Well done Megan I think you demonstrate Andrews point very well. any religious groups can only represent that views of its members ( even that might be problematic). their perspective on any matter shouldn't hold no more weight them someone off the street.

Cogent well informed argument Megan! Thank you!
Alan B.

yes the medical reasoning was correct and should have stood on its own feet.
Family interference against healthy life was seen when people thought free Medicare had ended and rang the doctor to cancel a relative's appointment. The smell of inheriting in a Will must entice some families also.

As a medical practitioner for 30 years, it embarrasses me that doctors such as the author continue to patronise their patients and ignore evidence which they are duty bound to act upon.
As both sides of the euthanasia debate acknowledge, a small percentage of deaths, (perhaps less than 1%)involve irremediable suffering by fully aware and informed patients. It's nobody's fault: it's just what happens in any large population, despite optimal palliation. This small group and only this groupis the target audience for Voluntary Assisted Dying.
There is no conflict between Palliative Care and VAD: they are both essential but when palliation and medical treatment have nothing more to offer and suffering continues, then any sensible person needs the right to decide their own fate.
The church will never change; it continues to put its dogma ahead of people's lives. If the Catholic church had its way, abortion would still be illegal and society would pay the price in young women's lives.
Like Andrew Denton I have seen dying up close and because I am an insider who understands how the system works, my mother had a reasonably comfortable though not perfect death. I have also had patients who have died horribly because the law as it stands is inadequate to grant some patients' wishes or allow doctors to act on them.
I challenge the author to provide scientific evidence of the vulnerable elderly pressured to end their lives in counties where VAD is legal. Instead we find universal support amongst the populations granted the right to control their own lives and deaths.
The church has a duty to advise its followers only. It should not interfere with the lives of non-believers.
Shame on the author for her patronising ignorance.

Well said TimH, Megan should know to have references at the end of here article so readers can check her "studies".

As much as I agree with Andrew Denton's feelings on euthanasia, I think that he is wrong to say that anyone who does not agree with him should keep their noses out of the discussion. And, while I agree that this writer has a right to express her opinion, I point to the fact that she is making her living from keeping people alive when, perhaps, they would rather she did not.

I also take umbrage at the arrogance of some doctors who think that they always know best. For instance, the totally unscientific diagnoses of Alzheimer's and dementia 'handed down' willy nilly, to the extent that there is suddenly a huge increase in the disease that is unbelievable. It has displaced old age and wear and tear on on body as the usual means of dying, plus aiding medicos to profit from something they know next to nothing about.

The fact of the matter of euthanasia is that there is no legal, dignified, peaceful way to kill yourself. As a member of an organisation promoting euthanasia for those wanting it, I know that DIY death is bulldust. You might be able to buy the appropriate drug (illegally) from overseas but, the Federal Police might get you and drag you and your family through the courts of, you might be sent a bottle of water for your $800. You might manage to use a plastic bag and nitrogen cylinder, but you have to provide photo recognition to buy nitrogren, and who knows what happens to that information. How about shooting, hanging or drowing? Jeez! I know of a man, who, two days ago, shot himself in his bathroom the same day he was diagnosed. A nice spectacle for his wife to find a short time later.

Until this vexed business is worked out, we really have to look to the likes of the writer take care of us. Politicians and holier-than-thou a..holes are, as usual, the problem here

Great article, well done! I am increasingly amused by the human rights arguments that seem to be spun to of thin air.
Peter Sellick

Just curious about " patients who have died horribly ". It seems that some under heroin / morphine can be unconscious and physically agitated with pain. Induced coma seems to be unconscious, but with some activity. Is that a sensation of pain that is "horrible" for the patient - or is it horrible for the family ?

Well ttbn: Given that the, out of his tiny mind, blew his brains out bloke you singled out as an example, left a mess for his wife?

