Assisted suicide is eevil, I tellz ya

We have an appalling story here, folks. Sir Edward Downes, one of Britain's most distinguished orchestra conductors, kidnapped his wife (or did she kidnap him?) and they hightailed it up to Switzerland where they both took part in assisted suicide. This is yet another blatant example demonstrating just how horrible, unethical and inhumane assisted suicide is.

Although friends who spoke to the British news media said Sir Edward was not known to have been terminally ill, they said he wanted to die with his ailing wife, who had been his partner for more than half a century.

Okay, so they went up there willingly, fully expecting what was going to take place there. But they were accompanied up there by their very own children!

The couple’s children said in an interview with The London Evening Standard that on Tuesday of last week they accompanied their father, 85, and their mother, Joan, 74, on the flight to Zurich, where the Swiss group Dignitas helped arrange the suicides. On Friday, the children said, they watched, weeping, as their parents drank “a small quantity of clear liquid” before lying down on adjacent beds, holding hands.

Poor children. They are undoubtedly traumatized from witnessing his horrible event:

"Within a couple of minutes they were asleep, and died within 10 minutes,” Caractacus Downes, the couple’s 41-year-old son, said in the interview after his return to Britain. “They wanted to be next to each other when they died.” He added, “It is a very civilized way to end your life, and I don’t understand why the legal position in this country doesn’t allow it."

[...]

“After 54 happy years together, they decided to end their own lives rather than continue to struggle with serious health problems,” the Downes children said in their statement.

... Okay, so they agree with their parents' decision to end their lives and fully support the practice of assisted suicide, even questioning its illegality. But obviously they have to be unsettled by their father's insanity in choosing to kill himself when he was perfectly healthy (or healthy enough not to warrant assisted suicide):

Friends of Sir Edward said that his decision to die with his wife did not surprise them. “Ted was completely rational,” said Richard Wigley, the general manager of the BBC Philharmonic. “So I can well imagine him, being so rational, saying, ‘It’s been great, so let’s end our lives together.’ ”

Jonathan Groves, Sir Edward’s manager, called their decision “typically brave and courageous.”

... So they were both completely sane and rational, and the man chose to die rather than spend his remaining years without his soul mate. That's so sweet ...

Err, NO – evil! It's evil! Even if it's two aging, rational and loving companions who chose to die together rather than live battling heavy health problems, and did so by ingesting a simple, completely painless barbiturate drink and died by each other's side in bed, and whose children and friends are absolutely understanding and supportive of what they did – it's still wrong! (And evil!)

At least the two children who accompanied the couple to Switzerland and provided mental support to the consenting lovers will be harshly prosecuted and likely imprisoned for choosing to do what's right over what's legal. 'Cuz ignoring obsolete and immoral rules – that's such a liberal thing to do.

Stephen Colbert, eat your heart out.

(via The Agitator)

Continued ...»

Even South Korea beat you to it, America

The US has long paraded itself as a forerunner for legal, civil and socio-political rights, yet once again another, substantially smaller and less renown country beat them to legalizing a critical person's right. A South Korean court has opened the doors to a possible legalization of human Right-to-Die following the ruling that an aging woman, stuck in a coma for over a year, was to be let off her artificial life-sustaining equipment and finally die in peace.

The ruling is the first of its kind by the country's Supreme Court and settles a case that began more than a year ago after Kim Ok-kyung, 77, lapsed into a coma following a botched operation, The Korean Times reported Friday.

Testimony indicated Kim had no chance of recovery.

"In this condition, extending her life is meaningless and against her right to die with dignity," Chief Justice Lee Yong-hoon said in the ruling.

Justice Lee said before falling into a coma, Kim had indicated that she would not want to be kept alive by machines.

Following the verdict Thursday, families of two other comatose patients applied for the right to remove them from life support equipment.

Earlier, Seoul National University Hospital announced it would allow terminal cancer patients or their families decide whether to remain on life support.

Glad to see they're already starting an example and leading the race for Right-to-Die in the area. Now if only this feeling of rational sense would make its way into the heartland of America ... hmm?

Continued ...»

Undercover fake terminally-ill patient busts Right-to-Die group

Late last month I commented on the now-famous Right-to-Die advocates ring, the Final Exit Network, that got busted and is due for court. This is a continuation of that story as new details and updates occur.

I'm not certain when this occurred, but a report states that an undercover state investigator posed as a terminal-phase cancer patient and asked for the ring's aid in his supposed assisted suicide. Naturally, the good people of the Final Exit Network agreed to help carry out the sleazeball's 'final demands', and in return, got busted (again?).

