce the stray-animal population, she said.The idea is to allow people to have more animals so they can adopt more animals from the shelter, she said.

Dains said she is also hopeful that the MOU with spcaLA will formalize the ways in which their operations work together, especially as LBACS has evolved over the past decade.

We really want to make sure our efforts are collaborative and make sure whatever were putting into place is going to be definitely beneficial for the LBACS shelter animals she said. Im very hopeful that we will be able to come up with a memorandum of understanding.

Dains added that LBACS will begin negotiations as soon as possible and expects the process to be short, hoping to complete the agreement early in 2020.

Dains said she is also confident in LBACSs Compassion Saves model to ensure the animals in its care get everything they need and especially an appropriate outcome, whether that means being returned to an owner, adopted, placed in foster care or sent to a rescue organization.

We want to make sure that were making excellent outcome decisions for them, Dains said. Making sure that animals are getting to their outcome as soon as possible is a really important part of the Compassion Saves model.

Dains said she is also pleased with reforms allowing volunteers to come on board faster.

Weve streamlined some of our training so that those who can come to the shelter and go through the screening process and be trained has been thankfully truncated, she said.

She added the City has opened up the window of time it can screen volunteer candidates by contracting with another organization to provide such services as fingerprinting.

People wont have to wait from their orientation to their processing time, which for some people could be weeks, Dains said. Weve definitely seen an increase in volunteer retention from going to that process.

More volunteers have allowed LBACS to develop new programs, such as behavior rehabilitation for dogs, Dains said.

Prior to starting this program, [some dogs] were not getting their needs met and so would languish in the shelter [and] their behaviors would become increasingly concerning because they werent getting the right type of enrichment, like getting out of their kennels and getting the right type of handling, Dains said.

She noted that a lot of the dogs at the shelter have been through trauma and need someone to guide them through that experience through specific activities with volunteers, such as educational training that helps them cope with the shelter environment.

It has made a huge difference in the stress level of our dogs in our kennels and the ease of volunteers being able to handle the dogs, she said.

As for cats, Dains said her own office has become the place for especially scared cats to calm down before continuing into the shelter.

People have been so invested and have really made a lot of personal sacrifices to see our animal-services department succeed, Dains said. Were very excited to keep up the momentum and progress that everyone in our community has worked on for so many years.

More here:

Long Beach City Council to consider increasing allowed pets from 4 to 6 to reduce animal euthanasia - Signal Tribune

Last month we began considering the proposal, What if evolution were true? Perhaps there truly was only a Big Bang, but no Almighty God.

Maybe it was just random chance operating over billions of years which spontaneously produced life. Perchance the biblical idea of a Creator God is ancient myth and ignorant superstition.

If evolution were true, were left with the conclusion that theres no unseen Director of creation, just time and chance doing their haphazard, undirected thing.

What are the ramifications of teaching only evolutionary theory? Could some of the evil behaviors in our country be linked partially to the fact that our society is awash in teaching evolution in both public schools, higher education, and the news media? Lets consider what might logically follow if evolution were true.

Previously, we discussed that if evolution were true, then were an accident and we have no purpose. What else flows from this teaching? Life has no intrinsic, God-given value; abortion, euthanasia, and suicide have no theological meaning.

Consider that, if life isnt God-given, if its derived from fluke, random chance operating over billions of years, then in the grand scheme of things, life is meaningless. When viewed through an evolutionary lens, abortion, euthanasia and suicide are perfectly acceptable and make sense in some cases.

If life is accidental and people have no God-given purpose or worth, then why not control populations using abortion as birth control? What difference does it make and why should anyone care? A fetus is just a cosmic accident, a blob of cells with no soul, because according to evolutionary theory, theres no such thing as a soul (thats a God thing). The spiritual doesnt exist.

Did you know that 75 percent of Down Syndrome babies conceived in the U.S. are now aborted in utero? Or, that over 600,000 abortions are performed in the U.S. annually? Some might recoil at hearing these statistics.

