Currently there is a Bill before the Victorian Parliament to allow for the legality of physician assisted dying (PAD) for terminally ill and terminally chronically ill people who wish, because there is no chance to recover from their intolerable suffering,  to VOLUNTARILY hastened their death.    The writer of the email being unable to attend the information forum on the Bill as presented kindly sent me a copy of the email sent to the Greens politician, Western Metropolitan Legislative Council, Colleen Hartland who is co hosting the Bill with Bass Member. Ken Smith – Liberal.

Politicians such as Ken Smith and Colleen Hartland have already made their views public on the implementation of a compassionate Bill to help those who hold views similar to ourselves, but what does need to happen is that you share your personal story, preferable in person, to your Local Member.   Let them see first hand the impact of what this Bill means to you in terms of peace of mine, secure in the knowledge that there is an alternative to intolerable pain at the end of life.   The law will always allow people their own choice whether to participate in the process and strict guidelines will be in place to protect those who don’t wish to use the Bill’s options.

Unable to Attend
Body won’t let me
But I wish to be heard

To Colleen Hartland MLC.

Thank you for hosting this forum. I want to speak on behalf of the hundreds of tired, and sick elderly unable to have a voice in this discussion, either by their own infirmities or lack of understanding that, they could have an opinion about how they will die.

When I first began my journey aged 50 around these issues after my mother died, I had MY understanding of her frustration and despair, and now admit I did not listen or hear what she said. Instead I constantly altered her reality by asking her to look to a more comfortable and loving reality that was not there. She knew she was in the closing stage of living, and had always believed in Voluntary Euthanasia as she had in fact worked in the Cheltenham Old Age Home… now called Kingston.

Thank goodness conditions have very much improved, but the facts of old age still remain, there is an end, and choices about how that end can come about is now the issue.

Do you really listen to the very old people in nursing homes etc. You can not feel their frustration ( often called depression) with loss of dexterity, loss of being able to control their own daily bodily functions, daily dealing with a body that is now a stranger to their eyes and other senses. Some are bewildered that the medical profession are not fixing their illness problems, others are very aware that all that has been done has been done and they are just waiting. So are their families. Everyone has to face their own challenge with this stage of either their own or their parents sunset stage.
How often do I now stand and say “ I am sorry Mum I did not understand “

So I want to be a voice* for the people who now, and for those who went before me, also believing in having a choice at that time. (*Thank goodness for my Computer)
This is why it is so important to have some legal paperwork in place while it is possible.
This bill is a very positive step in that direction and I thank you, younger energetic, understanding people who are now carrying the torch.

But I still have the dream that it will happen in my living time here.

Sincerely

Unable to Attend
Body won’t let me
But I wish to be heard
I forgot to add.

Most families do the very best they can to assist their parents. I did for 13 years…. but after a long time it becomes very wearing on the carer and their own family.  Even the grandchildren often do not want to attend the obligatory visits in the nursing home etc.

The structures in place now are beginning to wear thin because of the increasing numbers needing care etc….

Please do not put the benchmark for all, like the wonderful people who are still active at the latter stage of the lives…we are not all Elizabeth Murcoch’s.

In fact I feel that I have failed successfully to meet the outward appearance of aging gracefully, but the marbles are still very well polished, and I continue to study.

But again, I have to have care and assistance, and I am aware that, that too must end, as my family’s growing commitments with their children can not always cope with my needs, as much as they want to. I fortunately do understand this issue not like many I hear confused by the changing patterns of living today that their children are facing.

It is about choice and the Right to Life people have in fact got that…… what are they yelling about….

once again Regards

Stuff.co.nz reported 25 May 2008

Police ponder charges in euthanasia case

Police may charge an American woman with murder after she was allegedly hired to smuggle euthanasia drugs into New Zealand for a non-terminally ill Aucklander to kill herself.

An investigation was launched 10 days ago amid claims Audrey Monica Wallis, 49, paid $12,000 to an American woman, Susan Wilson, who flew to New Zealand last August to help Wallis die using veterinary euthanasia drug Nembutal.

If proved, the case will set a precedent as the first known case of paid euthanasia in New Zealand.

Wilson openly admitted on a British documentary, which screened there last week, that she helped people to die, for a fee. The Sunday Star-Times has also seen a yet-to-be-aired film by Australian euthanasia organisation Exit International, on which the woman talks about how she helps people to die.

Wallis, 49, believed to be depressed and suffering health problems from an addiction to prescribed medications, died at home in Auckland last August. Her death was referred to the Auckland coroner but that investigation was put on hold once the police probe began.

According to a police source, Wilson would be charged with murder or assisting a suicide, which had penalties of life imprisonment and a maximum of 14 years’ jail respectively

Detective Senior Sergeant Kim Libby, of the North Shore CIB, said if police did charge her with such major offences, they would seek her extradition from America. “It’s a serious matter someone has died.”

It was also of public interest because Wilson publicly claimed she planned to continue offering her service of helping people to die for money, Libby said.

Family and friends were still being interviewed but a decision over whether charges would be laid was expected within a few weeks.

Wallis’s case was revealed on the British documentary about Wilson and her colleague, euthanasia advocate George Exoo.