Perhaps she would have been less distraught if he bought some heroin from a local dealer and simply overdosed? No photos taken etc? And available to any suicidal anyone who just wants to end it now, minus the mess!

In any event, where there is a will there's always a relative!

One thing I can fault the Author on, is the fact that ever increasing doses of morphine can and does suppress the life force culminating in death from "natural causes"!

This is where we need to change the current law to protect Doctors from the possible consequences, of apparent daily routine in some of our larger hospitals!? Simply put, the law technically sees the aforementioned outcome as the taking of a human life!

It says much about our morality that we can allow a medically assisted termination of (non human) life in the womb, with no legal repercussions in play, but may hold a Doctor or nurse practising palliative care to account, if a patient dies from an alleged overdose of opioids? And provable in a post mortem that includes a toxicology report?
Alan B.

Who the hell is Andrew DENTON, other than that 'talking head' on the biased ABC ?

I understand euthanasia is a very delicate subject and one that I believe there's no right or wrong answer. For some folk inflicted with awful pain and other embarrassing symptoms that make their lives intolerable, euthanasia is their best option and a final release for them, in their mind.

While others, also suffering awful levels of pain, all they want and hope for, is some strong pain relief and to have their agony wracked lives, extended as long as possible ?

Personally, I don't support euthanasia at all. Subscribing to the old aphorism 'while there's life, there's hope ? Probably not entirely appropriate to an 'end of life decision', nevertheless it suits my own personal philosophy ?

I understand those poor souls who're in so much agony, they crave access to euthanasia in order to obtain that peaceful relief; And should they be denied it (legally), will more than likely commit suicide ? The legitimacy or otherwise of that statement, I'm not entirely sure. Still if those in the know say it's so, then perhaps they're right. Nevertheless, I would still query it ?

Allan B.

Pull your head in. You haven't got the guts to answer simple, straight forward questions to back up your left wing drivel, so I have no interest in anything you say.

O sung wu,

Andrew Denton is, as you say, an ABC drone who believes that the comrades are the only ones entitled to freedom of speech. I still believe in the right to euthanise but, for myself, I have given away thoughts of self-destruction; mainly for my family's sake, but also because I want to fight the bastards as long as I can.

ttbn: WTF are you raving on about? Did I press one of your buttons? What questions? I think I've made my views on euthanasia fairly clear? And am mostly against assisted suicide!

As far as I know, you don't control this site or are able to censor any content! And probably emphasize why voluntary euthanasia ought not be allowed, least mentally unwell use it to simply and cunningly top themselves?

Pain relief and palliative care is all most need or want? And if you don't want medical assistance to extend your time, you need to create a living will, with specific instructions for your end of life treatment!

Euthanasia can never ever be allowed to morph into a remedy for clinical or age depression, or hopelessness! I agree with O sung wu, where there's life there is hope!
Alan B.

Hi there TTBN...

I think you possess a very healthy outlook on this whole euthanasia issue. It's a very tough question and as I said earlier on, I don't believe there's any right or wrong answer.

However, if in the near future governments consider strictly legalising euthanasia, well I'd personally not condemn it nor would I support it. Every human on earth should have ultimate control over his or her's own life ! One person might consider seeking euthanasia, while another would never even consider it ? It's a very personal decision, and even close family members shouldn't seek to 'suborn' or influence a relative's decision, one way or the other. To do otherwise is completely immoral.

Hi there ALAN B...

A very simple axiom I grant you, 'While there's life there's hope' but it's very true. Life is so very precious, we only have one go at it, and it's definitely not a dress rehearsal, so if we bugger it up, well that's all there is to it, unfortunately ? Too many (young) people throw their lives away, sadly and needlessly ?

Alan B.

What questions? Have a look at my post 1/9/16, 2.34pm in the "Meet the family" comments. But of course, you are too busy blathering to bother with what anyone else says, so forget it. You are a pain in the backside. You probably have a similar pain - your head is so far up yours.