However, if evolution were true, these neednt be looked at as babies but as biological clumps of unwanted tissue and products of conception.

Whats the problem with harvesting fetal tissue, organ donation for medical research, or providing needed health care services for women? Why be squeamish about the brutality of partial birth abortions? Evolutionary theory tells us its an unborn fetus, not a precious baby made in the image of God.

If evolution were true, why should anyone have qualms about euthanasia? Taken to its logical conclusion, Darwins theory causes some folks to conclude that sick, diseased and handicapped folks add nothing to the gene pool but defective genes.

Enfeebled old folks what good are they? If theres no God, no eternity and humanity is a cosmic accident, arent all these kinds of people using up (for no utilitarian reason) precious resources that the rest of us need?

Maybe the 1973 movie Soylent Green truly tapped into the right way to handle overpopulation, pollution and global warming.

If evolution were true, wouldnt suicide be the preferable way to go when lives go hopelessly wrong? Why suffer if were going nowhere for no reason and theres nothing beyond the grave? What good could any suffering bring? Why not assist nature and end a purposeless, pain-filled life?

Is it only a coincidence that, since the theory of evolution is foundational teaching in most primary and secondary public schools, and summarily dismissed by higher education, the news media, and cultural elites, the rate of suicide in the U.S. especially among young people has skyrocketed?

Or, maybe theres a link. Perhaps people especially young people are listening, learning and absorbing all too well what theyre being taught. Is it unreasonable to posit that evolutionary theory might lead to hopelessness, helplessness and despair?

John Lennon dreamed of a world without religion. Imagine there is no heaven; its easy if you try. No hell below us; above us only sky. Imagine all the people living for today. What Lennon imagined would be utopia turns out to be a nightmare in reality.

Or, we can look to the beauty of the night sky, see the complexity of even the most basic cell, or hold a newborn baby and conclude, There IS a Creator. Christ said, Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me (John 14:1).

Hope, help and purpose in life have a name: Jesus.

Gregg Nydegger is the evangelist at Christs Church at Monticello.

Originally posted here:

Hope, help and purpose in life have a name: Jesus - Newsbug.info

EDMONTON, November 22, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) A United Conservative Party (UCP)-dominated committee voted Thursday to kill an Alberta private members bill protecting conscience rights.

But the Alberta legislative assembly as a whole could still vote to nix the committees recommendation and allow Bill 207 to go for second reading.

In light of that possibility, pro-family groups are urging Alberta voters to keep pressure on their MLAs and Premier Jason Kenney.

Tabled by rookie UCP MLA Dan Williams, Bill 207 upholds the Charter rights of health care providers to refuse to assist in or provide any health care service to which they conscientiously object. The bill as written defines health care service to include the provision of informal and formal referrals.

The standing committee on private members bills voted eight to two to recommend Bill 207 not be considered for second reading after hearing delegations from the Trans Equality Society of Alberta, and Dying with Dignity Canada, as well as physicians Ramona Coelho, Leonie Herx, Kiely Williams, and Jillian Ratti.

UCP members Michaela Glasgo and Joseph Schow voted for the bill, while UCP members Nate Horner, Nathan Neudorf, Jeremy Nixon, and R.J. Sigurdson voted against it.

NDP members Janis Irwin, Chris Nielson, Rakhi Pancholi, and Lori Sigurdson also voted against the bill.

Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition said opposition to the bill was all lies and that the pro-death lobby stoked baseless fears Bill 207 would impede access to euthanasia and abortion.

That was echoed by Glasgo, MLA for Brooks-Medicine Hat in a Facebook post vowing to keep supporting the bill.

I do find it unfortunate that some have attempted to fear monger on conscience rights, she said.

Indeed, Dr. Ratti claimed to the committee that the bill is motivated by anti-abortion groups, some of which are likely foreign-funded and was a veiled attempt to reopen the debate on abortion, the CBC reported.