Right-to-die advocate Lesley Martin, head of Dignity New Zealand, was contacted by Wallis and Wilson independently last year, but Martin had little to do with either.

However, she said the documentary producer called her several weeks ago to tell her about the film and 10 days ago she complained to police over her concerns that Wallis was helped to die.

Exit International head Dr Philip Nitschke met Wilson about two years ago in Australia, when she approached him to help her contact people seeking her euthanasia services.

Exit interviewed her for a promotional film clip on her services, which was originally to be shown to its members, he said.

On the film, she talked about her role, saying she remained with people while they died. “I usually stay and stroke somebody’s hair or their hand long after they’re dead, just to give them comfort.”

She encouraged people to come to her state, North Carolina, if possible because it was not illegal there to be present when someone committed suicide, but she was prepared to travel anywhere around the world.

“In North Carolina, as long as you don’t do the deed put it down their throats legally you’re allowed to be in the room.”

She said her fee covered travel expenses and the balance went into the Compassionate Chaplaincy, a non-profit organisation she and Exoo ran.

“This may be morbid humour I guess. Our motto is that we don’t give people a leg up like most chaplaincies we give them a leg down. That’s what we do. We don’t aid people in living better, we aid people in dying better.”

Wilson said some people booked her years in advance.

Wallis’s family and friends declined to comment on the case, her former husband saying they wanted to stay out of the public eye. It was understood none of them knew she had had help to take her life and were shocked to hear of Wilson’s involvement. In Wallis’s death notice last year, her friends and family wrote: “Your pain and anguish is over, rest peacefully” and “Finally at peace”.

Choice Comments:  Susan Wilson also contacted me some years ago offering her services to smuggle in Nembutal into Australia.  Susan Wilson, she said was not her “real name” and everything was done through a post office box, both hers and mine.   She suggested in her letter that I act as a booking agent for perhaps three people at a time, to minimize her travel costs.

I never responded to her letter.   I doubted its validity because all contact was via a PO box and what would I know of an American address anyhow.  It could have been the address of a rubbish dump or the FBI because of my outspoken views on the invasion of Iraq by American troops.

I may not have gone into the business of importing a prohibited drug with Susan Wilson, but perhaps in hindsight I could have shown a little more faith in the motives of a fellow campaigner for choice and dignity in dying.   Shame really!   Of course, there is a market for buying the tools for a successful, pain free suicide, so much more civilised than hanging gasping on the end of a rope in the garage.   Some folk think that dying by hanging is quick and easy, but its not!   However, desperate people take desperate measures, and a stupid law will always be disobeyed.  It is the nature of intelligent, educated people to decide their own destiny, with or without pleasing the constraints of the law.

Roll on with the legislative change for physician assisted dying and make all our lives easier to face at the end gate.   By allowing those who want choice in their dying process, police and lawyers and judges could be freed up to catch REAL criminals.  The directors of companies who consistently scan off the rightful dues of their employees by going into liquidation, only to open up a week later with new name, new business, new staff!   The rich who don’t pay any taxes but prey on getting the full benefits of infrastructure that PAYE(Pay as You Earn)  employees contribute to.    Spend money, time and energy catching some real criminals and don’t waste our money chasing up the frail, sick and elderly who merely want a good death.

22 May 2008 From the Great Lakes Advocate (NSW,AU)

http://forster.yourguide.com.au/news/local/news/general/exit-group-shown-the-door-by-patrol/774249.aspx

Exit group shown the door by patrol
TIM CONNELL
21/05/2008 10:33:00 AM

VOLUNTARY euthanasia group Exit International will hold its first Forster meeting today despite having to switch venues because of religious outrage.

The group, which lobbies for legalised assisted suicide and was established by Dr Philip Nitschke, will meet 10.30 this morning at Forster Golf Club. It had scheduled the meeting for Forster Tuncurry Volunteer Coastal Patrol headquarters but was told to look elsewhere.

Patrol commander Graeme Parker cancelled the booking after last Wednesday’s Advocate previewed the meeting.

Mr Parker blamed the article for his decision, but told the group a coastal patrol board member, who is a cousin of local priest Kevin Corrigan, was uncomfortable with Exit International’s agenda on religious grounds. The Advocate understands the board member requested the cancellation.

“It was cancelled because you people [the Advocate] publicised it as a public meeting,” Mr Parker said.

“We don’t have public meetings here because the [Patrol headquarters] room is for small gatherings of 15 to 20 people.”

He dismissed claims the booking was pulled because of religious indignation as “not correct”.

“We don’t want fights going on and people coming in and bringing the coastal patrol into disrepute,” he added.

Asked why public gatherings like the Forster Film Festival had been allowed to fill the room with over 70 people, Mr Parker said “That’s the absolute limit, 70 people.”

Asked why the meeting couldn’t go ahead with an attendance capped at 70 people, he repeated that the building couldn’t host public meetings.

Forster Exit convener Lesley Archer was disappointed her booking was cancelled.

“I booked that hall a month ago and there was no problem,” she said.

“I think it’s very poor they cancelled my booking with just six days’ notice.”

The build up to the group’s first meeting had more twists in store. After being thrown a lifeline by Forster’s Dorsal Boutique Hotel, Ms Archer again found herself without a venue when management changed their minds.

