It is quite unique in that a nephew of Craig had an assisted death in Canada.  The last two paragraphs of the sermon sum up the compassionate Christian approach to Assisted Dying Choice: Let me finish this with what my family members said and repeated often using these words about my nephew’s death: It was compassionate, it was humane, it was right and good. And the family are very proud and humbled with the courage he showed in his battle with cancer. And to me no one has the right to be critical and judgemental of the choice he made.

So for me and my family this is not a philosophical debate, it is not a theological debate, it is not a theoretical debate, it is a reality and it was right and my nephew was fortunate he lived in Canada.

The sermon is posted here with the kind permission of Rev Craig. In response to my question on what was the reaction of his congregation to the sermon Craig replied: the reaction from the congregation was very positive with many copies requested. Copies went wider into the community. I’ve been asked to speak to a retired group of Doctors at Hastings hospital. 

Ian Wood

Rev Craig Kilgour

Sunday 14 October 2018

Assisted dying

The topic I’ve chosen for the sermon might seem strange for a morning when we celebrate the birth and baptism of Angus, but then I thought when life ends, we celebrate the life lived whatever the length.

I mentioned my dilemma to Granddad David and he said it evens things out!

I want to share with you this morning about what our family has experienced just recently.

I’m going to talk to you about assisted dying, euthanasia, a topic which is difficult to deal with, and it provokes very strong feelings.

The End of life choice Bill is currently with Parliament’s Justice Select Committee. There have been 35 000 submissions – think about terminal illness, a few months to live, sound mind, to allow physician-assisted death.

I with some of the congregation, attended a discussion on the Bill, that our MP Lawrence Yule had called with a panel of experts at our Community Centre a while ago.

The issue has been debated by the General Assembly of our church and they were unanimously opposed against supporting the Bill before Parliament.

After I took the service on 30 September, I went across to Takaka for the memorial service for my nephew who had died in Canada. He was 47 years old. The memorial service was held on Wednesday 3 October in the Pohara Boat Club – a place where he loved racing his yachting.

I did the eulogy and the internment of ashes at the local cemetery.

It was hard taking part in the service but good to spend a week with the family. I got back home last Monday.

So let me give you a background that led up to his death in Canada on 18 September.

My nephew was born in Timaru and when quite young, the family moved to Takaka. He went to Golden Bay High School. He loved sport of all kind – rugby league was his first love and he continued to follow the warriors in Canada. He was into motorsport, dirt bike racing stock cars, yachting. Although he suffered from seasickness, he was a very competent sailor. He was adventurous – rock climbing, skydiving, bungee jumping.

When he left school, he became a share milker, he worked in Western Australia on outback stations as a jackaroo, he tried deep sea fishing in a Sealords boat. He met his wife at a Takaka A & P Show. She was a local vet. In 2006 they left for overseas for London, Zimbabwe and Canada. They got married on Christmas Eve in a chapel at Las Vegas in 2007. Seven years ago they had twin girls and five years ago another daughter.

Five years ago my nephew was diagnosed with an aggressive melanoma on his face. He had surgery which twisted his face, radiations that destroyed hearing in one ear and affected his swallowing and numerous chemotherapy sessions that left him sick. He was given experimental drug treatments. The best treatment he could have in Canada. He was able to have medical cannabis to help him sleep and control the pain.

Early in September my brother and sister in law along with their son and daughter went to Canada to be with the family.

My nephew and his wife gathered the family together to tell them that he would stop any further treatment and that they had decided with the doctors that his life would end on 18 September.

Canada’s Supreme Court has ruled that the Right to Die with Dignity was a basic human right. You might remember Lecretia Seales, the 42 year old lawyer dying of a brain tumour, went to the High Court in Wellington. The Court ruled that Parliament needed to change the law.

I was in contact with my brother as to how they were coping. He said it was difficult but because of their son’s condition, the pain and discomfort he was facing and the appalling future he faced, they accepted the decision made.

The day before he died my nephew cleared out his shed and burnt rubbish. The next day in the presence of his wife and 3 young daughters, he died.

While in Takaka, I talked extensively with the family. They all felt that what had taken place was right and that he was at peace.

