Thank you for this topic, TRTL and for the wonderful sensitivity and compassion the three of you have shown.
I feel for that poor woman!

Euthanasia has been very much in my head lately.
As some of you might know, I’m from a country (The Netherlands) where active euthanasia has been legal for some time.
Today, I received the news that my terminally ill aunt was granted permission on her application for euthanasia.

It takes two doctors who have been involved with the patient to agree that there is no positive outlook for the patient. My aunt has been treated for advanced bowel cancer for about 18 months; she's had 4 operations, chemotherapy and radiation, but the cancer has spread and has become untreatable.

My uncle, her husband, is extremely sad but fully supports her decision. They have a very happy and strong marriage and he loves his wife too much to deny her a painless, peaceful and quick death.

After Easter she will return home from the hospital and she will choose a time and date for her to be euthanised, which will happen in a week or so, before her body will be affected by dehydration.

She will see all of her friends and extended family for the last time during the days before her death. She wants to talk to me on the phone as well as we’ve stayed in regular contact since I emigrated.
Then, she will pass away softly, in her own bed, and with her husband and their 4 sons around her.

Continued

Foxy and Bronwyn, you have raised great questions.

I have a link somewhere of an English version on the euthanasia laws in the Netherlands and if any of you is interested in reading that booklet I will try to find that link for you. I’ve used that link in a previous euthanasia discussion but it’s quite some time ago and I can’t find it atm.

I did find the following info that may address one of your concerns:

"Doctors have two distinct duties to their patients. The first is to relieve suffering and the second is to preserve life. Because honouring a request for euthanasia conflicts with this second duty, doctors are allowed to refuse. Nurses may also refuse to assist in performing euthanasia or preparing for it. Neither doctors nor nurses can ever be censured for failing to comply with requests for euthanasia. The new Act is intended to ensure that doctors and nurses will never have to compromise their personal principles. Doctors are under no obligation to perform euthanasia,
and patients have no right to it. If a doctor refuses to perform euthanasia, however, he must refer the patient to another doctor who may be willing to grant the request."

Evolution

you want doctors to be elevated above euthanasia, yet they are already involved. Unfortunately it is under a veil of secrecy and thus the issue lacks clarity and honesty that it deserves. You are right in saying that we do not have a legal way of defining this issue, but surely the attempt is important.

An autopsy used to be an unthinkable and ghastly act and perpetrators executed. I am not comparing the two apart from to say that society can change and form a consensus even on something like this.

Foxy

you are right, this is something that society has to be carful with. Are we though, too afraid of death.
Is the idea that we force people to live agonising days, months and years; something that we should fear, as much as someone that quits a little too easy.

There is no right or wrong. But evolution, considering your hopes and wishes. If you are ever unfortunate enough to be stuck in pain and unable to move. Don't you hope that someone loves you enough to try to help you live and die on your terms, not someone elses.

thank you for your thoughts everyone and good luck

Thank you to TRTL for starting this thread.

Also thank you to Brownyn and Foxy for your reliably thoughtful and well reasoned posts.

Celivia, I am grateful that your aunt has the opportunity to choose how she wishes to be treated. This is something we have tried to achieve in this country but have yet to do so, hence the plight of people like Chantal in France, our own country and other countries which dictates to people how they should live their lives.

AT the time the Howard government banned Philip Nitschke’s book “The Peaceful Pill”, my mother’s health seriously declined. Somehow she managed to recover, although she is now on oxygen most of the time, she is still able to live independently. My family and I know she is on borrowed time, could be months; we hope for years. However, we have talked at length and my mother has been very clear that should she go into cardiac arrest, she is not to be put on any life support. She is adamant that she does not want to spend the reminder of her life dependent and restricted to a bed.

Despite the ban, I bought a copy of Nitschke’s book and it seems that unless I can afford to go to Mexico where Nembutal can be purchased, the options for a peaceful death here in Australia are limited to asphyxiation and other crude methods, where the family are unable to be present if they don’t want to be convicted of either murder or aiding suicide.

This is disgraceful,an appalling way to treat people who have contributed to this country and only want a peaceful end to their lives!

The one thing we can be sure of is that we will all die – why is death the one thing that others seem to want to control?

Getting v/emotional here. Have had a gutful on OLO lately. Time for me to take a break!

Ah, no Fractelle! You often provide a ray of sanity and occasionally amusement, two things which these boards could use more of.

I agree with most of what's been posted here so far. Yes, there are risks and it is indeed a slippery slope. I wouldn't want euthanasia to ever become a casual consideration or for there to be pressure, though the cynical side of me wonders what's going to happen when the pressure mounts on the number of aged people and whether we can avoid the risks that have been spoken of.

What I mean to say is, that perhaps if we're not careful, our stressed system won't be able to care for everyone anyway - but you're right in that it's something we need to be vigilant against.

That being said - as Celivia pointed out, there are countries which manage it properly and I think we're quite a way off seeing people pressured into these situations. Could you imagine the adverse publicity if even one person spoke out saying they'd been pressure to be euthanased? The outcry would be horrendous... I hope.

Fractelle, I wish you’d stay, too!
I was shocked when the previous govt banned The Peaceful Pill!
On Insight some time ago, when Christopher Pyne debated euthanasia, I thought he came across as a cold, closed-minded man, able to think in black-and-white only and showing no compassion for the plight of the terminally ill.

Christopher Pyne should have carefully listened to these ill people, he should have investigated how euthanasia in other countries has benefited patients, even if they never take advantage of their permission.
He showed no interest, perhaps partly because he is Catholic and therefore was in a compromised position.
So many terminally ill patients are being forced to die a horrible death because of someone else’s faith.

A fact is that only one-third of the patients who have requested euthanasia are accepted; for the remaining two-thirds other ways of relieving their suffering are recommended or doctors have some hope that the illness may improve.
Of the people who have been granted permission only about 30% go through with euthanasia because for the vast majority it is an extremely relieving feeling that they don’t HAVE to keep suffering day-in day out without knowing how torturous their last moments will be and how long it will last.

Once they have the permission, which allows them to choose their moment of death that can be arranged on short notice, a huge weight comes off their shoulders and they seem to regain some renewed energy.
Life is easier when they’ve lost their fear of dying an excruciating death, of perhaps having to choke to death and of dying all alone. They now can die a humane and soft death whenever they want.

Australia’s first step should be to openly discuss euthanasia. In the previous govt, as far as I know, Amanda VanStone was the only one who wanted to re-open the euthanasia debate.
Do any of you have any expectations of the Rudd govt in this regard?

Here’s that link I was looking for. When you’re on the site click the link at the bottom for the euthanasia pdf brochure.
http://www.minvws.nl/en/folders/ibe/euthanasia_the_netherlands_new_rules.as