“I was told on Sunday that the Dorsal had regretfully cancelled my booking. They received a series of nasty phone calls from people who didn’t want the meeting to go ahead.”

Ms Archer didn’t blame the Dorsal for turning her away, saying the hotel was scared off by threats of loud protests. She said her husband and a friend will stand outside the two aborted venues and direct meeting attendees to the golf club.

“People who were interested in the meeting have been ringing coastal patrol headquarters, but they tell them they never knew anything about it,” Ms Archer said.

“As it happens, I think they’ve done me a favour. I think I’ll get a lot more people now. The Dorsal have been great – they said they’d forward any inquiries to me.”

Choice Comments: Ms Lesley Archer – You’re doing a great job for the elderly and frail citizens of Forsters and those people foolish enough to seek to intimate the right to free speech in a democratic country should have known the force they were up against!

Third time lucky and with a fantastic turn up. 

Local priest Kevin Corrigan needs to do his sums.   If 80% of Australians want legislative change for choice and dignity in dying, and 52% of Australians go to a religious meeting place, then guess where the minimum 28% difference is derived from.   His Church Pews!    Christians in general believe that a good death is one that reduces the dying process to be as painless as humanely possible.  

K.  Corrigan can choose for himself his own dying process by leaving it fully to the natural process…..but to inflict his will by influencing local business decision is arrogant at the very least, and entirely expected of the Catholic Church “masters”   because they don’t encourage their congregation to think for themselves.   They want their members to be automatic robots just doing what they’re told by a hieratical system to ensure continuity of the church.  They don’t actually care about suffering because they see it as an opportunity to cleanse the soul and prepare for eternal life – much quicker to see God’s face in the hereafter so to speak!  

Fortunately common sense prevails for the majority of Australians who with education, understand the cynicism of indoctrination and inability to move with the times of many religious groups.

An article from the Sydney Morning Herald.

Nitschke rejects suicide bias
Geesche Jacobsen
May 20, 2008

THE euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke has rejected the suggestion he had been “hell-bent” on supporting a man’s application for an assisted suicide because of his ideological views and despite the man’s severe Alzheimer’s disease.

He also denied he had shown “reckless disregard for human life” and had abrogated his responsibilities as a doctor and acted as a euthanasia campaigner in supporting the application by a former Qantas pilot, Graeme Wylie, to die in Switzerland.

Dr Nitschke was giving evidence in the trial of Mr Wylie’s partner, Shirley Justins, and his long-time friend, Caren Jenning. On the eighth day of the trial, Justins pleaded guilty to assisting the suicide by obtaining and providing the drug Nembutal. But the court heard she “vehemently” denied being guilty of murder.

Jenning yesterday pleaded guilty to illegally importing a barbiturate.
The court has heard she travelled to Mexico, where Nembutal is legally sold, several days before Mr Wylie’s death. Jenning maintained she was not guilty of being an accessory to murder, or assisting his suicide.

The court heard Dr Nitschke had spoken to Mr Wylie and Justins for two hours, had taken no notes, conducted no cognitive tests, and had not consulted any of his doctors. The Crown prosecutor, Mark Tedeschi, QC, said: “You were negligent and careless in failing to ask to see any of [Mr Wylie's] medical reports.”

Dr Nitschke replied: “No … I was there, you were not. I had nothing to gain from supporting his application. I saw a frail man, a dying man, a suffering man, who wanted help to die and anyone would have approved it.”

The trial continues.

Choice comments:   Mr Mark Tedeschi QC appears to have a problem understanding the definition of negligent and careless.  It is negligent to watch a living person dying slowly, painfully and inevitably and not do something to ease the suffering.   Obviously “careless” is not something Philip Nitschke could be accused of, he merely assessed a patient based on what he observed for himself as a professional and practicing doctor.   I deal with some five doctors for a variety of needs and it is difficult sometimes for the left hand to know what the right hand is doing unless the body in the middle tells them!  

Would a competent doctor need to see Mr Wylie’s medical reports and for what reason?   The man had a progressive degenerative disease for which there is no cure!    Dr Nitschke had the evidence in front of his eyes for the work he needed to assess.  The man had advanced Alzheimer but as we all know, sufferers do have their lucid moments and know exactly what is befalling them in the future and without any hope of recovery.   I too would seek an immediate solution as Mr Wylie did of his own free will and while alone.   

Is the prosecutor so disdainful of Nitschke  because Mr Wylie achieved a hastened death in spite of a draconian and outmoded belief that life at any cost is automatically sacred. 

 Pity the soldiers in Iraq didn’t feel the same way when shooting at perfectly health Muslims!   But who really care about the sacredness of a Muslim life?  The value of a human life in Western culture is entirely dependent the monetary gains made from preserving it.   The Health Care System employs hundreds of thousands of people but who really cares personally about the bodies lying comatose in the bed, sitting pathetically vague by the front door waiting for a visitor that will never arrive, lolling in their chair within the day room with a TV blaring that no one watches, reeking of urine and stale food smells.

