Everyone has the right … to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media and regardless of frontiers.

— Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19

But then I remember, Australians don’t have a “Bill of Human Rights”.  Perhaps, if Mr Bush gives us permission, it may happen.

Late last week I posted off 130 letters to Victorian Politicians, both Houses of Parliament (a copy of which is posted under Lobbying).

I have deleted my previous comments written in this spot,  in the heat of the moment,  as of Thursday September 1st, 2005.   A  friend told me I should be more optimistic about the outcome of my letter writing….As in a manual diary, I have torn the page out and said nothing in anticipation of a positive response from my Victorian Representatives in Parliament.   Perhaps,  I should have more faith in the system and remember good people who work hard on my behalf, such as Australian Democrats,  Senator Lyn Allison.

Senator Allison, who will debate Senator Barnaby Joyce in the “Role of Religion in Politics” at the Exit Annual Conference in Brisbane, November 2005.

My Say:  The article below could be relating to any “case” in Australia.   In the eyes of the Law which is made by politicians, implemented by the policemen, and debated by lawyers, compassionate killing is MURDER.   Yet a soldier, sanctioned by laws made by those same politicians can go forth and bomb or shoot, and just generally kill anyone, including babies without reprisals.

In the Criminal Code there is no room for “compassion” as the man says, Murder is Murder, but why is there a distinction about indiscriminate killing of civilians not a charge worthy of debate and accountability?. Can there not be such a thing as a Good Murder and a Bad Murder?  Of course, when it suits governments, there is!

There is “justifiable homicide” when a policeman kills a man holding a knife who gets shot dead with a bullet.  Not shot in the leg, and just disabled, but shot dead by the policeman under stress, with a gun. Why then is a 70 year old man nursing a very ill wife, not seen as being under severe stress (over a much longer period of time) and the killing seen as “justifiable homicide”?   The policeman and the husband are both guilty of killing, yet one is cautioned about acting in haste and the other, who could be assumed,  loved the victim dearly, is charged with Murder or Manslaughter.  Both killings are understandable.  People under stress react according to their ability to cope.

Every week,  some where in Australia a loving relative or friend is charged with murder or attempted murder for helping a hastened death for those who are living “a dying existence”.

Changing the law to accommodate medical assisted dying would eliminate the desperate measures frantic people take.  

We as a society really do need to question what defines Murder which the Webster dictionary explains is “killing a person especially with malice aforethought”.  No one would describe killing a suffering person as “malicious”, a person usually loved and cherished as a healthy adult over many years, by the very person killing them swiftly.  Rather than the natural drawn out alternative of pain, suffering, loss of dignity and independence.

Doctor Nitschke is right.   You have to be prepared for the consequences of your demonstrated love should you assist in a compassionate end to a loved one.   It is far better to ensure one takes care of their own business and not place others at risk.   It may mean that we’ll have to die earlier than hoped for perhaps, but it also means no one else is put at risk by seeking to have them break the law as it stands.   Hundreds put their freedom at risk showing their ultimate sacrifice for love because the law at it stands, fails them badly.  Most are a hastened death for someone already dying so it is not as if they have been cheated of living in any sense of the word.   Unlike “real murderers” who kill for gain, power, hate, or just because they’ve tired of their partner, there is no malice in helping a loved one die more easily than from horrendous natural causes.

Many Seniors organisations avoid talking about the necessity to plan for a good death as if by talking about the subject of voluntary euthanasia will somehow forestall the inevitable….”we’re about the positive attitudes in living, death is not suitable for our programs”.   Perhaps if there was more honesty in the reality of death, particularly in the frail and elderly, many older persons would not feel so isolated in trying to share their concerns about how they see themselves ending up.  

I can’t think of a more compelling example than the very recent suicide death of Steve Guest to galvanize Governments into some sort of moral rethink on what constitutes the cost of living just because of technological advances in medicine.  Had he not had a tube in his stomach to “feed” him for some 9 months, the throat cancer would not allow food to pass through, allowing him to die much earlier.