The challenge I think we all faced, personally I had for many years been in favour of assisted dying. Intellectually I believe it needs to come in our country – even if it is for a relatively small number of people – but when it actually comes close and to your family, emotionally it is much tougher to deal with.

You occasionally hear opponents to the Bill use the slippery slope argument, but this argument has been used for every social advance we have made in society: giving emancipation to people of colour, votes for women – we celebrate 125 years in New Zealand – decriminalizing homosexuality, same sex marriage. We are making society more permissive but more humane.

While I lived in America for nearly six years, I read extensively about the State of Oregon. The law on which our one is modeled on, has been in operation for nearly 20 year. Oregon has a population of 4.1 million. They found that over a ten year period on average 30 each year used the legislation to end their lives – again under strict guidelines. A number of people were able to use the means to end their lives but didn’t use it. They had peace of mind. Whenever it is on a ballot, conservative groups have tried to deny this right – each time it has been overwhelmingly defeated. It was widespread public support.

Just a few reflections:

I recently read Nikki Gemmett’s book ‘After’. She is a top Australian novelist and writes a regular column in The Australian. I jotted down in my note book a few quotes from the book:

– In the fraught world of euthanasia – if the perpetrator’s family cannot by law be involved in the wishes of the person wanting to die, then you are condemning that person to a horrendously bleak and lonely death.

• We are not talking about taking life, we are talking about releasing it.
• Embracing individual choice is the mark of a mature nation.
• As we become more empowered as individuals, we need laws out of compassion for people wanting to die.
• I’m in favour of the freedom to choose.

Dr Philip Nitschke – Exit ‘those who seek to exert control over the dying process are pragmatic and directed – and are not cowards, but courageous.’

Nikki Gemmet’s mother committed suicide without telling anyone. Her mother had suffered chronic pain from a couple of botched operations. The book ‘After’ came out of her and the family coping with her mother’s death. She wrote about her experience in her column and had been flooded with responses.

While on holiday in Rarotonga with friends, one evening we were discussing euthanasia. One of our friends, a local GP, made a couple of comments to me. First he said in the 36 years I was in ministry I had more to do with death and dying than he did as a doctor!

And towards the end of the discussion he said would I be able to help someone to end their life with pills?

I went to bed with that on my mind. Next morning at breakfast I said to him Yes I could if I loved someone, they were suffering and I knew their wishes. Someone in the group said to me; Where is God in this? I said I’m not sure God has anything to do with it, but on later reflection, if God is love – and love is shown, yes God is present.

Ian Harris: “What does love, when focussed unwaveringly on the wellbeing of another require for this person in these circumstances at this time?”

The other reflection I have is that over all my time in ministry I visited many parishioners in Senior Citizen homes/Rest homes. I had known many of their life stories. Most had lived full, rich lives, adventurous lives, they were ready and wanting to die. Numerous ones would say; Craig, I hope I could go to sleep and not wake up. I would often reply they needed to be patient and accept the love given by family and friends – if they had anyone. It wasn’t that they felt a burden on others but rather life itself was a burden. Doing basic things took everything out of them.

In a recent Listener article on Jenny Gibbs, one of New Zealand’s leading philanthropists, had made a submission to the select committee considering the issue of voluntary euthanasia.

I quote: “I wouldn’t dream of stopping you from having your views and doing what you think is right and proper. I know some people think suffering is ennobling and I wouldn’t dream of stopping someone who believed that. By the same token I can’t see why you should stop me from living or dying by my beliefs. It is as simple as that – choice.”

As someone said there will be no more deaths, but less suffering.

Let me finish this with what my family members said and repeated often using these words about my nephew’s death: It was compassionate, it was humane, it was right and good. And the family are very proud and humbled with the courage he showed in his battle with cancer. And to me no one has the right to be critical and judgemental of the choice he made.

So for me and my family this is not a philosophical debate, it is not a theological debate, it is not a theoretical debate, it is a reality and it was right and my nephew was fortunate he lived in Canada.

Photo supplied by Rev Craig Kilgour

Maine Voices: In name of mercy, Maine Death With Dignity belongs on ballot

The measure [to include this in a referendum] would offer the dying an option to minimize needless suffering.

The original opinion piece title was more provocative – Rev Ellison has said he called it: “”Thou Shall Not Torture the Dying.”

