Category Archives: Euthanasia

22 May 2017, 9 a.m.

Tasmanias largest aged care provider not asked to consult on legislation.

Lara Giddings

The chairman of Tasmaniaslargest aged care provider says itis extremely concerning Lara Giddings and CassyOConnor failed to ask for Southern Cross Care to consult ontheir revised euthanasia legislation.

Board chairman Ray Groom said the decision was extremely disappointing.

We operate nineresidential aged care or nursing homes, extensive home care services and 13 retirement villages across Tasmania, he said.

It is well known to both Members that this life and death issue is of vital concern to the aged care sector. Yet there has been no consultation with us.

Mr Groom saiddebate on the Bill should be adjourned until a full and proper consultation had taken place with interested parties.

He said it must be done sothere couldbe a complete and detailed understanding of exactly what was being proposed in the revised legislation.

Lower House MPs in the Tasmanian Parliament are set to have a conscience debate on thenew Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill this week.

Go here to read the rest:

Euthanasia bill criticised by Southern Cross Care - Tasmania Examiner

Toronto Sun

Why is Ontario forcing docs to participate in euthanasia? Toronto Sun From the beginning of the debate over the now legal medical procedure of medically assisted dying, politicians have simply assumed doctors would do it. Why? Why assume all doctors (and nurses) would be comfortable with this burden? Especially since the ...

Visit link:

Why is Ontario forcing docs to participate in euthanasia? - Toronto Sun

Mashable

Pit bull on the brink of euthanasia gets second chance as a police dog instead Mashable Leonard, a pit bull who had been put on the euthanasia list due to aggressive behavior, is set to become Ohio's first pit bull police dog. According to local ABC news, Leonard was brought to Union County Humane Society where staff members found ... Pit bull spared from euthanasia becomes police K-9KXAN.com WATCH: Leonard the dog on brink of euthanasia becomes Ohio's first pit bull police dogYahoo7 News Dog who faced death in shelter to become Ohio's first pit bull K9ABC6OnYourSide.com NBC4i.com -Facebook -13abc Action News all 37 news articles »

Read more:

Pit bull on the brink of euthanasia gets second chance as a police dog instead - Mashable

Ontario, Canada has passed a law formally legalizing lethal injection euthanasia. And it will force all provincial doctors to be complicit by either doing the deed themselves to all legally qualified patients who request to be killed, or by tasking them with procuring a death doctor. From the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Website (my emphasis):

In Ontario, health regulatory colleges are responsible for regulating their respective professions in the public interest. In doing so, colleges may establish policies and standards that their members must comply with, including policies and standards regarding medical assistance in dying.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontariorequires that when physicians are unwilling to provide certain elements of care for reasons of conscience or religion, an effective referral to another health-care provider must be provided to the patient. An effective referral means a referral made in good faith, to a non-objecting, available, and accessible physician, other health-care professional, or agency.

Think about this. Three years ago, it would have been a felony fordoctors tokill patients, potentially landing them in prison.

Now, refusing to participate in homicide could cost them their medical licenses.

The question I am often asked is, Why?Why force a doctor to participate in killing against her moral or religious beliefs when a patient wanting to be lethally injected could easily find a death doctor through a pro-euthanasia organization or a list of willing MDs published by the governmentas has been established in other provinces.

Heres what I think:

First, adoctor refusing to kill sends a powerful message that the act is wrong morally and medically. That message must be silenced.

Second, medicine is being weaponized as a means of turningculture away from the core principles ofintrinsic human dignity and the equality/sanctity of life,into a society more focused on radical and atomistic individualism and utilitarian outcomes.

Third, compulsory euthanasia complicity marginalizes the influence of religion in society and strengthens secularism.

Fourth, this is a splendid way to cleanseorthodox religious believers, Hippocratic Oath-acceptingdoctors, andpro-lifers from the health professionsand dissuadethose holding suchbeliefs from becoming physicians, nurses, and pharmacists.

I am sure there are other forces at work. But this much I know: Conscripting doctors to be homicide facilitators as a condition of practicing medicine is tyranny.

See more here:

Ontario, Canada Euthanasia Tyranny Against MDs | National Review - National Review

A renowned British neurosurgeon has strongly backed euthanasia and assisted suicide in the second volume of his memoirs, even if there is collateral damage. Henry Marsh has just published Admissions: A Life in Brain Surgery. Mr Marsh (surgeons in the UK are called Mister rather than Doctor) was famous for operating on the brain with only a local anaesthetic to minimize damage to neural structures. A talented writer as well, he is well-known in the media.