We shouldn't be talking about abortion rights in Alberta, Ratti said. This is a very political thing and a very cynical thing and it is not about physicians.

Bradley Peter, a Dying with Dignity board member, likewise claimed Albertans would not be able to find a doctor to kill them if the bill passed.

Moreover, Alberta Medical Association president Christine Molnar alleged in a letter to UCP Health Minister Tyler Shandro that the bill may have unintended consequences in limiting patient access to services.

But Williams has insisted the bill would not affect access to medical services.

He said hes heard legitimate fears of doctors that they will be forced to choose between a career in medicine or following their conscience, given that Ontario courts upheld a provincial policy requiring objecting doctors give their patients an effective referral.

Moreover, Williams has worked with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta to bring forward amendments if his bill proceeds, Glasgo pointed out.

The College has said that based on the new wording, Bill 207 would not change how CPSA functions as a regulator, she said.

It is my belief that Bill 207 provides necessary protection for medical professionals on matters of personal moral conviction and respects their Charter rights, she said.

No less than former Supreme Court of Canada Justice John Major has stated that Bill 207 is valid legislation that embraces the Charter rather than breaches it, Glasgo added.

Committee chair Mike Ellis is expected to make a motion next Tuesday afternoon asking the legislative assembly concur with its recommendation to kill Bill 207.

However, if one MLA stands and requests a debate on the concurrence motion, the assembly will have an hour to do so but not that day.

The debate would likely take place December 2, and its possible a majority of MLAs could vote to ignore the committees recommendation and allow Bill 207 to proceed to second reading, where it can be amended.

UCP caucus members have free votes on matters of conscience, Glasgo noted.

I am thankful that this right is being afforded to us as MLAs. I respect my fellow United Conservative MLAs ability to freely vote on Bill 207, even if we disagree on this particular piece of legislation, she said.

I am confident that, especially with the proposed amendments, this can be a unifying piece of legislation that protects conscience rights for medical professionals without compromising the care that Albertans need and deserve, Glasgo wrote.

For more information on contacting your MLA, go to Campaign Life Coalition website here.

Continued here:

Pro-life conscience protection bill thwarted in Alberta, but still has chance at passing - Lifesite

OPINION:Next year's general election just got a whole lot more complicated, voters.

Not only are we going to be drowned in the usual tub-thumping rhetoric and "pick me" bluster that comes with a national election, we're now going to be caught up in a maelstrom of two referendums.

The first follows last week's historic decision in Parliament to allow a referendum on voluntary euthanasia; the second is on the regulation of cannabis.

These two issues not to mention a general election are major, and, if followed through the way that is seemingly expected, will fundamentally change New Zealand.

READ MORE:* Labour and the referendums of dread* MPs pass the buck to the public* Is a referendum democracy at work or abdication of political will?

Both the voluntary euthanasia and cannabis issues need, and deserve, enough time and information for us to get to grips with them, if we're going to be asked to vote on them.

For those of you who read these columns regularly, you'll know that I have already developed an aversion to referendums since watching the damage done to the United Kingdom over the farce that is Brexit.

ROSS GIBLIN/STUFF

ACT MP David Seymour's euthanasia bill was passed by Parliament.

That's been a great example of what happens if you ask people to vote on issues when they really have no clue what's going on and don't have the time, access or the will to search out enough information to make a good decision.

I know we all have a duty to make ourselves fully aware of these issues, but most of us won't, because we have other stuff going on. We'll get half informed and go with our gut instinct when faced with the moment we have to put an 'X' in the box.

Those who shout loudest, have the deepest pockets and have the least regard for truth will do well, if the UK is anything to go by.

I can't think of two more emotive issues for the public to decide on than death and drugs.

Two countries and 11 US states have legalised cannabis, but the exact details of laws and regulations varies from place to place.

Groups who want the vote to go one way will become more strident, vocal, political and polarised; as will those on the opposing side.