Here are some quotes from Rev Ellison. I do urge viewers of this post to read the full article at the link below.

 “As a person of faith, ordained minister and professor of Christian ethics for more than three decades, I’m committed to seeking peace, justice and compassion in all things.”

“My religious tradition calls on the faithful to help reduce suffering in the world, including suffering at the bedside of those dying. For many, palliative care offers the comfort and support necessary to ease their way to a good death, but alas, palliative care is not always adequate to the task.”

“For others in the dying process, despite receiving the best palliative care, they find themselves ready to die, but unable to die. Too often they face a torturous ending.  Denying the dying person the freedom to end unnecessary, meaningless suffering is far from merciful; rather, it’s torturous.   Torture in any form is morally wrong.”

• “As a person of faith, I hope and pray that Maine will join California, Colorado, Hawaii, Montana, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia and make assisted dying legally available, allowing adults of sound mind to make their own value choices at the end of life. Doing so, I suggest, is a faithful, principled, and compassionate way to affirm the dignity and well-being of the living and the dying.”

Rev Dr Marvin Ellison, a Willard S. Bass Professor Emeritus of Christian Ethics at Bangor Theological Seminary, USA, is a scholar-activist and ordained Presbyterian minister. 

 Photo supplied by Rev Ellison

Please read the full article ……

An outstanding group of experts gave us the facts in this Forum on voluntary assisted dying support. Essential viewing!

The emotional plea by Jan, wife of Tim Edwards, and their daughter, Jessica, who spoke at the meeting about the torturous death of Tim from mesothelioma certainly bought tears to my eyes! I just cannot understand why our MPs continue to ignore such futile suffering, especially those who profess to be Christian. Where is their compassion?

I had the privilege of meeting Tim not long before he died, and together we went to lobby our local MP, Jai Rowell.

Every MP who is against this choice, and all members of the ‘ACL” (Australian Christian Lobby) and the ‘HOPE no euthanasia’ group should watch the complete forum and become familiar with the truth behind the issue, and then perhaps understand why up to 85% of Australians support voluntary assisted dying.

Ian Wood

We were both very pleased when we received this letter of support from the Senator.

Burston clearly states “I will be supporting the bill”. Yet eight days later he voted against the bill! He did not speak on the Bill during the debate. Readers will note that the Senator has One Nation Senator on his letterhead, and signs himself Senator for United Australia Party.  In retrospect that should have alerted my to the fact he could be two-faced!

Combined with Senator Georgiou, who also changed from a vote Yes, to a vote No, the Bill was lost 36 votes to 34.

I will leave readers to decide on the morality and ethics of this situation. Just what pressure was applied at the very last minute to Burston, and by whom?

After the vote, I sent Senator Burston’s letter back to him, with my comment written on it. Clearly I was not happy!

Carol was quite devastated.  Obviously Burston has no thought or compassion for the damage his change of position has done for the truly vulnerable – those like Carol.

Carol also wrote back to Senator Burston, and with her permission I include the letter here. I will update this post if we receive a reply from the Senator.

Dear Senator Burston

Our hearts/spirits were intensely lifted by your positive letter to us, dated 7 August 2018 (Ref TS20180807) advising us that you absolutely were going to vote for the Restoring Territory Rights legislation, and this gave us hope that it would ultimately lead to “euthanasia- end of life choices”.

I write to now to express my disgust and betrayal of this letter of support. You have turned your back on us all, by voting against the bill. I/we were so crushed by it, especially as your vote destroyed all of our hopes.

As I advised you in my earlier letter, I have my diagnosis of a type of dementia, which is killing off my brain cells until its wrathful journey ends all of my brain functioning. It is taking my world away. I will not allow my family to view me this way.

My mother died with an illness that gave her physical unbearable suffering due to her broken fragile bones, her shoulders and ribs that would not mend  Her every day was spent in tears, screams for help and pleas to end her suffering.   Our memories are still raw in sadness with what we had to share/endure with her.

My respected Neurologist states: “once I am in that demented state ‘YOU won’t know – what you are doing etc.”  However my family, spouse, children and grandchildren will share this horror perhaps for their remaining lives. 