He told the London Times in an interview about his latest book that he was exasperated by opposition to liberalising end-of-life legislation and described it as grotesque.

One of the most powerful arguments in the armoury of opponents of euthanasia is fear of elder abuse, that vulnerable older people will be made to feel that death is obligation for them. Mr Marsh pooh-poohs this notion.

"They argue that grannies will be made to commit suicide," he said. "Even if a few grannies get bullied into it, isn't that the price worth praying for all the people who could die with dignity?"

Continue reading here:

UK star surgeon backs euthanasia despite danger of elder abuse - BioEdge

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Mller pictured attending the Epiphany Mass at St Peter's Basilica in 2015 (Photo by Franco Origlia/Getty Images)

The Vatican's chief of doctrine urged pro-life Canadians to continue the fight

The Vaticans doctrinal chief has told an audience in Canada we shall prevail in opposing legalised euthanasia.

Cardinal Gerhard Mller addressed an audience of bioethicists, theologians, doctors and nurses at Torontos St Michaels Cathedral Basilica on Monday.

The prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith called Canadas turn to legalised euthanasia tragic.

Euthanasia not only constitutes a grave wrong in itself, but its legalisation creates toxic and deadly social pathologies that disproportionately afflict the weakest members of society, Cardinal Mller said.

The cardinal was in Toronto to deliver the keynote address at a Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute conference dedicated to the conscience rights of health care professionals.

He urged members of the institute to persuade Canadian citizens to take the necessary steps to reverse the dangerous legal error of your Supreme Court and Parliament and, in the meantime, to protect the rights of conscience of health care providers who refuse to take the lives of those that they have sworn to treat and comfort.

Basilian Fr Leo Walsh, who leads the institutes branch at Assumption University in Windsor, Ontario, called the cardinals address dramatically important.

While it is true that those who oppose physician-assisted death have lost the debate up to this point and the law is unlikely to change soon, that does not mean the debate is over, Fr Walsh said.

We dont give up, he said. We have to keep pushing it.

In bringing in Cardinal Mller to argue against legalised euthanasia, the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute is tapping a deep well of Catholic thinking and the highest authority on Catholic teaching. In a recent book-length interview, the cardinal argues for a brand of theology that is not satisfied with merely internal Church arguments.

Amid so much irrationality and frivolity, we must seek out the enemy nihilism, agnosticism and scepticism so widespread in our society because of its loss of realism and humanity and, with the help of the riches of the magisterium of the Church, fight it systematically, Cardinal Muller said in The Cardinal Muller Report, a 2016 volume from the US Catholic publisher Ignatius Press.

Everything is reinvented, anything goes. In society, we can only expect the wind that blows us this way and that. In society, we can only seek the comfort of being always on the side of the majority and not that of the brave witness we bear by swimming against the current when we must.

The next step for Canadians who oppose medicalised killing must be to legally protect the conscience rights of doctors who refuse to refer their patients on to Medical Aid in Dying (MAID) assessments, Cardinal Muller said.

No one who trains and takes an oath to care for the sick should be pressed into ending the lives of the very people that they have promised to serve, the cardinal told about 200 people who had gathered at St Michaels Cathedral.

Refusal to engage in euthanasia represents basic fidelity to the very medical art that the physician professes, he said. To compel a doctor to participate in any manner in euthanasia is to force him to cease being a doctor and to betray the very profession to which he has given his life.

Any law that forces a physician to act against what he knows to be the most basic good of the patient the preservation of his very life either directly or indirectly, is unjust.

Read the rest here:

Euthanasia 'creates toxic and deadly pathologies' that hurt the weakest, says Cardinal Mller - Catholic Herald Online

In the Kanpur district of Uttar Pradesh, a mother-daughter duo is suffering from an unusual disease due to which they are unable to move even a step from their seat. In order to get rid of this disable life, they both has demanded Euthanasia from the state government. Euthanasia is a mercy killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma, in other words, it is an assisted suicide.

22 years old Anamika lives with her mother Sashi Mishra in Shankracharya area of Yashoda Nagar, Kanpur. She says she and her mother being diagnosed with a rare disease called muscular dystrophy,a hereditary condition marked by progressive weakening and wasting of the muscles. They came to know about this in the year 1995 when for the first time her mother faced difficulty in walking and working.

Doctors say this rare disease is irremediable in India. Only physiotherapy is a temporary solution to get relief for some time. After some time in 2006, Anamika also got diagnosed with this rare disease as already mentioned it is genetic. In 2002 Anamikas father died due to a heart attack. Their financial condition got shattered after the demise of her father. Currently, they have no one who can take care of them. They even need a person who can hold them and take to the washroom. In such situation, their neighbors help them. They use to sit on the wheelchair all the day long.