Both viewpoints may be valid, but polarised behaviour is how referendums work they push people into opposing positions where they start shouting over each other to make their points heard so they can 'win'.

And politicians will be at the forefront of this as they jump on these issues to get air-time, increase their profile and, of course, gain votes.

These are huge issues to decide on and people are going to feel really strongly: just look at the interest already on the euthanasia bill.

GETTY-IMAGES

legalising cannabis will probably become an also-ran issue when put into a two-horse referendum race with euthanasia, but it deserves a thorough hearing in its own right.

The End of Life Choice Bill passed by a relatively slim margin of 69 votes to 51, after two years of fierce arguments. It gained a record 39,000 submissions from the public during its passage through Parliament.

By comparison, legalising cannabis will probably become an also-ran issue when put into a two-horse referendum race with euthanasia, but it deserves a thorough hearing in its own right.

These issues need plenty of clear air to be properly considered by the general public who are being asked to vote on them.

SUPPLIED

Sue Allen says both referendums will need plenty of clear air to be properly considered by the general public who are being asked to vote on them.

This is all aside from a general election, which is when we have to work out who we want to run the country. And that's a whole can of worms for us: getting to the bottom of issues around education, health, the economy, housing.That list goes on and on.

My plea, though I'm sure no one will hear it, is that if we want informed debate and voting behaviour, then the Government needs to invest some serious time and money into ensuring we lesser mortals fully understand what it is we're voting on.

Sue Allen has worked in journalism, communications, marketing andbrand management for 15 years in the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

Read the original here:

End of life and legalising cannabis referendums make for a complicated election - Stuff.co.nz

A set of regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services, intended to go into effect tomorrow, would have expanded the right of medical professionals to refuse, as a matter of conscience, to perform certain procedures or provide certain drugs. But, earlier this month, a federal court struck down the rules, which would apply, for instance, to a doctor who doesnt wish to perform euthanasia in a state where it is legal to do so or to a nurse who doesnt wish to administer a vaccine manufactured from fetal tissue. Without objecting to the largely technical grounds on which the court invalidated the regulations, Moishe Bane and Nathan Diament argue in favor of such protections:

American law, both legislative and judicial, has a magnificent tradition of accommodating the rights and needs of individuals with conflicting interests. Surely, such mutual accommodations should be the aspiration of regulations regarding health and medical care. Sadly, in certain contextssuch as regarding womens reproductive rights and euthanasiaachieving a balanced approach to competing rights is not the goal of some judges and legislators who instead seek to diminish, and [even] to dismiss, the rights of those Americans committed to abide by their religious tenets.

Even in controversial contexts, legislators have successfully found a middle ground to provide rights to services for some individuals while simultaneously ensuring protections for those unable to provide those services on religious grounds. . . . Unfortunately, [however], respect for the conscience rights of healthcare providers (and other Americans of faith) has been persistently attacked.

The denigration and dismissal of religious belief is frequently advanced in association with both abortion and LGBT rights. Rather than seeking to ensure that these legal rights are balanced with the competing, authentic religious rights of others, many abortion and LGBT advocates frame values borne of religion as illegitimate and undeserving of respect, let alone entitled to legal protection. They assert that any accommodation of religious belief is tantamount to using religion as a sword to harm others. Experience has now shown that the preservation of religious-conscience protections need not impose significant burdens on others.

Our courts and our culture must be reminded that America was founded by those who were seeking religious freedom; that is why they enshrined its protection in the First Amendment. A devout Jewish doctor who declines to issue an assisted-suicide prescription shouldnt be forced to choose between her career and conscience any more than a faithful Catholic attorney who doesnt want to work on a death-penalty case, or a committed feminist web designer who doesnt want to build a pornographic website.

Read more at Washington Times

More about: Abortion, American law, Euthanasia, Freedom of Religion, Medicine

Read more from the original source:

Expanding the Availability of Controversial Medical Procedures Need Not Interfere with the Religious Freedom of Doctors and Nurses - Mosaic

Life is sacred: Townsville Bishop Tim Harris has spoken out strongly against euthanasia.