I would ask you Senator Burston, to visit a bed ridden dementia ward (we, my sister and I, called it death row). During your visit (unannounced) I would ask you to put yourself in the place of one of these people there. Would you prefer to live out your existing years like that? Or visit your wife/family or anyone that you love, in those circumstances? Please accept and agree this is a cruel and barbaric existence that YOU have determined by your vote they have to endure.

When I, and my husband with my children, accept that my brain ability has deteriorated so that it no longer functions, I/we will be forced to leave Australia for Dignitas Switzerland, to “end my life there compassionately”.  Costly -and emotionally traumatic for myself and husband and for my children.

I/we and my family will “NEVER” put me into one of those end of life nursing facilities.

Senator Burston, your written words of promise – to vote towards changing the end of life laws – to give people the right to” die with dignity”- could have given me a quality of life to freely enjoy peace of mind, to be able to focus only on seizing every possible day, until my health ceases to allow me to do so.

Then allow me and others a rightful humane gift of ending our lives when all hope has gone.

You, Senator, who appeared to have a human conscience, have betrayed us!

Yours, in confusion.

Carol Cronk.

36 Golding Street,
Yamba NSW 2464       21.8.2018

Dear Prime Minister Turnbull

On Tuesday 14 August 2018 the Senate is set to debate legislation lifting the ban on NT and ACT controlling their own voluntary euthanasia laws.

The Liberal Party of Australia platform includes: We believe in the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; ……

“If the vote came on, if I was a Senator, I would be voting against it,” Mr Turnbull said on SBS News.

This is in spite of the fact that Victoria passed their Voluntary Assisted Dying law last year.

So Mr Turnbull, you believe the 250,000 people of the NT should be denied “the inalienable rights and freedoms” permitted the people of Victoria!

Mr Turnbull. Your position is both hypocritical and totally undemocratic.

Ian Wood

Spokesperson                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      for the Australia-wide group, Christians Supporting Choice for Voluntary Euthanasia

Mittagong NSW

Assisted dying is an “ill-considered and dehumanising” practice reflecting a society in which there is more loneliness, Canberra’s Catholic archbishop Christopher Prowse has told an inquiry.

He spoke at an ACT Legislative Assembly committee’s second day of hearings into assisted dying in which doctors rubbished claims that palliative care could always manage end of life pain.

Archbishop Prowse told the committee it was a “lonely policy that only an atomised society would think about”, and said people approaching death experienced a “rollercoaster” that saw them take back comments they wanted to die earlier.

He said it would be a “fundamental mistake” to put vulnerable people at “grave risk” by allowing assisted dying.

When asked what was a good death, Archbishop Prowse recounted a time he sat with a woman as she died, and she squeezed his hand.

“I could tell she was on a journey but how grateful she was when she was with us,” he said.

“She was ready to go, ready to go and approach death.”

He admitted people he had spent time with as they were dying had said they wanted to die right away. However they changed their mind later, he said.

“Then people say, ‘I’m feeling a lot better today’.”

Ian Wood responds to Archbishop Prowse, as follows ……

Archbishop C. Prowse,                                                                                                                                                                                                    Canberra, ACT

I refer to the report of your evidence given to the ACT Assisted Dying hearing as reported in The Age, 18.5.2018.

Keith, described here by his wife, was on a “journey” too, but was certainly not “grateful” to still be alive “with us”!  (See attachment 1 below.)

You ignore the fact that over 1/3 of terminal patients in Oregon USA, who are given access to voluntary assisted dying medication, at their considered, repeated rational request, do not go on to take that fatal medication, but it does provide peace of mind in that they can choose to exit life if the suffering becomes unbearable. Having access is palliative in its own right.

Certainly when my sister-in-law Joyce died from ovarian cancer that had spread to her bones, she was not capable of squeezing any hands during her last two days! She said goodbye to her husband and family on a Sunday afternoon, but lingered on in a semi coma for another two days. In moments of lucidity she would ask why am I still here? Her husband is still suffering from the trauma of watching these last days. How much better and more compassionate it would have been for Joyce if she could have asked for, and been given medication to assist her to go to sleep and not wake up, after those final goodbyes.