Anamika said, she wrote a letter for help to Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the year 2014. She asked for electronic band and wheelchairso that they dont need to depend on others. After that in her letter she wrote, in case the government is not able to fulfill their demands then they can permit usEuthanasia i.e mercy killing.

However, they didnt get notify and got no any reply from the government end. After one and a half year, she got a call saying, the government will help you. CM Akhilesh Yadav issued a cheque of Rs 50,000 to diseased mother and daughter in the year 2016. But is that a sufficient amount? No, absolutely not! Thats why this duo has demandedEuthanasia. Now see what government will do!

NOW YOU CAN GET THE LATEST BUZZ ON YOUR PHONE! DOWNLOAD THE PAGALPARROT MOBILE APP FOR ANDROID

Link:

This Mother Daughter Duo Wants Euthanasia (Mercy Killing) And The Reason Will Upset You - PagalParrot

CAMPBELL COUNTY, Ky.

Every dog at the Campbell County Animal Shelter has been adopted, the shelter announced late Tuesday.

Workers at the shelter said earlier this week that it was at full capacity, which is about 50 animals. It is a traditional shelter, meaning that when it is full, it might resort to euthanasia.

We need to keep at least a little bit of space so we don't have to euthanize to make room later, assistant director Lisa Crummen said Monday.

Related: Campbell Co. Animal Shelter giving away dogs, cats due to overcrowding

The shelter offered free adoptions in hopes of making room.

Workers announced that every dog has been adopted.

Again, we can't thank everyone enough, shelter workers wrote on the facility's Facebook page. We are so excited about all the new homes for these babies.

Adoption fees are still waived for all adult cats through Saturday.

Excerpt from:

Dogs once at risk of euthanasia adopted, NKY shelter says - WLWT Cincinnati

Under legislation proposed in New South Wales, residents would have the legal right to end their own lives if terminally ill and likely to die within 12 months. Photograph: Alamy

In New South Wales and Victoria this week, two draft bills are being hailed by right-to-die advocates as the two best chances to legalise voluntary euthanasia in Australia in 20 years.

Sponsored by a cross-party coalition of five MPs, a draft version of the NSW voluntary assisted dying bill was unveiled on Tuesday, while in Victoria an independent ministerial advisory panel chaired by neurosurgeon and former Australian Medical Association president Brian Owler is due to release an interim report on Wednesday morning.

Both are scheduled to be presented to parliament in August with a good chance that one or both states will become the first jurisdiction to legalise euthanasia since the Northern Territorys assisted dying laws were overturned by the federal government in 1997.

In South Australia, a bill last November was defeated by one vote. In Western Australia, the recent Labor election victory has delivered a new premier and health minister who are openly calling for their laws around euthanasia to change.

As legislative momentum builds and community attitudes change, each state is approaching the issue in its own way.

The director of Dying with Dignity NSW, Shayne Higson, says the draft bill presented in Sydney on Tuesday is the most watertight in the world.

It will have the tightest eligibility criteria in the world and the highest safeguards for assisted dying, she says. It has a good chance of passing. I cant imagine what else they could do to safeguard it they have designed a bill that addresses all those concerns.

The result of collaboration between Liberal MP Lee Evans, Nationals MLC Trevor Khan, Labor MLC Lynda Voltz, Greens MLC Mehreen Faruqi and independent MP Alex Greenwich, the voluntary assisted dying bill is a rare example of cross-party support that has Higson personally optimistic about its chances.

Under the proposed legislation, New South Wales residents would have the legal right to end their own lives if terminally ill and likely to die within 12 months. They would have to be over 25 and suffering severe pain or physical incapacity to an extent deemed unacceptable to the patient.

This would need to be verified by both a primary medical practitioner, and an independent specialist.

Higson also said the NSW bill was unique in further insisting the person must be examined by an independent psychiatrist or psychologist to determine if they are of sound mind and if their choice is voluntary.

The bill would also enable a close relative of the patient to apply to the supreme court for a judicial review and would force a 48-hour cooling off period in case they wanted to change their mind.

Khan said he was confident the working group had enough votes that we can shift across the aisle, despite noted opposition from the Christian Democrats.

We wouldnt be going forward unless we thought there was a chance, he said.

Like all recent and proposed euthanasia bills, the NSW bill would be up for a conscience vote, allowing MPs to vote unbound by party lines.