ATLANTA — An undercover state investigator told a right-to-die network that he wanted to kill himself. In response, he later testified, officials of the network planned to have him asphyxiate himself with a helium-filled face mask while holding down his arms.

After an investigation, four officials of the group, known as the Final Exit Network, were arrested last month on charges of racketeering and assisted suicide.

The arrests raised questions about whether the group, which has helped some 200 people commit suicide since 2004, merely watched people take the leap into death, or pushed them over the edge.

There isn't much I can say here that wouldn't be plainly and flatly repeating myself for the umpteenth time. I believe the group's actions, if they're as advertised, are noble and honorable and never should be anywhere near a courtroom setting. This is once again self-serving, self-righteous assholes deciding who gets to live or not depending on their own stupid beliefs, something I shall never condone or be respectful towards.

The chief claim against the Final Exit Network is it's alleged 'hands-on' approach; while other Right-to-Die support and advocate groups generally tend to be more like counselors or guides, members of the FEN are said to be directly involved in the actual assisted-suicide acts themselves, which – predictably – some say damages the movement instead of helps it.

Other groups are concerned that the network will portray the movement negatively.

“People don’t want to do this underground or covertly, with hushed tones, with great risks to themselves and their loved ones,” said Barbara Coombs Lee, the president of Compassion and Choices, which supports end-of-life decisions. “They want to have their physician involved. They want hospice care involved. They want their family there without shame or risk.”

Even if she's also a Right-to-Die advocate, I have to disagree. How can she, or anyone from either side of the fence, proclaim to know what people want in their final hours? Sure, some do want to be surrounded by loved ones and family for moral support and all that. Perhaps even a certain amount of the majority. But certainly not all – it's simple statistics that some will want to be alone for whatever reason. Perhaps they are ashamed and just want it over. Perhaps they don't want to have their family and cared ones see them suffer. And then, what about those who may not even have any friends or loved ones at all?

And this bit about them wanting their physician involved along with hospice care – sorry, that's just rubbish. I can hardly imagine that the location where the patient chooses to die would be a cold hospital, rather than their comfy home with familiar surroundings, and as for the physician, unless they were more than 'doctor-patient', I don't think the patient would care all that much at all. It's just another face in a white lab coat.

I know if I ever was about to be guided through assisted suicide, I'd want to do it at my home, with the few people I cared for; the presence of my doctor would be entirely dependent on how I got along with him or not.

But of course, one thing you can depend on is close-minded idiocy from this basic right's opponents.

Opponents of assisted suicide were harsher.

“These are people who instead of pulling you back from the ledge, they shove you off,” said Stephen Drake, a research analyst for Not Dead Yet, an advocacy group for the disabled that opposes assisted suicide. “Legally, we may not know what this means. But in a personal sense, it can mean the difference between life and death.”

Seems Mr. Drake doesn't write much; his sentence structure leaves quite a bit to be desired, casting some question marks upon his relevance. But irrelevant; he speaks like any other imbecile, blowing it out of proportion ('shove you off [the ledge]'), bringing up the legality as if that had anything to do at all with if it's right or wrong instead of merely permitted or not, etc. And his last comment about it being 'the difference between life and death' ... well, no shit, Einstein. Some genius, isn't he?

His group's name, 'Not Dead Yet', doesn't seem particularly wise a choice in terms of the impression it imprints one with, but now I'm just getting petty and nitpicky. (Why not?)

Overall, I think the only right thing to do is ... Well, why don't I let Mr. Dincin, a member of the Final Exit Network, say it for me?

“There are millions of people who think what we do is just awful,” Mr. Dincin said. “They think we shouldn’t touch a person’s natural course from living to dying, but I think people have a right to decide for themselves.” [My emphasis]

Continued ...»

Washington state is about to legalize "Death with Dignity"

Another move forwards for proponents of the Right to Die. The state of Washington is about to allow 'Death with Dignity' which, after plenty of red tape and procedural complications, will finally allow terminally-ill patients to end their lives sooner and avoid unnecessary pain and torment.

OLYMPIA, Wash. - Terminally ill patients with less than six months to live will soon be able to ask their doctors to prescribe them lethal medication in Washington state.

However, the legality isn't the real issue at stake here, as the article then goes on about how doctors, for reasons either personal or professional, are disinclined to end a patient's life even if it's really in that patient's best interest.