Is it right for a Nation or the State of Victoria to permit pain and suffering ongoing, for an evitable death?   How much pain is enough when it is someone else doing the suffering?  Who defines how much pain one person can endure?  Some scoff at receiving an injection at the dentist, some need two, while others never attend because of the sheer terror of facing the pain of extraction?  How much worse is the pain suffered by the chronically and terminally ill and who weights up their ability to cope with the pain attached to such illnesses.  The pain has not been welcomed as something to be endured because there is a light at the end of the tunnel.  Things don’t always get better and sometimes they get a bloody sight worse.

I read an article where some bright spark suggested “that euthanasia is not a viable law because moralistically we owe it to a civilised society to continue with a life as a god given right.  Though, unfortunate that this may lead to suffering, for the good of the nation with Christian ethics we must continue to value life regardless of the cost to some.” 

Maria Korp’s ongoing dilemma is a very real possibility for Victorians unfortunate enough to be develop a vegetative existence due to medically introduced support.   The Federal Government will ensure Terri Schiavo will become a reality for Australians because of the conservative religious right such as Senator Barnaby Joyce and Abetz will place themselves very well to have maximum impact on any outcome arising from the latest study of managing brain dead people.

I console myself with the thought that even a conservative government has to acknowledge Victoria’s and Australia’s inability to support massive medical costs ongoing as the population continues to age.   Not my problem!   I will be dead before it happens, but it will happen.  

Financial concerns always grabs governments’ attention. 

It has been suggested to me that politicians should have to complete a Contract under the New Industrial Legislation in which they have justify the decisions they make, demonstrating how best they meet the needs of the communities.  I laughed, as one would at the stupidity of the idea that where there is no money changing hands, choice and dignity in dying would actually be a consideration.

With this in mind,  and moving right away from the subject of your choice in dying, Governments will need to start reopening the orphanages of yesteryear because abortion will soon be unfunded by Medicare. given the idea flagged by the  Federal Government to introduce legislation to ensure there is no rebate for abortions on Medicare.  Senators Barnaby Joyce & Abetz will be able to give free lectures,  on how to achieve this legislation   They now have the power to do this and any Member who disagrees will most likely be bought quickly to heel.  Telstra, with 80% of the public wanting communications to be retained by Government, making a massive profit, will be sold off.   Mustn’t have dissention in the Camp from toeing the Party Line, in preference to actually listening to the constituents. 

The first doctor since 1971 has been charged over an abortion gone wrong.   I believe it will be a test case to make doctors reconsider their choice of employment.  

The criteria for adoption is horrendous, with significant financial ability to pay for the child and the age of potential parents, a major barrier. 

My digression from choice in dying is irrelevant to me personally due to age, but I equate difficulty in gaining an abortion due to financial restrictions as a very good reason for young girls and those females carrying a deformed fetus to seriously consider the option of suicide.   If Governments are genuine about their legislation preventing suicides please don’t create yet another reason why a woman would want to commit suicide  because of the additional trauma of an unwanted pregnancy.   

Of course, there is always the option of Bankcard, with interest!.

I posted an email regarding the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria impending change of name to “soften” the implication of what Voluntary Euthanasia means to the broader community.   (VESV Newsletter No 131 August 2005)

Mary <choice@yourchoiceindying.com> wrote:

Mary Walsh
www.yourchoiceindying.com

and this is one response:

I’m with Mary! In the U.S. the Hemlock Society was a proud organization respected around the world for 20+ years. It was mentioned in medical books and referred to in fiction. But — the Board wanted to be politically correct.

Faye Girsh
Past President, The Hemlock Society USA
Denver CO USA

50 Something
National Seniors Association
Aug/Sept Issue

I welcome your article on Advanced Health Directives. Lets have more imput from your members on these important
matters.is
M. Jeffares, Wollongong, NSW

Quebec woman accused of giving morphine to dying elderly cancer patient

“In the Criminal Code, there is nothing suggesting compassionate murder. Murder is murder.”