Victorias proposal has slowly but unfalteringly inched towards a conscience vote since the government announced in December 2016 that a bill would be put before parliament.

This would have the best chance of any of the bills up to date, because this it is a government bill.

Unlike in other states, the push in Victoria is directly sponsored by the premier, Daniel Andrews, and the health minister, Jill Hennessy. The planning has been rigorous and drawn out but the government support means euthanasia advocacy groups are confident the bill will be successfully passed by mid-year.

The process is currently being overseen by an advisory panel, who are following the recommendations of a June 2016 parliamentary committee inquiry into end of life choices.

It is likely that the final form of the bill will follow the June 2016 report but the advisory panel has been tasked with consulting stakeholders and providing more specific advice for the government.

On Wednesday, the committees interim report is set to be released, which contains feedback but no firm recommendations. A final report with recommendations is expected in July, which will then inform the final form of the bill, to be presented in August.

It is likely that the Victorian bill will apply to Victorian residents over the age of 18, who are suffering from a serious and incurable condition which is causing enduring and unbearable suffering that cannot be relieved in a manner the patient deems tolerable.

While the parliamentary committee recommended patients must be at the end of their life, the interim report found there was no clear consensus as to what timeframe this entailed and was still considering a range from six, 12 and 18 months.

In terms of safeguards, it is likely that doctors who are conscientious objectors could not be forced to assist patients end their life. Dementia or disability alone would also be excluded as an eligible condition in any final version of the law.

The patient will also need to be assessed by two doctors and they will be able to rescind the request at any time.

Higson said the Victorian bill had been the most thorough process in the history of this movement.

On the face of it, this would have the best chance of any of the bills up to date, because this it is a government bill. There are more the resources behind it, they have appointed an expert panel led by Brian Owler and the process that theyve followed has been impeccable.

Following Labors election win in March this year, WAs new health minister, Roger Cook, has been pushing for voluntary euthanasia to be legalised.

I support voluntary euthanasia and I think we need to legislate to enable people to take control of their lives in their final stages, he said, weeks after his win.

Despite refusing to endorse it as Labor policy, the WA government has been encouraging the Labor agriculture minister, Alannah MacTiernan, to introduce reform as a private members bill, along with the Greens MLC Robin Chapple.

Chapple said in March that they were waiting on the outcome of Victorias inquiry before progressing.

The premier, Mark McGowan, has also previously spoken in favour of euthanasia laws and it is likely a conscience vote would be allowed.

In November last year, South Australias bill to legalise euthanasia was dramatically defeated by the Speakers casting vote despite support from both the premier, Jay Weatherill, and the opposition leader, Steven Marshall.

Both leaders voted in favour of the Death With Dignity Bill, with Weatherill saying he was gutted by the outcome and the bills original mover, Duncan McFetridge, vowing to continue pushing the issue.

The November vote was the parliaments 15th attempt at the bill and the first time any euthanasia legislation had made it past a second reading vote.

However, after a conscience vote, a 23-23 tie had to be broken by Speaker Michael Atkinson in the early hours of the morning.

Atkinson then told ABC radio that if the bill had been considered during daylight hours ... over several days, it may have been carried.

Similar to the NSW bill, the proposed law would only affect those suffering from terminal illness with unbearable pain and would require the affirmation of two doctors.

Go Gentle Australia nevertheless called it an historic moment for advocates of legalised euthanasia in Australia.

The voluntary assisted dying bill 2016 is tabled to be debated in the Tasmanian lower house on 24 May.

Moved on 17 November 2016 by former Labor premier Lara Giddings, and supported by Cassy OConnor, leader of the Tasmanian Greens, it follows a bill in 2013 that was defeated at the second reading stage by only 2 votes.

The bill only applies to patients with a serious incurable and irreversible medical condition. It also requires the approval of two doctors and would create an office of an independent registrar with powers to monitor and review all asssisted deaths.

Chances of the new bills success have not been publicly discussed, but Dying with Dignity Tasmania noted that the make-up of parliament has changed since the last vote, with two new Labor, five new Liberal and two new Greens MPs.

Queensland is the only state to never have had a voluntary euthanasia bill introduced to its parliament.

Queensland speaker Peter Wellington called for a parliamentary inquiry into voluntary euthanasia last year following the Victorian announcement, but the Queensland parliamentary health committee declined to initiate one.

In 2013, a parliamentary inquiry was held into palliative and community care, but it did not cover issues of euthanasia or assisted death.

Here is the original post:

Assisted dying: states rally as bills offer chance to legalise voluntary euthanasia - The Guardian

The right to end one's life when pain and immobility become unbearable has seen many swords clash during the past decades.