Why should Philip Nitschke reject suicide bias?  Suicide has a place in modern society which is demanding to be catered for in the legislative process.   Whether suicide be provided for through PAD won’t deter us from using its finality in the meantime.    For many of us, suicide is the great alternative to living through the long dying process of terminal and chronic illnesses!

Nitschke ‘not hell bent’ on mercy death

By Amy Coopes | May 19, 2008 Australian Newspaper Article

Controversial euthanasia advocate Phillip Nitschke has denied being “hell bent” on the mercy killing of an elderly Sydney man.

Alzheimer’s patient Graeme Wylie, 71, died from a lethal dose of the euthanasia drug Nembutal at his northern Sydney home in March 2006.

Mr Wylie’s partner of 18 years, Shirley Justins, 59, is charged with his murder while her friend Caren Jenning, 75, is charged with being an accessary to murder before the fact.

The pair today pleaded guilty in the NSW Supreme Court to the lesser charges of aiding and abetting suicide and importing a prohibited drug.

But crown prosecutor Mark Tedeschi QC rejected their pleas and indicated he wanted to proceed on the murder and accessary charges.

Dr Nitschke today testified that he assessed Mr Wylie on behalf of Swiss euthanasia organisation Dignitas on November 16, 2005.

He sent a brief report back to the group observing Mr Wylie appeared “physically fit, despite ongoing unexplained dizziness, and able to travel to Switzerland and drink the drugs”.

“Graeme is significantly affected by dementia and depends a great deal on his carer Shirley Justins,” Dr Nitschke wrote.

“He was unable to recall his date of birth or number and sex of his children.

“He retains significant insight, though, and realisation that his mental capacity is failing is causing him a great deal of distress.

“He is adamant he wants to go to Switzerland … as soon as possible.”

Dr Nitschke today reiterated his belief Mr Wylie was capable of deciding on an assisted suicide, but denied being ideologically driven.

“You were hell bent on supporting Graeme Wylie’s application to Dignitas, no matter what his condition, because of your ideological views on suicide,” Mr Tedeschi said.

“That is incorrect, and I object to the term ‘hell bent’,” Dr Nitschke replied.

He also denied Mr Tedeschi’s allegations he was “grossly careless” by deliberately overlooking a number of specialist reports and opinions showing Mr Wylie had advanced dementia.

“You are simply wrong sir,” Dr Nitschke said.

The doctor agreed he had not conducted any form of standardised cognitive testing on Mr Wylie, nor had he noted in his report whether there was undue influence from Justins or third parties, as requested by Dignitas.

“I saw no evidence of it,” he said.

Dr Nitschke agreed the issue of whether Mr Wylie was “easily manipulable” by Justins or others was a “live concern” for Dignitas.

Mr Tedeschi grilled the doctor on his failure to examine reports from the Concord Hospital, where Mr Wylie had been a patient for a number of years, during his assessment.

One in particular, from January 2005, noted that the former pilot could not tell what season, month or day it was, nor what floor of the building he was on.

He could not subtract seven from 100, spell “world” backwards, identify a pencil, or repeat the phrase “no ifs, and or buts”, Mr Tedeschi said.

Mr Wylie scored 12/30 on a cognitive scale on that occasion, a “very poor score” which Dr Nitschke agreed reflected “severe Alzheimer’s disease”.

Dr Nitschke said he was not qualified to assess Alzheimer’s patients, but insisted that Dignitas only wanted to know whether Mr Wylie was capable of deciding if he wanted to die.

“I did what was asked of me properly and correctly,” he said.

Justice Roderick Howie asked Dr Nitschke whether it would have been more appropriate to get an independent doctor, without biases about the application, to assess Mr Wylie.

“With the clarity of hindsight that’s true, sir,” he responded.

However, he insisted specialist reports would not have swayed his support of Mr Wylie’s euthanasia application.

“The man I saw maintained a significant insight, knew that he wished to go to Switzerland to die, was capable of making that trip and I would have supported him on that day,” he said.

His evidence continues.

Choice Comment:   What this article has reinforced in my mind is the need to plan your own arrangement before it “becomes too late”.

All this could have been avoided if only there was no money involved.  No one would have minded an old man’s death but for the money he didn’t leave them!   The subject of your assets is also something that needs to be sorted before any life ending decisions are to be made.   Beware the fury of those spurned!   Mind you, probably any money in this instance is going to pay lawyers so they’ll be the only ones to benefit eventually.

 Thank goodness Philip Nitschke is a capable witness not easily undermined by the stress of going through all this for no personal benefit.   The movement for change is very lucky to have such an articulate advocate for the cause.  

I hope the lawmakers in Victoria and Canberra are listening to the evidence and understanding the actions of those who want control of their own lives and their dying process.  The real message in this court case is the sadness that Mr Wylie left unfinished business for others to answer for.

The Final Choice

 A grieving daughter describes how her father starved himself after· asking his children and grandchildren for permission to die, writes RACHEL BROWNE.

Wouter den Dulk led an eventful life. He fought the Germans in World War II, migrated from his native Holland to Australia where he raised a family, established a successful business and enjoyed the company of a wide circle of friends.