TOWNSVILLE Bishop Tim Harris has spoken out strongly against euthanasia and defended comments he made likening a push to allow voluntary assisted dying in Queensland to a mentality that existed in Nazi Germany.

Bishop Harris said it was an important time to have a conversation on the grim topic following the Queensland Governments committee hearings, which could result in new laws being presented to parliament early next year.

He joined other Catholic leaders across Queensland, including Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge, in observing Dying Peacefully No Euthanasia Sunday on November 17, advocating against the introduction of so called voluntary assisted dying.

It reminds me of Nazi Germany; these are some of the things that people did because if someone was not 100 per cent, crippled, if they had something wrong with them, if they were aged or not of use to society any more the state then would select certain people and say well experiment on you or well kill you because youre not worth anything, he told parishioners during Mass at Sacred Heart Cathedral, Townsville.

Bishop Harris said he was not surprised media picked up on his comments, and he stood by them.

Everyone is referring to the reference with the Nazis. It (VAD) has that feel about it, for sure. Its not exactly the same but its got that feel about it, he said.

A shiver goes up my spine with this whole matter.

Both my parents had palliative care in the last couple of years of life and it never entered my mind that we would somehow have a law that would allow them to end their life prematurely.

They wouldnt have wanted it, we didnt want it.

The point was the more chances Ive got to say I love you, to me its worth every second of every day.

During his cathedral comments, Bishop Harris said he was not suggesting any evil intent from people with a different view.

Good people are believing that voluntary assisted (dying) is the way to go and I respect their views, but Ive also got to be in there and say there is another way and challenge it, just as theyll be challenging me, he said.

The Church wants to emphasise that we are created in the image and likeness of God and because of that it puts us right up there at the top in terms of Gods creations.

Our bodies are the temple of God and his Holy Spirit and you dont muck around with that, you respect it to the very end.

I believe to assist someone to die in an intentional manner is clearly intentional killing and the Church does not believe in intentional killing.

Instead, Bishop Harris said there should be more attention on improving palliative care services.

A state-sanctioned voluntary assisted suicide can have all the safeguards it likes but even then things can go wrong; the best safeguard is not to do it, he said.

Archbishop Coleridge said Catholic support for better palliative care was grounded in the common good of society.

Better end-of-life care begins with better conversations about death and dying, and how we can die well in ways that do not undermine the foundational values of our society, he said.

Read more from the original source:

Townsville Bishop says Church will never accept assisted suicide because it is intentional killing - Catholic Leader

RIGHT-to-die campaigner Richard Selleys widow has been swamped with letters backing the legalisation of euthanasia in Scotland.

Elaine Selley, 58, told of the overwhelming support since MND sufferer Richard ended his life at the Dignitas clinic.

4

The couple paid 10,000 to travel to the controversial Swiss facility in September but most people cant afford the cost.

And Elaine, of Glenalmond, Perthshire, is determined to carry on Richards battle to change Holyrood legislation so people can die at home surrounded by their loved ones.

She said: Richard left a legacy. I had no idea his story captured so many hearts and made people think about this issue to live positively with a terminal illness.

Thats what he did.

4

4

Ive been overwhelmed with letters of support. Theres hundreds from all over the world from Canada, New Zealand, Dubai, North America, Hong Kong.

Weve also had a great deal of letters supporting assisted dying from complete strangers who hope the law will be changed.

What stands out is empathy for the case and the cause, people sharing end-of-life experiences of loved ones who want assisted dying and wish they had that opportunity.

Former headmaster Richard died at the Zurich clinic after self- administering a powerful dose of sedatives, ending his five-year battle with the incurable disease.

On the day of his death he issued a final plea to MSPs to let people slip away at home.

4

His ashes were interred in Witheridge, Devon, last weekend.

Days later Elaine opened a library in his name at Loretto school in Musselburgh, East Lothian, where Richard worked for 30 years.