Sharing this with you, I am confident that my friend will not read my diary because she is too busy living to think about the manner of her dying.  I appreciate and applaud her optimism.

I have a friend of many years standing who does not share my sentiments regarding voluntary euthanasia.  She believes that doctors will take care of her when the time comes.  Since 1999 when I was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, she herself has had bowel and lung cancer, both treated successfully.   On Wednesday she has learnt that she is out of remission with a return of lung cancer.  The same lung as previously.   I can’t say she is optimistic about her prognosis.

My friend visited me regularly in hospital and bought me delights such as soaps and lotions to enhance my recovery period, with her bright, breezy, full of “vim and vitality” attitude.   She was horrified at the impact of chemotherapy on me, but fortunately for her, the scenarios were different when her time came, with being able to continue her sporting prowess with alacrity (though slightly diminished for a time).

I was aware, on Wednesday,  that I desperately wanted to fold her into my arms and hug and reassure her that I was a living example of the power of modern medicine.  This independent woman who is a very keen sportswoman, leaves me feeling impotent. She had previously rejected my offers of books on coping with cancer and does not invite one to become “reflective”  about such issues.  I would have been a “write off”, in her place, short term, coping with the possibilities, she will now endure. 

Of course, I am sure that in the privacy of her own thoughts she has the same fears as the rest of us, but her public demeanor is one of control and even I hesitate to attempt to breach this with the familiarity of a long term friendship.  I cried for her, but not in front of her.   This woman who was so very careful with her diet and exercise, all her life,  has cancer for a third time in five years.  There is no justice in who is targeted with this insidious disease.

With her attitude in mind, it reinforces to me yet again,  the need to respect the individual’s manner of coping with such life threatening health issues.  Talking with her about options available, whether they’ll operate, whatever, all I could do was offer my spare room to her for as long as it took for her to recover should she wish to.  

Practical help is just as useful as a shoulder to cry on.  I remembered there were women in the chemotherapy wards who drove themselves into hospital for treatment when I could hardly walk, least of all, drive.  Some people just have more fortitude than others. I must have been very weak because I desperately needed both. 

I sincerely wish her a very speedy recovery, and if sheer will is sufficient, my good friend will be a formidable opponent to take on the cancer bug.  Go Girl, go!   

She may be one of the lucky ones who believes in the power of prayer.  I do know,  she shares with me the power of the mind.

It always come back to the Choices we have in life.

I intend to point out that today is the feast day of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary and for all those Roman Catholics a day in which their attendance at Mass is obligatory.  Failure to attend Mass is “a mortal sin” and will result in an RC “burning forever in Hell should they not abide, by this particular rule of the Church.   With due respect for another’s belief, can one really equate killing a person, including oneself, with not attending Mass on a major Feast Day?.   Both are “Mortal Sins” in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church.

Unless, of course, the rules have been changed since I left school. Such as attending Mass on a Saturday night, instead of Sunday.  Laying a hand on a Nun pulling your hair out by the roots, trying desperately to pull her hands away from your head as she struggled for ultimate power against the child.  That too, was a “Mortal Sin” as she was Christ’s Representative here on Earth and as such was a Holy Person.  Working on Sundays, a day of worship (we were obliged to darn Mon-Friday, Saturdays high cleaning, and Sundays, attending Church up to 7 times a day).  Eating meat on a Friday.  Having sex before Marriage.  And one must not actually enjoying having intercourse (sex).  It was only to be endured to procreate (get pregnant).    Confession, at least once a year to avoid “Mortal Sin” but we went once a week. (that is, you went into a tiny darkened room and told a Priest how bad you’d been for that week).  How wicked can a small child be?