I've just emerged from a death bed vigil of a good friend of many years, so to me, this is an appropriate subject.
At death, there is exposed exasperation with the dying process. An anxiousness to "get it over with", it may appear as a statement towards those ends; but in this case it was fleeting!

Maybe the 85% of Australians agreeing with euthanasia are the 85% with inadequate health care cover. What I observe on a daily bases, is the abandonment of the chronically ill and dying in our community, by an over pampered and greedy medical profession. No money no service!
There is an underlying hatred of this cruel system!

One such example is the woman acquaintance, who was ignored under these rules of service to the rich, until she identified as Aboriginal. Using the "closing the gap" as a lever to gain entry to an otherwise unaffordable medical profession, it was staggering what doors were suddenly opened wide!
From that moment on, her life was made comfortable, with no medical attention withheld through lack of affordability.

The author is either unaware or chooses to ignore the realities of the disparities between rich and poor, and the quality of health service people are likely to receive in their final stages of life. Life is very bleak and painful for the poor!

Church duty to be involved?
"Testamentary bequests to the church became compulsory rather than simply permitted. The church combined the final confession with the act of directing the distribution of property at death. In the West, the church established its own form for executing a
testament in accordance with Canon law. These testaments had to be executed in the presence of a priest or other religious official—but were otherwise lacking many of the formalities required by Roman law. The church worked to abolish many aspects of the
Roman law aimed at protecting the freedom of the testator—such as the requirement of disinterested witnesses—in order to enhance the likelihood that the church would benefit from a will. “[M]any councils in France, England, and Spain made it a law for the
laity, that they should not testamentate otherwise than in the presence of their priests.”_ Louisiana Law Center.

ttbn: #1 my voting history would suggest I'm anything but left wing!
#2 that said, I'm not a extreme right wing Ideologue who simply refuses to look at any evidence that conflicts with his views or inculcated belief system!

#3 I don't intend to be cross examined on evidenced based views by an extremely rude homophone!

#4 I hope that answers your inquiry?

#5 I don't suffer fools gladly, but leave no doubt for those still able and more importantly, able to engage in rational critical thinking!

#6 common courtesy and civility costs nothing, you should try it sometime, if you would have your asinine ignorance responded to, perhaps!?

#7 My patience with fanatics and their flat earth world view is very limited, particularly those who resort to abuse as soon as they've lost the argument!

#8 I will not discriminate against folks, because of an accident of birth!

#9 you need to at least try to remain on topic for this thread; after all OLO is not a forum for you particular stone age beliefs!

#10 I believe I left nobody in any doubt what my evidence based views are on SSM! Those that stoically refuse in any way shape or form to look at the irrefutable evidence are not worth debating! I mean what's the point?
Alan B.

Diver: excellent point and hear, hear! Alan B.

Hi there DIVER DAN...

Sadly you're absolutely correct - the rich can die comfortable, whereas the poor just have to hurry up and die, because they need the bed, irrespective of what palliative care they may need. We live in an inordinately unfair society I reckon, where even dying with dignity depends on one's bank balance.

Allan B,

Not only are you a hypocrite - continuing to shout abuse, while whining about the supposed abuse of others - but you are also not very bright. I couldn't care less about your views on SSM. I couldn't care less if you wanted to shack up with a man. You are entitled to think and do as you wish. You can call me anything you wish too - homophobe, racist, right wing whatever - again, I couldn't care less. But when you claim that people abuse and hate certain people you think you need to defend, while spouting the same sort of abuse and hate yourself, you are not much chop, in my view. You have already been advised by the editor that you engage in personal attacks, and you argued about that, too. You are a nasty bigot, Allan; one I will not attempt to talk to again. You are typical of all deluded individuals who think that anyone not like them must be 'bad', because you are sooo 'good'. I pity you for your total ignorance of mankind and your refusal to accept that you are not the font of all wisdom. Hell, you are still incapable of answering my original question, preferring to try to put me down rather than admit that you are a hypocrite. Goodbye, and good luck with the head-banging.