She said: I promised Id carry on what he started. I also want to raise awareness of motor neurone disease.

Its so rare that theres not that impetus in terms of money and donations.

Fellow MND sufferer Dave Finlayson, 69, plans to go to Dignitas after saving for an assisted death.

The dad of two and ex-lifeguard, from Dundee, said: A lot of people cant afford it, especially anybody thats working class.

Its a lot of money and I would have rather gone on a good cruise but I dont have a choice. Nobody wants to die but Id rather go the way I want to than suffer.

Late MSP and Parkinsons sufferer Margo MacDonald tried to change the law twice before she died in 2014. But opponents argue legalising assisted dying would expose people to coercion and abuse.

Charity Dignity in Dying hope to put the issue back on the agenda at the next Holyrood session.

The Scottish Government said they support greater public and personal discussion of bereavement, death, dying and care at the end of life.

oliver.norton@news.co.uk

We pay for your stories and videos! Do you have a story or video for The Scottish Sun? Email us atscoop@thesun.co.ukor call 0141 420 5200

Read the rest here:

Right-to-die campaigner Richard Selleys widow swamped with letters backing legalisation of euthanasia in S - The Scottish Sun

LUMBERTON If a dog or cat is taken to the Robeson County Animal Shelter, theres a pretty good chance it wont get out of there alive. Last year, more than a 90% chance.

But people like Molly Goldston, the founder of Saving Grace Animals for Adoption, act as a lifeline for the more adoptable animals by working to find them homes.

The Robeson County shelter reported 4,493 euthanized animals in 2018, according to Public Animal Shelter reports by the N.C. Agriculture and Consumer Services, by far the most in the state. Coming in a distant second was Johnston County with 2,703.

Records show Robeson County numbers have fluctuated over the years, but have been on the rise recently. In 2010, 2,073 animals were euthanized, which was 46% of all animals taken in. The rate increased to 65% of 3,726 animals in 2015 and 94% of 4,778 taken in during 2018.

In 2018, the county shelter had its highest euthanasia total since 2001, and it accounted for 9% of all the 55,900 animals euthanized in shelters throughout North Carolina that year.

The Robeson County Health Department, which manages the shelter, is directed by Bill Smith. He said the county animal shelter has seen a decrease in the number of animals put to death since the 1990s. Public Animal Shelter reports date back only to 2001.

Goldston visits the Robeson County shelter once or twice each week to rescue dogs, which are much more likely to be pulled from the shelter than cats. Goldstons is one of three rescue groups that regularly take animals from the county shelter.

Shes our biggest rescue, said Victoria Heinds, a shelter attendant.

Goldston said sometimes five, sometimes 25 animals are rescued during her visits. In 2017, she said she rescued about 900 animals from the shelter, which is at 255 Landfill Road in St. Pauls. She also travels to shelters in Scotland, Sampson, Johnston and Wayne counties in North Carolina and Marlboro County in South Carolina.

We get so many amazing dogs from Robeson County, and it is very rewarding to see them receive the necessary care and go through our adoption program and find a wonderful home, she said. I have a great team of volunteers and foster homes who make it possible.

The Wake Forest-based nonprofit is situated on 10 acres of land and has the capacity to house up to 100 dogs on its property. The group, which enjoys 300 active volunteers, also has a foster program that sends 250 dogs to temporary homes in advance of finding a permanent one. Goldston said the center processes 60 to 70 adoptions each week and predicts 3,000 adoptions by the end of this year.

She helps us a lot, Heinds said. She really does. She gives them a chance.

Cat adoptions from the shelter are low, said Jason Allison, shelter director.

A lot of people suffer from cat allergies, which will prevent them from adopting cats, Allison said.

The Raeford-based Making A Difference Rescue and Cats Paw Rescue and Sanctuary, based in Maryville, Tennessee, pull some cats from the county shelter, Allison said.