One must wear a hat, (in my case, a veil) in Church, and of course a female never receives Communion in a sleeveless dress and never cross your legs!  Lies, deceit, anger, The last were “venial sins:

Mortal Sin brings about the loss of sanctifying grace or friendship with God, that the nature of it is grave and serious, a free and willing turning away from “His” love.  Venial sin, in contrast, is a less serious rejection of God’s love, not a fundamental choice against God.  It is a failure to “love God” as much as we should.

I share these insights into my personal experiences to demonstrate my concerns that rejection of Voluntary Euthanasia by the authority of the Catholic Church is itself a Mortal Sin of Hypocrisy.  Every day, innocents are killed under a Christian banner that proclaims, among many beliefs  “Thou Shalt Not Kill”.  No distinction is made between War & Peace. 

The Commandment of God is “Thou Shalt Not Kill.”  No where,  do these four words say this Law of God only applies when it suits the purpose of Governments.  It is OK to kill for “power”, but not for “compassion”???  For a rational thinking person does this make any sense?   My common sense totally rejects the ’selectiveness” of the Christian way of doing things.  I was taught as a small child that a guardian angel always watched over me to ensure my goodness, honesty and integrity.  Do grown up Christians who still “believe”,  live by the standards taught in their child hood?  

Being judgmental, it is my very humble opinion that many, many so called Christians do not live by the standards they seek to impose on others.  The major sin now to actually being exposed in their deceit.  Yet there are those that would impose their sanctimonious public attitudes on me, who has good reason to doubt the validity of their credentials. 

This is a very good example of why Governments and Religions should be kept apart.  To include religiously motivated standards into our secular governments is to confuse the majority of those people who do not share the beliefs of a Christian standard.  

What has occurred within the Catholic Church is CHANGE in line with modern living standards.  Some one realised that for the purposes of modern day living the Church’s definition of sin were too numerous on their congregations to handle, and the confessional boxes couldn’t cope.  And of course, there was always HELL to terrify those who stepped outside the square.  

How can something that was a “Mortal Sin” 50 years ago, no longer be that?.  Were those souls who followed the beliefs of 50 years ago, shortchanged?   Did they really go to HELL for eating a piece of steak on a Friday?

Did they live with long term illnesses that could make them wish they could die sooner rather than later but because their bodies were “the Host of Christ Received” they were left to suffer regardless of the sin against humanity and compassion?

I would ask those within the Catholic Church to weigh up their own personal individual belief and ask themselves whether a loving and compassionate “Shepherd” known as Jesus,  would allow one sheep to lie writhing in agony having been torn apart by a wolf (Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid, Cancer, Motor Neuron etc) or would a good and kind shepherd dispatch the animal quickly, and efficiently. 

• Cynically, one has to also remember that the “good shepherd” was really just looking after his investment because eventually the lamb would be slaughtered for the dinner table.  I don’t believe any sheep has ever died of old age. 

Had the Shepherd not intervened (Modern Medicine) the Wolf would have finished by killing the sheep swiftly.  But to save the person from a quick death (natural attrition)  in order for a slow death (life support) to occur is pointless and leads to further futile suffering.

I wondered as I listened to Mr John Anderson (ex deputy Prime Minister) talk of his health issues on 60 Minutes,  which may well have been prostate cancer in the making, if he took a kinder view to those proponents of Voluntary Euthanasia as he waited anxiously for his results.   He was starting to try on our shoes for just a while.  Fortunately for him, they didn’t quite fit!   And then there is our ex Opposition Leader, Mr Mark Latham, who was once a believer in the VE cause but for political expediency changed his mind, I still wonder how he feels about it today.   I feel both men will re evaluate their assumptions about the message VE carries within their hearts and understand our needs.

In the gym this morning I read an article about a young man about 28, hanging himself .  His girlfriend tried desperately to revive him despite the fact he was not breathing, gave mouth to mouth and had him taken to hospital, where she says the (Catholic) hospital staff worked a further couple of hours to “bring him back”!.    Fortunately they failed and he went on to continue what he had chosen to do.  She took 18 months to recover the shock.