To delve deeper into this issue, I asked 18 students from the University of Malta and noted the arguments by the Rev. Prof. Emmanuel Agius, Dean of the Faculty of Theology, and Pierre Mallia, Professor of Family Medicine, who both lecture at the University, during an interview on Campus FM.*

Students defined euthanasia as: the killing of seriously-ill patients to be relieved from pain; a patient's right to end his life painlessly; mercy killing; the withdrawal of treatment; and assisted suicide.

Euthanasia, however, holds a wider definition. Prof. Mallia defined it as 'voluntary homicide', generally referring to a sick person but not necessarily one close to death. He made a net distinction between active euthanasia: when the physician helps end the patient's life with intended means; and passive euthanasia: when treatment is purposely withheld to let the patient die.

Prof. Agius noted the difference between killing and letting die, saying that only the first action is considered as euthanasia and not "when a patient refuses to take treatment". When I asked students about this, four agreed with Prof. Agius, saying that you are just letting nature take its course. Six claimed to be both a form of euthanasia or else an indirect method.

Prof. Mallia said that although when one speaks of such moral rights, one tends to incorporate the importance of autonomy, one cannot oblige society to end one's life, especially in cases of heartbreak or just because you got ill. So, when can euthanasia be justified? Thirteen of the students felt that euthanasia can only be justified when the person's life deteriorates, when not able to live independently and when one loses complete control of one's body. Five said that ending a life can never be justified because each and every human life is precious, invaluable and humans don't have authority over it.

Mallia referred to the pre-legality state, observing that Parliament is trying to turn ethics into statistics, which is impossible, because the passing of a law doesn't depend on whether the law is morally right or wrong; rather on the agreement reached by MPs.

According to Agius, one should look into the social conditions which induce a person to consider such a step that goes against the fundamental right to live. What induces a person to opt for euthanasia? Students listed endless pain, concern for others such as concern of being a burden to one's family, lack of hope, lack of support from relatives and friends and lack of understanding of value of life.

Seven students disagreed with the fact that the right to live and the right to die are contradictory, insisting that they are similar human rights which every person should be entitled to. One rejected euthanasia as a right, claiming that we are not the master of our lives. Eight agreed while two said that life should be protected at all times; otherwise the right to live would be meaningless. The rest were undecided.

In order to analyse what leads people to want to take their own lives, one ought to consider palliative as well as spiritual care, Agius said. Out of 18 students, 16 agreed with Agius, that euthanasia should be a last resort after spiritual/emotional support. Also, that authorities should make sure people who are giving such support are competent, well-trained, pro-life and of good morals. The rest said it's difficult once a person has made up his mind.

I asked the students if the moral implications are any different between an old person and a child/teenager/young adult who opts for this procedure. Seven said that age should not make any difference. One said it's true that a young person is seen as the one who has a longer future but if life was extended to both, they might end up with a positive outcome i.e. changing someone else's life or giving a life-changing contribution to society. Five students said that there is a difference because while the old person lived his/her life, the young one is still at the beginning of life.

When it comes to the effects on the physician, students mentioned guilt, especially if a bond has been created with the patient. Others said it depends on the physician's values - especially spirituality - because if he/she is pro-life, shame might ensue for having assisted in the procedure. Four students disagreed that such attached emotions could follow since, for physicians, they encounter such losses while others might be blinded by its lucrative side.

So, should euthanasia become legal or not? Apart from the four students that responded "undecided", the number was even. Seven agreed to the extent that strict regulations should be applied, for example, when the patient is in a good state of mind, when it's the patient's decision and when the patient is terminally ill. The other seven students disagreed, saying that authorities cannot keep referring to themselves as 'Christians' if they opt to go against the fundamental and core values of Christianity. One said that with the improvement of medicine, euthanasia should not be considered.

Ten students were concerned that if euthanasia is legalized, we would be running the risk of people abusing of such an option and sick people will opt for the easy way out i.e. refuse treatment. Three said this depends on the emotional support the patient receives. The rest were undecided.

"If we want to make our island more merciful and be first in Europe, we have to be the country where we give the most palliative care and whoever will be found in this situation wouldn't need to ask for euthanasia because we have psychological, emotional, spiritual support and a good system where we give these patients their dignity," Agius added.

*The programme, 'Mhux l-aar Kelma', led by the Rev. Dr Joe Borg and Professor Maryanne Lauri is broadcast on Campus FM. 103.7

Excerpt from:

Is euthanasia assisted suicide? - Malta Independent Online