But even though the "Death with Dignity" law takes effect Thursday, people who might seek the life-ending prescriptions could find their doctors conflicted or not willing to write them.

Many doctors are hesitant to talk publicly about where they stand on the issue, said Dr. Tom Preston, a retired cardiologist and board member of Compassion & Choices, the group that campaigned for and supports the law.

"There are a lot of doctors, who in principle, would approve or don't mind this, but for a lot of social or professional reasons, they don't want to be involved," he said.

Of course I perfectly understand how some doctors would be hesitant or simply refusing to end a patient's life if that doctor is simply too put-off by the idea of killing someone; hell, even if one of my loved ones were ailing and dying, I know I would want to end their sufferings, but more likely than not I'd have some serious hesitation issues with terminally ending their life. It's plain human nature: normal people don't like to kill, even if it's theoretically in the 'victim''s best interest.

I can just hope, of course, that most doctors are able to overlook and overcome this initial disturbance and hesitation, and are able to let reason shine through: they're not killing them per se; they truly are helping them. (Plus, this isn't even a rationalization, it's plain and simple truth.)

The vigors for finally being eligeable for this ending-of-life thing are rather lengthy and tedious, though.

Under the Washington law, any patient requesting fatal medication must be at least 18 years old, declared competent and a state resident. The patient would have to make two oral requests, 15 days apart, and submit a written request witnessed by two people, one of which must not be a relative, heir, attending doctor, or connected with a health facility where the requester lives.

Two doctors must certify that the patient has a terminal condition and six months or less to live.

I understand one has to be absolutely certain that the want to die so it's not just some stupid passing whim, and that they have to be terminal, but really, those regulations just seem a bit excessive to me. Agreed with the two statements and having at least one witness, along with of course a confirmed diagnosis and 'window-of-life-left', but that's really where I'd stop it. Just one reliable witness and one credible doctor's diagnosis seems perfectly enough to me. I'd also eliminate the 'limit' on the six-months-left-to-live bit; what if the patient has more than six months left, but is gonna be in pain and torment long before? There seems to be a logical fallacy here.

I understand the necessity of boundful protections and clauses ... This though, I'm less lenient towards.

Under the Oregon and Washington laws, physicians and pharmacists are not required to write or fill lethal prescriptions if they are opposed to the law. Some Washington hospitals are opting out of participation, which precludes their doctors from participating on hospital property.

I can understand individual doctors and practitioners refusing to end patients' lives, but when entire hospitals say 'no', I call 'bullshit'. It's the choice of the patient and the individuals who may be involved in the willful dying, not the establishment's. Imagine Right-to-Die being legal in your state and you're a perfectly fit patient for that and you wish to die, yet you're in the wrong hospital due to chances outside your control ... That's ridiculous.

(And anyway, how the hell can a hospital say 'no' to state legislation? I didn't know hospitals were of any authority when it came to state-wide law, so either this is illegal on their part and I wish them to be bitchslapped, or this is legal, and I'm dumbfounded.)

Continued ...»

Right-do-Die ring members due for court

This is an interesting story for anyone who believes in a person's right-to-die should they willingly choose. A ring of four members who offered services to people who wanted to die peacefully is due in court for the criminal charges they received after they'd helped a man in Georgia kill himself.

Members of an assisted suicide ring say they've done nothing wrong and seem eager for a court battle over criminal charges they helped a Georgia man kill himself, while their supporters are using the case as a rallying cry for more debate about end-of-life issues.

Four members of the Final Exit Network were arrested Wednesday on charges they violated Georgia's assisted suicide laws by helping 58-year-old John Celmer use helium and an exit bag - a plastic hood with tubing attached - to suffocate himself.

[...]

In Baltimore on Friday, Dr. Lawrence D. Egbert and Nicholas Alex Sheridan smiled and waved to supporters before asking a judge to release them on bond so they could travel to Georgia to face charges. The judge later agreed to release and their attorney said they were expected to travel to Georgia over the weekend.

What else can I say? Of course, I'm all for it, myself. A person should have a right to die just as much as they should have their inherent right to live. I'm not saying kill any depression-wracked miserable soul who comes knocking when they just need to throw away the beer bottle clutched in their hand; people with genuine reasons to cease living, when they're living in physical pain or incapacity, should be the judge to when they want their time to be up in this world. I don't count these four activists as 'heroes', but I certainly do commend their efforts and actions.

They're also being charged with 'tampering with evidence and violating anti-racketeering laws'. There're few details on this, but personally I wouldn't be surprised if this was plain fabrication to try and inculpate them out of the prosecutors' close-minded moral rights.