The truly vulnerable are those who have futile treatment inflicted on them by well meaning doctors – treatment that doctors frequently admit they would not accept for themselves.   “Up to 70% of people now die in acute hospitals, surrounded by well meaning strangers, inflicting all that medicine has to offer; often resulting in a painful, distressing and degrading end to their life,” and “Clinicians themselves are often complicit in refusing to face the inevitability of dying and death,” states Dr Ken Hillman, Professor of intensive care at the University of NSW in Sydney.

Dr Charlie Corke, Palliative Care, Geelong Hospital, VIC says, “He ‘inflicts’ treatments he would not want done on himself.”

Two other examples are attached where assisted dying choice would have been a humane, compassionate and Christian option. (See attachment 2 and 3 below)

Yet you and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church insist that your beliefs on assisted dying choice should override the rights of other Australians to choose. Not between life and death, because by definition a terminal patient is going to die – but between two ways of dying – one quick and painfree.

Evidence recently given by countless victims of Catholic paedophile priests clearly show the abyss and total lack of understanding by the Catholic Church for the suffering endured by those victims. Many of these victims went on to take their own lives in dreadful circumstances in a cruel irony compared with the Church position on voluntary assisted dying.

I certainly do not write in the hope of changing your mind on this issue. By all means feel free to endure what ever suffering comes your way in your end of life, but I do pray and urge you not to use your position to force me and every other Australian to do the same.

Sincerely

IAN WOOD

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Attachment 1.

RIP Keith   Died October 26 2013, aged 85 years

I’m writing to state my case for the legislation of choice for an assisted death. On Friday 1 November 2013 I buried my husband of 61 years. Early this year he was diagnosed with aggressive Lymphoma which was strangling his Intestine. Sounds horrendous, doesn’t it?

His final 3 days were spent in hospital and on the 3rd night he lapsed into semiconsciousness. He had been having litres of fluid drained from his abdomen at intervals during the treatment process and in the early hours of the 4th day fluid in large quantities continued to rise into his throat as he was gurgling and drowning while he struggled dreadfully  to get a breath. All the while he kept raising his hand to his head imploring someone to help him. This inhumane action continued without ceasing for 7 hours!! ! How I wished we lived in a compassionate, loving society that approved an injection that would save him from this hideous state.

A Nurse entered the room towards the end, saying, “I have been crying reading his Advanced Health Directive where he wrote that it was his wish to have some kind person euthanise him.” This document had been signed by him, a Doctor and a Justice of the Peace some years ago but of course that wish is entirely overlooked by Australian Law at the present time. It was just his wish – as it was mine.  Towards the end, one and a half litres of blood soaked fluid gushed out of his mouth before he took his final breath. Those hours will haunt me forever. Why should anyone die that horribly?

When it’s your own family having to endure this cruel, inhumanity and it’s you sitting beside the bed waiting and wishing someone had bitten the bullet for change on this grievous, outmoded law of ours, you feel and know the need of the urgency for change. As a practising Christian couple we viewed the present law as ungodly. We are God’s hands and feet, he has no other, and while we do nothing this horrendous practice will continue. Please, please be strong enough to give the Ending Life with Dignity (No2) Bill 2013 the thumbs up. The majority of Australians would be enormously relieved. South Australia would be applauded.

Sincerely,   Joan S      A Christians supporting Choice for V.E. member

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Attachment 2.

No human should have to die such an horrific death.

Our members of Parliament have the power to allow a quick and more peaceful death to people like Flora.

Above left. Flora before her illness.

Flora Lormier, suffered from multiple sclerosis since she was 20 but her condition worsened over the past two years. She begged her family to help her die (left, taken by her daughter Tracey Taylor in her final days, and pictured right at a family wedding when she was younger.

Ms Taylor, from Glenrothes, Scotland, told the Daily Record: ‘Mum was just left to suffer – it was torture, absolute torture. We were all around her when she passed but it wasn’t peaceful.

‘These pictures are what people need to see – this is why we are fighting for the right to die.

‘There wasn’t a thing we could do to help free her from her pain. We had morphine and sleeping pills and she begged us to help her end it, but we couldn’t.

‘She was like a prisoner of war who had been in a concentration camp.