Smith said the local shelters are at the mercy of rescue groups, which decide which shelters to target, and that euthanasia numbers reflect that.

Since many shelters in the South have excess animals it is easy to move on to another site and that is what happens, Smith said.

Anyone looking to adopt a cat or dog from the shelter can view some of the available animals at the shelters Facebook page.

The job can be difficult for shelter attendants, Heinds said. There are days when she finds herself in tears.

Sometimes theyre tears of happiness, she said, referring to rescues. Sometimes, theyre tears of sadness.

Euthanasia procedures are performed once a week at the shelter, Allison said, and only when the shelter is closed. It is done by injection.

Theres no euthanasia specific date, he said.

The decision to euthanize is based on space available in the shelter, the length of time an animal has spent in the shelter and the animals health.

State law says an animal must be held for at least 72 hours before it can be adopted or euthanized, but the county extends that to five days.

Some of the animals at the shelter are surrendered, or perhaps abandoned and picked up by Animal Control officers.

A lot of people just cant financially afford to have dogs, Allison said. And they take on more than they can chew, so to say. And they have good intentions, and it just gets to a point where they just cant do it anymore.

The costs of upkeep, vaccinations and food contribute to the financial burden, he said.

As of Friday, the shelter had 64 dogs and 44 cats.

We receive animals every day, Allison said.

The Robeson County Animal Shelter recently added 10 new quarantine pens that ease overcrowding, Allison said. They house puppies before they are introduced to the rest of the population.

The shelter has 125 dog pens, 34 cat pens and a state-approved capacity to house 159 animals, Allison said. But all the pens cant be occupied as some must be available to move animals into as other pens are cleaned.

Of the dog pens, 100 are used for adoptions and 15 to quarantine sick or dangerous dogs, such as a dog that has bitten someone. Cat pens can be divided in order to house two cats per pen.

Health officials encourage pet owners to spay and neuter their animals as a way to decrease the number of strays. Although the shelter does not perform those procedures, it offer vouchers that allow owners, if they qualify, to receive those services for free as a part of the N.C. Spay/Neuter program.

The program is available to residents whose annual income is lower than the federal poverty guideline set by the Department of Health and Human Services. The federal poverty guideline for a one-person household is $12,490 a year, a two-person is $16,910, and a family of four is $25,750.

The program covers the cost of the procedure, according to N.C. Agriculture and Consumer Services.

We hand out vouchers that most local vets accept, Smith said. Local vets bill us, we pay and then seek reimbursement from the state, if the fund has not been depleted.

Vouchers are available at the animal shelter on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from 8 a.m. to noon, and at the Robeson County Health Department, located at 460 Country Club Road, every Thursday from 1 to 2:30 p.m.

The Robeson County Veterinary Medical Association also offers a Spay/Neuter Improve Pets program in March and September of each year. Procedure fees are lowered during the SNIP events and are based on pet weight, surgery needed and the use of anesthesia.

The spay/neuter procedure normally costs as much as $150, depending on the size and breed of the animal. All pet owners qualify for the SNIP discount regardless of income, and the owner doesnt have to live in Robeson County.

Allison

Smith

In 2018, the Robeson County Animal Shelter had its highest euthanasia rate since 2001 and accounted for 9% of all the animals euthanized in such shelters throughout North Carolina. Robeson County reported 4,493 euthanized animals that year, according to a 2018 Public Animal Shelter Report by N.C. Agriculture and Consumer Services. In 2001, 4,226 animals were euthanized, or 95% of the animals taken in. Courtesy photo

Goldston

One dozen dogs were given a home on Nov. 6 when the Saving Grace Animals for Adoption rescue group visited the Robeson County Animal Shelter. James Walters, left, Molly Goldston, Dawn Johnson and Lukas Packer helped load the animals into a van.

Number of dogs, cats put down on shelter on the rise

Reach Jessica Horne at 910-416-5165 or via email at [emailprotected]

The rest is here:

Robeson leads NC is number of unwanted animals put down - The Robesonian