 So when the time came to die, he decided he was going to do it on his own terms. Aged 90, crippled with agonising back pain, legally blind, partially deaf and confined to a bed in a Wollongong nursing home, den Dulk decided his life – or what was left of it – was not worth living.

 

In February, he called his four children and 16 grandchildren to his beside and asked for their permission to die.

And then he starved himself. Den Dulk died 12 weeks later on May 4.

 His daughter Hanneke Chipperfield’s voice cracks with emotion as she recalls her father’s determination to die in the same manner as he had lived his life: with dignity. “I understood what he was going through,” says Chipperfield, a retired registered nurse with more than 20 years’ experience in aged care.

 

“Where is the quality of life? Where is the enjoyment of living? Where is the challenge left in life?

 

“His future was just lying in a chair, waiting to die. He decided he just couldn’t do it anymore. “He asked his four children, he asked each in-law and he asked the grandchildren for permission to die. Then he said goodbye to all of us. And he just stopped eating.” 

Speaking from her home in Windella in the Hunter Valley. Chipperfield recalls her father as a decent, hard-working man who could do anything he turned his hand to.

 

One of seven children, den Dulk was born in Holland in 1917 and left school aged 12 to work for his father, giving all his wages to his family to support them in the lean years between the World Wars.

 He signed up to the Dutch Army to fight the German soldiers who flooded into Holland in 1940, but was taken to Germany as a “forced worker” along with his 18-year-old wife. 

When Holland was liberated in 1945, the couple returned home with their first baby and den Dulk attempted to start a business to support his young family.

 

But the post – War years in Europe were economically difficult and the den Dulks made a decision similar to that taken by thousands of other European families – they would start a new life in Australia. 

They left for their new home in 1951, living in a series of migrant camps before finally settling in Wollongong, where the entire family lived in a tent for six months before moving into a proper home.

 The den Dulk’s story follows a pattern similar to many post-War migrants. They worked hard, the four children did well at school and all went on to have success in their careers.

 “But those early years were horrific for both my mother and my father;’ Chipperfield recalls. ”They lived a very, very hard life in many ways before their circumstances improved, mainly due to my father’s sheer hard work and determination to make a go of things in Australia.”

 But as the years went on, Chipperfield’s parents became more frail, with both ending up in a nursing home. After her mother’s death, her father, then increasingly incapacitated, announced he wanted to return to Holland to visit his family.

 

“Dad wanted to go back to Holland so we went back,” she says. “He paid for me and my sisters and my sister-­in-law to go back to Holland to see his brothers and sisters. After four weeks we returned to Australia. He tried to do as much as he could in his last few years.” 

Eventually, however, den Dulk’s condition deteriorated to the point where he could no longer walk unaided, even though all of his mental faculties were intact.

“He was a smart man who was mentally motivated and had been active his entire life,” Chipperfield says. 

“He loved to play bridge and he always won. He would get out and walk every day. He was the type of person who was always doing something; always interested in the world around him.

 

“For my father to sit and do nothing was the hardest thing. That was worse than death.

“I remember one day the people at the nursing home said, ‘Mr den Dulk, it’s a beautiful day outside, we’re going to put you in a chair and you’re just going to enjoy the sun’. And his response was, ‘How can I lie in a chair and enjoy the sun? I’m doing nothing’. 

 “He said, ‘I can’t do this. It’s boring, It’s dull. I have no challenge left Mum’s not with me anymore and you people have to get on with your lives; you have to live your lives; I can’t get in your way. You’re all visiting me all the time. I have become a burden’. He just hated what his life had been reduced to.”

 With her history of caring for elderly people, Chipperfield understood her father’s view and knew from experience that the situation could only get worse. 

“I have nursed so many people who couldn’t speak; they were just turned every two hours,” she says. ‘We’d put food in their mouths at one end and clean them up when it came out the other end. That was their life. There is no dignity in that.

 

“When you nurse people in that state, when you see what happens to people … ” her voice trails off before she continues, “These are people who have led decent lives, they’re good people who have given a lot during their lives. And at the end of their life, their dignity is taken away from them.”

A week before den Dulk passed away; he made a final request. He asked his daughter to start a public campaign for the right to die with dignity. 

“He said, ‘What I’m going through, it’s not right. It is undignified. “Please do something about this because it’s just so horrific for everybody involved’,” Chipperfield says. “Currently, the law states that people are not allowed to die, even if that is their wish.” 

Chipperfield does not like the term euthanasia but she is a firm believer in the right to die, a view she believes is shared by many who work in aged care. “It’s interesting,” she muses. “When my father was doing this, not one of his friends thought it was bad; not one of the staff at the nursing home ­except for one who objected on religious grounds and I respect that – thought that what he was doing was wrong.” 

But euthanasia, or assisted suicide as it’s often called, remains a vexed ethical issue for the medical and legal professions. “At the moment people risk ending up in jail if they are seeing out the wishes of their loved ones,” Chipperfield says. “There has to be a better way of addressing the rights of those people who wish to die.”

Chipperfield has written an impassioned letter to the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, outlining the circumstances of her father’s demise and asking the Federal Government to reconsider the current position on a person’s right to die. 

“Why is it illegal to end your own life if this is your wish when life has no meaning left?” she wrote.