Some would say “A Coward’s Way” but in my view in takes a lot of distress to bring people to the brink of considering suicide as a viable alternative to living, and “Coward” is the last word I would use to describe them.  No one really wants to die, but sometimes the Living is just too painful. And who cares about the description of “depressed” if it suits the example to describe how ones feels about being terminally and painfully ill, or wishing the illness was terminal.   Any one who says they are “happy” in this situation would be less than truthful, there are just varying degrees of depression or sadness, and has nothing to do with acceptance or denial of the condition.

While I could feel for the girlfriend I just felt appalled that any person in their right mind would think resuscitating a person after longer than 5 minutes hanging from a rope.   Common sense and education teaches us that a brain deprived of oxygen ceases to function.  My own mother, of a stroke,  proof  before my eyes,  revived after 12 minutes, ceased to function as a normal human being,  never regaining consciousness.

A “vegetative”  state of existence is not living.   And, who among us,  would swap places with the person,  society condemns to exist in such a state?

The item below,  just confirms what I have always thought.  Which I why I have budgeted $75 for stamps this week to post out 130 letters to all Victorian State Politicians, give or take one or two.   I write letters usually.  Expensive in paper, printing, envelopes and stamps (for a pensioner of unknown duration).   Next week’s mail out will be for the third year in a row, promoting Advance Directives to be legalized. 

When I sat and individually wrote to some 70 odd Senators, sending them a copy of my original email to Senator Ellison (Federal Justice Minister) together with a brief note individually addressed, I could count on two hands the number of Senators who replied to me.  A couple said “of course they treat all matters brought to their attention very seriously” which says nothing really!  The exercise took hours to undertake given I’m no speed typist and for what?  The Suicide Related Materials Law came into effect regardless of my small contribution. 

• Which is why we need thousands of Mary Walsh’s endeavouring to have a voice for individual choice for dignity in dying.   I don’t believe at this stage of my life that my dying is going to be very dignified at all!  I’ve tried hard for the sake of my family, and others like mine to have laws protecting a person’s right to a good death,  honoured.  A good death may not be forthcoming but it will be quick, given Choice.  And “quick” to me,  is relative, what is 10 mins of pain and anguish to achieve lasting freedom?.

• Maria Korp died slowly over six months.      What an indictment on a “civilised”  society, that in the name of whatever one calls this “right to life” at any cost we allow people to suffer a long and lingering death, whether conscious or unconscious.   And God help those who actually don’t live up to the “civility” and crack under the strain of looking at a loved person rotting in front of them and want to hasten their death directly because of their love. Their anguish is continued. 

• They’re charged with murder for Christ’s sake!! 

(contributor’s name deleted)

‘A personal representation is much better than one that is mass produced
- don’t just regurgitate what someone at the head of a lobby group says.’

Contributed by our friend, Ron

 Words of wisdom

These words were spoken by Abraham Lincoln 130 years ago and are
still relevant today, probably more so.

From media reports I went into the Alfred Hospital yesterday, Sunday,  intending to stand against the Right to Life demonstrators protesting about Maria Korp.   Fortunately they were no where to be seen.  

Thank God we have a strong advocate, Julian Gardner who is strong enough to withstand the forces of a part of Christianity that would condemn Ms Korp (and her family) to an indefinite existence without “living”.  

Who would wish to lie in a vegetative state for any ongoing period of time?, and yet there are some in Australia  who would condemn Ms Korp to imitate Terri Schiavo.    How in God’s name can anyone understand the logic?   I believe it is real and genuine love of a human being that allows us to “let them die” when there is absolutely no hope of a reasonable return to a normal life.  

We (well 72% of us)  wouldn’t want to be in Maria Korp position, so why would society allow her situation to continue.   I was begging my mother to die for my sake in the end, even though I knew she couldn’t see, hear or even know that I stood by her by for fourteen long days.   The stress on the surviving relatives, is almost intolerable, for many witnessing a loved one in a comatose existence.