Anyway, best luck to them to escape jail time of course, and if anything this will hopefully spark a stronger debate that, just maybe, will result in people actually getting to choose when to end their lamentable existence on this planet.

Continued ...»

Italian Right-to-Die case: confirmed cause of death

I previously wondered just what had finally caused Eluana Englaro to die, finally ending the heated controversy in Italy. Well, the official report is now in: she had cardiac arrest from dehydration. The complete text from the relatively short article below:

A preliminary autopsy on the woman at the center of a right-to-die case in Italy has found that the woman, Eluana Englaro, 38, died Monday of cardiac arrest because of dehydration, the ANSA news agency reported Wednesday. The autopsy appeared to rule out foul play in the death of Ms. Englaro, who died just days after her nutrition intake was reduced in line with a high court ruling in favor of her family and opposed by the Roman Catholic Church and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. She had been on a feeding tube for 17 years after a car accident. The results of further tests are expected in the coming weeks, ANSA reported.

Well, that's it, I guess. She can finally move on (if there's anything to move on to), and the asshats who fought to keep her tied down here can suck some zucchinis.

Continued ...»

Italian Right-to-Die case: Eluana is finally dead

Yes, it's finally happened after all this time: Eluana Englaro, the vegetative state woman I've been harping on about for the last few days, has finally passed away peacefully, despite the pretentious bill to force her to be kept alive. The linked article doesn't seem to mention how or why she died – as a result of her extensive brain damage, likely, though why it suddenly happened after 17 relatively stable years, and right after I've started blogging about it, is intriguing – but needless to say this should come as a large relief to her father, who fought endlessly for her rights to have her ruined life ended, and to Right-do-Die proponents everywhere.

... It's an odd feeling that I feel relatively happy and relieved to hear someone died ... Eh. At least that stupid debacle is over, although seeing as the bill is still in effect, it could likely prevent any more Right-to-Die cases from succeeding. I have a feeling I'm not done blogging about this ...

Continued ...»

Italian Right-to-Die case: update – senators jump to approve bill

Still going down the same road as ever in this case, the assholes in charge in the Italian government are now dogpiling on the bill that Premier Silvio Berlusconi hurried to introduce recently to force the ever-ailing vegetative state patient Eluana Englaro to be kept alive, despite her final wishes to be let off life-support. Her father even won their court case which finally allowed them to remove the feeding tube – until the asshats barged in with their red tape and other conservative, Vatican-backed bullshit.

If I were this woman's father, I seriously would have long-since crept into the room, kissed her goodbye, wept a bit probably, then personally removed the feeding tube and other life support systems. More likely, I would've carefully injected her with an overdose of Morphine or something: quick, painless, effective. I think the guilt of ending your brain-dead daughter's life will be quickly assuaged by the knowledge you really did help her ease her burden and end this ridiculous debacle. She can finally move on to whatever is after life, if something exists (even though I personally doubt it). Although, perhaps I'm simply too enthused by that similar scene in Million Dollar Baby to realize it's an absurd plan ... but whatever. Something should be done.

And did I mention my outrage at the fact that one of the reasons Premier Berlusconi is using to excuse her being force-kept alive, is that she could even in theory bear a child? How pathetically cruel and/or retarded is that sort of reasoning?

Continued ...»

Italian Right-do-Die case: 'wrong clinic'

The right-wing nutjobs at the head of Italy are now trying a new tactic to further prolong Eluana Englaro's vegetative state. (As I commented twice on this topic before: Ms. Englaro suffered a horrific car crash 17 years ago that left her with irreversible brain damage, meaning she'll be stuck in her vegetative state forever ... then the Pope also dug his self-righteous paws into the issue.)

Health Minister Maurizio Sacconi said that there were problems with the clinic ('La Quiete') that's hosting Ms. Englaro's lifeless form, and that the clinic also wasn't the hospice faculty called upon by the court's decision to finally grant Ms. Englaro's father's wishes to remove her life-support systems and grant her final wishes to die in peace. Excerpt below from the ABC News website article:

Italy's health minister declared Sunday there were problems with the clinic hosting a woman in a hotly debated right-to-die case, as the government appeared to be trying a new tactic to keep her alive.

Minister Maurizio Sacconi also said the "La Quiete" clinic in Udine isn't the hospice facility called for by the Milan appeals court, which has ruled that Eluana Englaro's feeding tubes can be removed.