“When you read this letter stop for one moment and think how you would feel if this was your life. My father has asked for there to be a structured system put in place, where people at the end stage of their life can nominate to die with dignity. This can be achieved in many ways, although I do have to acknowledge that this is not for every person as not everyone would agree with taking this type of action, but we must give people the choice one way or the other.” 

While Chipperfield understands the ethical complexities of the right­-to-die debate, she believes it boils down to one thing. “It has to be an individual choice” she says. “My husband believes in life at all costs and I respect that I would nurse him until he died. For me, if I become a burden, if I have no quality of life, I would choose to die with dignity but at the moment I don’t have that choice. None of us do.” 

Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics suggest that the right-to-­die debate will become a greater issue due to the ageing population. 

In 2006, people aged 65 and over accounted for 13 per cent of the population. Life expectancy is increasing and the birth rate remains comparatively low at 1.8 children per woman, although it has gone up in recent years due to Government incentives such as the baby bonus.

“This issue is going to become more prevalent,” Chipperfield says. 

“Our population is getting older. And there is a large group of post­ War baby boomers who are now entering their 60s. Just think about what’s going to happen with them in 10 or 20 years’ time. This is going to be a huge issue for the future.” 

As the number of older people increases, so too will health problems associated with ageing such as dementia, diabetes, eyesight and hearing difficulties. 

“When I worked in aged care we used to see these chronically ill people with no quality of life and describe it as the long death,” Chipperfield says. 

“What happened to my dad was a long death.”

 rbrowne@fairfaxmedia.com.au

 

Choice comments:  It is pointless for lawmakers to shoot the messengers.   Australians demand the right to choose dignity in dying in the face of pain and unnecessary suffering.   I too would have taken the Nembutal knowing I would take ten years more or less to die of Alzheimer’s.  My brain physically deteriorating with no hope of a cure!, of course death is preferable to the alternative of diabolical mood swings, not recognising my loved ones or them recognising their wife or mother or Nana!!, losing control of my bowels, unable to dress or feed myself…..god, what does it take for police, politicians, doctors, lawyers to get the message from the 80% of Australians who want the choice to decide for themselves with legislative change to protect the individuals right to choose for themselves – Voluntary Euthanasia – that is plain and simply – A GOOD DEATH.   heavens, we pride ourselves on having become civilised but allowing individuals to suffer intolerable pain with death the final outcome and not want to protect them from more hurt is just inconceivable!….

May 20, 2008 an Age Newspaper article

Euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke has rejected a suggestion by the prosecution in a euthanasia trial where he was appearing as a witness that he had been “hell-bent” on supporting a man’s application for an assisted suicide because of his ideological views and despite that man’s severe Alzheimer’s disease.

Dr Nitschke also denied he had shown “reckless disregard for human life”
and had abrogated his responsibilities as a doctor and acted as a campaigner for euthanasia in supporting the application by former Qantas pilot Graeme Wylie to die in Switzerland.

Dr Nitschke was giving evidence in the trial of Mr Wylie’s partner, Shirley Justins, and his long-time friend Caren Jenning.

Justins yesterday, on the eighth day of the trial, pleaded guilty to assisting Mr Wylie’s suicide by obtaining and providing the drug nembutal to him. But the court heard she “vehemently” denied being guilty of his murder.

She pleaded guilty to illegally importing a barbiturate drug. The court has heard she travelled to Mexico, where nembutal is sold legally, several days before Mr Wylie’s death.

Asked by Justice Rod Howie how he assessed a person’s capacity to decide to commit suicide, Dr Nitschke said it was “an impression one forms after discussion”.

“If they can consistently, and repeatedly and coherently put a position that this is what they want …”

The trial continues.

And again, a news item from ninemsn

Choice comments: I too am one of thousands (though not terminally ill) who traveled to Mexico not only to witness their Festival of the Dead, which was both thought provoking in its promotion of death as ongoing (with some humour) and at the same time, quite a sacred time for many remembering their dead, but also to acquire the drug Nembutal.   Unlike others, I did not actually bring it back into Australia.  Had I done so, I still wouldn’t have seen my actions as criminal.  I had no intention of using it for anyone else’s benefit, I’m selfish that way!  I opened the bottle in my hotel room, tasted it (bitter) and flushed the rest down the toilet… Many don’t believe that I actually did flush it, but I did.   

I have resigned myself to a less dignified death because of the lack of Nembutal, but in reality I have taken into account that I can suffer physically for 15 minutes more easily than 15 months if need be! 

Lawmakers in Australia, despite consecutive conservative Governments denying people the right to die peacefully on their own terms when faced with a drawn out terminal illness,  don’t have it all their own way just yet.   Politicians, lawyers, doctors, healthcare workers can’t prevent us from dying, they just make it even harder, more painful, more distressing for both the dying and the living.

Holding one’s hand, offering tea and sympathy is never enough for some of us.   We want more – we want Rights!

Foreigners seek euthanasia aid in Mexico

At least 200 terminally-ill people from Australia, Britain, New Zealand and the United States have visited Mexico since 2001 to buy a euthanasia drug, a newspaper has reported.

The Mexican newspaper Reforma cited Exit International – the mercy killing organisation run by Australian euthanasia advocate Phillip Nitschke that promotes Mexico as a destination for patients seeking to end their lives.