‘So why is it OK for a human to suffer? The Government need to see why people want the choice to decide when to die.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4116308/This-fighting-right-die-Family-release-harrowing-pictures-MS-suffering-mother-final-days-torture.html#ixzz4VharNIoe

Article from the Daily Mail, UK, copied by Ian Wood

Please support voluntary assisted dying  and give CHOICE to people in NSW who are dying just like Flora.  

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Attachment 3.

Chantal Sebire begs French president for the right to die peacefully

From correspondents in Dijon, FranceAgence France-Presse  February 27, 2008

Disfigurement … ‘an animal would not be allowed to endure what I have to endure,’ says cancer sufferer Chantal Sebire.

Tumours make Chantal Sebire’s face unrecognisable

Teacher says disease has led to attrocious suffering

A FRENCH woman badly disfigured by facial tumours caused by a rare and incurable disease has appealed to President Nicolas Sarkozy to allow her to die by euthanasia.

In an interview with the Agence France-Presse news agency, former school teacher Chantal Sebire, 52, begged for the right to end the “atrocious” suffering inflicted on her by the disease which has rendered her face unrecognisable because of growing tumours.

“An animal would not be allowed to endure what I have to endure,” she said from her home in Plombieres-les-Dijon in central France, asking French media and Mr Sarkozy to allow her a dignified death.

Euthanasia is illegal in France, unlike in some other European countries such as the Netherlands and Belgium.

Ms Sebire told AFP that she suffered from a very rare disease called esthesioneuroblastoma, which attacks the nasal cavity. It had left her blind and had robbed her of almost all other senses, leaving her in terrible pain.

“In 2000, I lost my sense of smell and taste, and then the tumour evolved and ate into my jaws, before attacking the eye socket. I lost my sight in October last year,” she said. The disease caused “atrocious bouts of pain that can last up to four hours at a time”.

Pleading to be allowed to die serenely, the mother of three said that only 200 cases of the disease had been reported globally in the last 20 years.

This article was a deciding factor in Christians Supporting Choice for VE co-founder, Ian Wood’s decision to take public stand on DWD.  He says, “Chantal would not have had to suffer in Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Oregon,or Washington State, Vermont, Montana, Colorado, Washington DC & California USA, and now Canada and asks are we so different in France or Australia?”

Christians support Voluntary Assisted Dying choice!  

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A Christian response to the Archbishop from Ian Wood.

I urge the Archbishop and his listeners on Cradio  to take the time to view two contrasting deaths, from the many I have on file.

The assisted death of John Shields in Canada. “At his own wake” https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/world/canada/euthanasia-bill-john-shields-death.html

A fascinating depiction of how John, raised in a Catholic family, was ordained as a priest, but left the Church after being barred from preaching when he challenged the church opposition to birth control. Read about John’s life as a social worker, his diagnosis with terminal neuropathy and then his advocacy for Medical Assistance in Dying, and using that choice at the end.

John Shields says goodbye to friends and family at his own ‘Irish wake’

Please compare John’s death with that of Flora Lormier from Multiple Sclerosis.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/help-die-family-release-heartbreaking-9614060#ICID=sharebar_facebook

Flora became paralysed from the neck down as her MS progressed.  Her daughter Tracey Taylor posted these photos on a Facebook page and in media such as the Mirror, UK, in the hope it would alert MPs to the futile horrific suffering endured by some people as they die.

Warning: disturbing images…..

Flora before her illness.

“She was like a prisoner of war in a concentration camp”

Yes, Archbishop, as you state, there have been advances in palliative care, but their own data clearly shows that as many as 1 in 6 patients in the terminal stage of their terminal illness report moderate to severe distress from pain and breathing problems. In jurisdictions with Assisted Dying choice, two facts become clear – 1) palliative care improves and 2) assisted dying choice is not an either/or with palliative care but simply another compassionate end-of-life option.

A terminal patient is, by definition, going to die. Voluntary Assisted Dying is not a choice between life and death, but gives an alternative way of dying for the patient to consider. Those who view voluntary euthanasia and assisted dying as against their beliefs simply do not go through the rigorous process of requesting this assistance!

[Voluntary] euthanasia or an assisted death does not deny the person the opportunity to say farewell, as the Archbishop suggests. If anything the opposite is correct – knowing when you are to have that assistance gives the time to say goodbye to friends, make amends for family problems or disagreements, etc – time that may not be possible if you are hooked up to machines as you die, or in that last resort of palliative care when all else fails, put into a coma with terminal sedation until you dehydrate or starve to death!