I would like to drill into the statistics of 2500 suicides PA, and identify why suicide is so prevalent among the aged population; particularly male!
From my observations of life, those with minimum resources are the most vulnerable.

When the question of euthanasia arises, debate on the cohort of the population who will be given the option is ignored.

It seems pretty obvious that people generally who find themselves in dire straights requiring unaffordable medical attention for chronic diseases, have already chosen death by their own hand!

Euthanasia is a lovely wollen blanket for the wealthy to placate anxiety of impending doom, that will no doubt, be added as another layer of the "dogs breakfast" of the over pampered medical practicianers, to add to their cart! Hang the expense, (excuse the pun)!

http://www.mindframe-media.info/for-media/reporting-suicide/facts-and-stats

nobody on this site who is not dying or over 70years old, or having chronic unbearable
pain has a right to decide this issue.

Only those going through these things have the right to make a dcision on it,

The Drs excuse that they have to administer the euthanasia drugs is not valid.

Make those Drugs available to the individuals in the above dying circumstances
with instructions of dosage and they would be capable of taking the drug themselves.

I watched it done on a documentart in a country where it is legal.

It involved drinkiing about a third of a small glass of a liquid.
It was the most peaceful way to die you could wish for. It was over in seconds
with no stress to the patient at all. I saw my husbands mother in her dying days,
As her organs shut down she started to have violent siezures, awful spasms while
she was awake and conscious that were wracking her body and lifting her off the bed
with the violent movement.
We reported it to the nurses but they didnt seem to be able to provide much help.

A lot of the time people not going through awful dying processes,, think they should have all the say about it.
They are not quailied to know what the hell they are talking about until they experience it, or are going through it.

I have a "sudden" interest in this subject due to a spike in deaths of those around me.
Death, the silent calamity.

Nobody dying wants to die; first observation. Even the few I were acquainted with who took their own lives at the end of personal struggles, were driven in the end, by insurmountable pressures of life. Drug addiction seems to feature, but marital dysfunction featured high on the list.

Most hung themselves in various places. One from a tree in the swamps where if not for the trail of blowflies, would still not be found. One electrocuted himself on a bed frame in the garage.

2500 deaths PA at their own hand, indicates to anybody with minimal intelligence, a dire need for easier access to a dignified end surely!

Seems to this little black duck, the debate on euthanasia is becoming "gentrified" and it's suggested uses corralled into a defined medical use for the medical profession. An addition to the dogs breakfast of money making opportunities, assisting doctors in adding another floor to their North shore mansions!

Yes, I'm cynical with years of observation of pretence, that the medical fraternity actually give a stuff about anything but the bottom line.
Cheerful is on the mark. An alternative to an otherwise unbearable situation should be cheap and readily available to all who have finally chosen death as an alternative!

Quote >> "One Sydney study found that only 2.8% of patients in a palliative care service requested euthanasia when first seen. After palliative care commenced, this number was reduced to less than 1% of those referred."

Yes, on might expect that the % seeking euthanasia would be low.

Dr Best's discussion of the use of morphine is disingenuous. Yes, morphine in normal doses provides therapeutic analgesia (in most cases). But higher doses are depressant, especially when used in conjunction with benzodiazapines or similar drugs.

Im not sure where the author got their information, but there is statements that seem unlikely to me.

Firstly she states that most doctors are against euthanasia. This occurs to me as extremely odd in my own experience. I regularly get work with doctors, and have 5 family members who work as either a nurse (dealing with cancer patients) or are doctors. All of them support euthanasia.

I definitely agree with the author that euthanasia and its administration is not a simple black and white process, however, it should not be dismissed.

I also believe that religion should stay out of it. If euthanasia is against your religious beliefs, then that is fine, don't volunteer for it. However, don't stop others from having the choice.