“On the basis of Exit research, the best places to visit are the 20-odd (US-Mexico) border crossings, from Tijuana in California through to Matamoros on the Gulf of Mexico,” the group says on its website.

The organisation says Nembutal – a drug usually used to put down animals – is “widely, cheaply and legally available, not only in Mexico but in many other South American countries”.

“Throughout Mexico veterinary Nembutal is available for between $US20 and $US40 ($A21-$A42) per 100ml bottle,” it says.
“One only needs to know the location of a veterinary supplier and the labelling in use at that location.”

Nembutal is banned for human use in Australia and it is also illegal to import or possess it, although it is allowed to be used in veterinary medicine.

The Reforma article examines the case of Australian man Don Flounders, who suffers from the fatal lung condition mesothelioma and travelled to the Mexican town of Tijuana to get the medicine.

Flounders, from Warragul, south-east of Melbourne, told the newspaper he found a veterinary pharmacy that had a sign advertising “articles for Australians”.

In March, Australian Federal Police (AFP) officers raided the Victorian homes of Flounders, 78, and Angie Belecciu, 54, both terminally ill, after they announced on Australian television that they planned to end their own lives.

The AFP was searching for Nembutal, but found none at the two homes, AFP spokeswoman Alex Kirkham said.
The raids came after Flounders and his wife Iris, 85, told the Seven Network they had recently travelled to Mexico to bring back the lethal drug for himself and Belecciu.

Flounders told AAP he was diagnosed with mesothelioma in August last year after being exposed to asbestos while working in sales for Shell in Melbourne in the 1960s.

A couple of people has missed the activity of my blogsite this past week or two. Needless to say I am alive, happy and well, just busy! Not neccesarily promoting voluntary euthanasia although I did bare my chest in the Olive Tree Restaurant on Friday night where there was a farewell function for a scrabble colleague travelling overseas. She’d had a tattoo of the Scottish flag on her back that day and of course, as women do on these occasions, I said, mine isn’t as grand but surely packed a message!….Unlike me she didn’t have her tattoo done at Chapel Street Tattooist, Prahran – which was only around the corner from where my friend has been staying….

Even before I’d had a drink that night I took a fall over those raised yellow markers in the middle of Park Street, South Melbourne (outside the Olive Tree Restaurant) where motorists are separated from the tram line. Walking quickly to avoid traffic I wasn’t expecting an impediment at my feet….grazed elbow, skinned knee, bruised hand and knuckles, I was grateful I hadn’t torn my clothes as well. Serve me right thinking how well I presented in my tailored self patterned good black slacks with a brand new deep orange knitted shawl come jacket! I’m told pride comes before the fall!…. but I’ll fix eventually.

On Monday I had an appointment with my Oncologist to sort out my dramas with the recently discovered melanoma since removed from my back. Currently I am reading a book Songs of Strength, where sixteen women talk about cancer. One of them had had a melanoma on her back removed and went on to develop lung cancer within two years. I had added two and two together and come up with five! as we do, not seeing things too clearly…..The major differences between the two of us ended up having a vital impact – The writer had had STAGE two and I had had LEVEL two melanoma……Stage two of five possible stages was so much more serious than my level two and for which I am eternally grateful. My oncologist gave me a clean bill of health and although I don’t have to see him again, I must still continue with the Surgeon and the Dermatologist.

Did you know that one could get a melanoma between the toes? It first appeared on Noelle’s feet as a fleshy blood blister.  Noelle being one of the sixteen contributors to the book, Songs of Strength.     Although it was recommended she have it looked at, she waited some three months, it had got larger, hardened and gone quite dark.  Then she went to the doctor!
Marionamoana’s brain tumour probably had started eleven years previously when at the age of 25, she started dropping things.  She’d just given birth.   Because she had a eye defect her symptoms were blamed on that.   She felt no pain and burnt herself badly because she could gauge distances for the stove or much else either….

The book has highlighted to me how lucky I am with both my restoration of health and my health carers.   Others seem to have really had a bad trot with the service they came up against.   Fortunately medicine has moved on a lot in 10 years since the book was published.

Feeling the pain

ONE of the end-of-life issues often overlooked, and discussed by Rodney Syme in A Good Death, is the fact that not all suffering is physical. Certainly intolerable (and incurable) physical suffering is warrant enough to justify the legalisation of medical assistance with dying.

But, there also is existential suffering. This is psychological and deserves as much relief as does physical pain. That, in part, is why palliative care specialists look to treat the whole person, not just their physical symptoms.

Dr Syme also highlights the difference between terminal illness and hopeless illness.

Existential suffering can be worse in cases of hopeless illness because, in those cases, a person doesn’t know how long they are going to suffer. In terminal illness, usually a time frame to death is known.

Dr Syme has shown not only uncompromising determination, but also great goodwill over decades in his quest to provide us all with the legal option of a good death, a death with dignity.

Ralph Blunden, Hawthorn

—————

No complaints here

AS ALWAYS, proponents of “voluntary” euthanasia miss the point — the history of the human race (and the recent experience in the Netherlands — despite strict guidelines) proves that the “voluntary” bit soon gets disregarded. The “choice” you claim is yours to make will be hijacked by others, simply because the choice exists and you are weaker.