As you can expect, this is all bullshit of course, as a following excerpt reveals:

The head of the clinic, Ines Domenicali, said the only anomaly was that volunteers were caring for Englaro, but said everything concerning her care was correct, ANSA reported.

On Sunday, Englaro's neurologist, Dr. Carlo Alberto Defanti, said her condition was "stable, and we are proceeding with the total suspension of artificial nutrition," ANSA said.

Just had to add that last paragraph. Of course, a reputable neurologist (I looked him up) can't be trusted to tell precisely if a patient's brain damage warrants her being left lifeless and vegetative for eternity. What do neurologists know, anyway?

Perhaps there should be a clue as to the batshit government being utterly morally bankrupt and wrong when they're backed by the fuckin' Vatican. Lord Knows the Pope and his cronies always do what's best for everyone, right? No harm in asking THAT death-cult for support and moral guidance, no?

Not to mention, one of the reasons Premier Silvio Berlusconi chose to describe her being kept alive is that she could potentially have children. What do they plan to do, impregnate her when she's unconscious and unable to give consent, or even fucking KNOW she'd have kids? Remove and fertilize her eggs? This is wrong on so many levels I can't even bring myself do describe it.

Continued ...»

Guess which position the Pope took in the notorious Italian Right-do-Die case?

I previously commented on the heated debate for supporters of patients' right to die peacefully regarding the case of Eluana Englaro, the now-38-year-old woman who's been in a vegetative state for 20 years or so after a freak car crash left her with irreversible brain damage. Well, after the politicians, now it's the Pope's turn to meddle in this affair, reaffirming his oh-so-boringly-wrong views that all Human life should be protected and preserved, no matter what, and especially the 'weak and suffering'.

Pope Benedict XVI said Saturday that all human life must be protected, especially that of the weak and suffering, making a last-minute intervention in a right-to-die case that has convulsed Italy.

Groups of protesters — both for and against keeping Eluana Englaro alive — held demonstrations across the country on Saturday. Outside the clinic in the northern city of Udine where Englaro is being cared for, a few dozen people shouted "Eluana Viva!" or "Eluana Lives!"

Englaro, 38, has been in a vegetative state for 17 years after a car crash. On Friday, after a decade-long court battle, her nutrition began to be reduced in preparation for removing her feeding tubes, which her father has said was her wish.

Apparently, those cruel anti-Right-to-Die parasites, Pope included, believe that anyone should be forced to be kept alive, no matter if it was their final wishes to be let off with some dignity instead of being kept alive in pain or suffering. Not to mention, it seems particularly idiotic in such a case as this, seeing as the patient-in-question, Ms. Englaro, has – need I repeat it – IRREVERSIBLE brain damage. Don't waste your time praying to your inexistent flying fairy. Don't force this poor woman to stay alive even when she will NEVER regain consciousness. Her brain is fried. She's dead. Only her meat is being kept alive by machines, not by your useless hope for a miracle that won't happen. There is no reasonable hope that she could ever potentially come back to our world. Let her die in peace. Bastards.

Although, I can't decide which is worse: this poor woman's final wishes being betrayed by the assholes in charge who see fit to meddle in her business, or that she has unwittingly become the center of such a large media circus in the Right-do-Die debate. I know if I'm ever unconscious forever, I'd want to be let off in peace instead of forced to stay behind indefinitely because some self-righteous morons can't mind their own business.

Continued ...»

Italy smothers a comatose woman's wishes to die

Once again, the assholes in charge show they're the ones who decide whether you die as you wish or if you get to keep living in a comatose state indefinitely. In Italy, a woman named Eluana Englaro, who has been in a vegetative state for nearly 17 years and shows no signs of ever waking up, is being kept alive by force against her will now that an emergency decree has been forced through Friday that prevents doctors from removing a vegetative state patient's feeding tube, which is what hooks her to life. Eluana has been at the center of the national Italian controversy on the right to die.

Eluana was 20 when a car crash stuck her with irreparable brain damage. You read that, fools? *Irreparable*. Say she wakes up. I doubt she'd be pleased to find herself stuck in a wheelchair, unable to keep her drool in her mouth. And that's if she's able to cogitate at all.

A person has the complete and total control over what happens to their body, and no self-righteous imbeciles should ever be given the allowance to take that control away from them. If someone wants to be let off life-support and pass away peacefully, it's their right. This is a stupid controversy that never should exist to begin with. If Eluana's wishes were to be let off in peace if it became clear she wouldn't emerge, bloody well DO IT. Keeping her alive is basically backstabbing her and violating her last wishes.

Continued ...»