There has always been an inherent danger in the concept of deciding if a life is “not worth living”. Tell me, which of the victims will come back to say “I wasn’t ready to die”?

A mature society will realise we simply cannot go down this road if we are to maintain true dignity and respect for life. Abuse will happen because we are guaranteed to get no complaints if it does.

Mark Rabich, Heathmont

Commentary: Mr Rabich, Why so cynical of your fellow man? Abuse is happening now so just make sure you leave your wealth to the dog’s home…then no one you know will have a reason to “knock you off before your time”….Always a good reason for giving away your money while alive and well. Voluntary Euthanasia has much more going for it than against it!….I trust implicitly the motives of my family…

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2236158.htm

Dr Death pushes for voluntary euthanasia to be legalised

PM – Monday, 5 May , 2008  18:31:00
Reporter: Edmond Roy

PETER CAVE: The man described as Victoria’s Dr Death is hoping to start a new dialogue on physician-assisted dying by publishing his own experiences.

Dr Rodney Syme has practised medicine for 45 years and in the past few years he’s been actively campaigning for a change in the law to make voluntary euthanasia legal.

He is also campaigning for a private member’s bill on physician-assisted death that is set to go before the Victorian Parliament later this year.

Dr Syme spoke to Edmond Roy and admitted that he was being deliberately provocative in an attempt to change the law.

RODNEY SYME: Yes, that is one aspect of it although I originally decided to write the book in order to try and educate the public about the context in which decisions are made by a doctor to help patients to die.

Although there was very strong public support for this concept I didn’t think the public really had very good understanding of the issues involved, so I set out to write a book that described the context of these issues.

And that’s why there are a number of patients stories in the book but as I went further and further I realised that the law was unclear, opaque, that it wasn’t being prosecuted and where you’ve got a bad law sometimes the only way to change it is by being provocative.

EDMOND ROY: So who is your view, is the law protecting?

RODNEY SYME: Well the law is protecting both doctors and patients, because if you think about it, if a doctor is prosecuted for providing humane and sympathetic treatment to a patient at the end of their life, it would knock the guts out of all palliative care, decent palliative care, because all decent palliative care has an intrinsic risk of hastening death.

EDMOND ROY: But as you put it in your book, there is an unofficial conspiracy of silence within the medical profession, how does that tally with what you’re doing?

RODNEY SYME: Yes, well doctors are very, very loath to talk about this. One of the unusual things about this book is that it gives two people a voice.

It gives patients a voice because throughout the book I’ve been able to use letters and comments from patients who are faced with these terrible predicaments and it’s also probably almost a unique book in being a book written by a doctor about his experiences in this area.

Doctors are very, very loath to talk about the things they do. I’m very, very far from being the only doctor whose helped patients at the end of their life by hastening their death but doctors naturally because of the opaque nature of the law are very, very loath to talk about these things.

As such, the medical profession doesn’t talk about it, the prosecutorial authorities don’t talk about it, the police don’t look for doctors to charge, and so it all goes on under the table, under the carpet and who knows what things are happening there that are not being exposed to the light of day.

It would be far, far, far better if doctors had some guidelines, some regulations it was out in the open and we would have far better practice, far safer medical practice than we have at the present time.

EDMOND ROY: You talk in your book about the idea of a natural death, dead so to speak. Is that true? I mean, have we reached a point in 2008 where you cannot die naturally?

RODNEY SYME: Well, people do die naturally if they have sudden death. They might be having a shower and die of a heart attack or some people do die in their sleep but most people who are dying have a death in which there is considerable medical influence.

Very few people who do die do so without some administration of drugs. Drugs which inevitably are going to have some influence on how that person dies. Natural death would be one in which there is no medical intervention at all and that’s actually very, very uncommon unless it’s a very acute death.

EDMOND ROY: How do you as a doctor make the decision about who should or shouldn’t get advice on how to organise their death?

RODNEY SYME: I don’t make the decision, the patient makes that decision. All I do, I’m a facilitator, I like to think that I conduct a dialogue with the patient and that dialogue is involved in finding out exactly what it is that they are concerned about, what suffering they have, addressing the question of is there any way in which that suffering can be relieved.

My aim is to get people to go as far with their life as they possibly can. I’m concerned to make sure that they are suffering from any mental illness which would be impacting on their decision.

I’m concerned to see that nobody is putting duress on them to make their decision but if after that dialogue it is absolutely clear that the well-informed patient is making a rational and clear and persistent decision that they do want to bring their life to an end
- in order to end their suffering, in order for them to end their suffering – then I’m prepared to assist them. And that assistance is in the form of medication which they then control.

This is the nature of the legislation which has been put before the Victorian Parliament in a private member’s bill which will empower patients, it won’t empower doctors. Patients are empowered by them having control of their medication.

They will decide when they when they need to use it or if they need to use it, and that is the best possible control you can have against any possibility of abuse.

PETER CAVE: Dr Rodney Syme speaking to Edmond Roy. His book, A Good Death: An Argument for Voluntary Euthanasia, is out this week.