The real problem arises when various church hierarchy use their adherence to church doctrine and dogma to override and deny the majority of Australian Christians THEIR CHOICE to follow what they believe is a true final act of love and compassion.

Desmond Tutu, renowned Archbishop Emeritus of Capetown, advocates this choice here >  https://christiansforvad.org.au/archbishop-desmond-tutu-gives-his-blessing-to-the-voluntary-assisted-dying-campaign-in-australia/#more-371

I am very happy to discuss this issue further with the Archbishop and folk on Cradio, Tasmania, but for now leave them with the words of Governor Brown of California. Gov. Brown, who had trained as a Jesuit and is a committed Catholic, and had this to say when signing the California Voluntary Assisted Dying legislation. “In the end, I was left to reflect on what I would want in the face of my own death.  I do not know what I would do if I were dying in prolonged and excruciating pain. I am certain, however, that it would be a comfort to be able to consider the options afforded by this bill. And I wouldn’t deny that right to others.”

Ian Wood

National Coordinator and Spokesperson

Christians Supporting Choice for Voluntary Euthanasia

Ann’s letter appears in the Guernsey Post, UK, where Guernsey is considering a vote on assisted dying. My sincere thanks, Ann, for writing this. Ian Wood.

 ‘I am convinced that physician-assisted dying can be, and is, practised responsibly’, says Ann Jackson, Oregon USA

MY NAME is Ann Jackson. In June 2008, after 20 years, I retired as executive director and chief executive officer of the Oregon Hospice Association, during which time I was involved in the public debates around assisted dying. I remain involved now, as an independent consultant about end-of-life options.
It is my understanding that Oregon’s assisted dying law has become a matter of debate in Guernsey ahead of a vote in May on whether to legislate for assisted dying on your island. When I was made aware of a recent letter published in the Guernsey Press (9 April) entitled ‘Oregon assisted-suicide model too good to be true’ I felt compelled to offer my professional experiences and put right misleading claims made by the author, Tony Meadowcroft. I hope that this letter also addresses concerns of Catherine Hall (Open Lines, 13 April).

There are various reasons people may oppose assisted dying but I do believe that the debate, wherever it occurs, should be based on evidence and facts.

As chief executive of the OHA, I acted as its primary spokesperson on physician-assisted dying before and after the Oregon Death with Dignity Act was implemented. The ODDA was introduced as a voter initiative (referendum) in Oregon – I voted in opposition to the Act. I have subsequently changed my mind and fully support the Act. The OHA has also subsequently dropped its opposition.

Today I am convinced that physician-assisted dying can be, and is, practised responsibly in Oregon, and that the ODDA is a very well-crafted law. I feel it is important to correct some of the misrepresentations made about the consequences of assisted dying in Oregon:

1. There has been a profound shift in attitudes towards terminally ill patients in Oregon.

I will concede on just one of Mr Meadowcroft’s points. There has indeed been profound change, but for the better. The ODDA has facilitated discussion of important issues, allowing more open and honest conversations between dying patients and their physicians and more careful evaluation of all end-of-life options. These discussions more often lead to reassurance of the dying patient than an eventual direct request for life-ending medication.

2. The safeguards built into Oregon’s physician-assisted dying law are followed to the letter.

The law has remained unchanged over the past 20 years and is only available to dying people of sound mind — these criteria, and the safeguards associated with them, have not broadened since the law was enacted. Fears of a ‘slippery slope’ have not come to fruition and there are no proven cases of coercion of individuals to have an assisted death. The risks of patients being murdered or coerced into ingesting life-ending medication were far greater prior to the implementation of a transparent system with upfront safeguards and effective regulation.

3. The overwhelming majority of terminally ill patients who ingest life-ending medication at a time and place of their choosing die peacefully, without complications.

More context must be given to Mr Meadowcroft’s broad statement that there are complications with physician-assisted dying. There have been no reported complications in over 98% of cases of people dying under the ODDA. For others, complications are associated with symptoms that are commonplace among people at the very end of life, such as regurgitation. Furthermore, we cannot ignore the significant likelihood that many people who have made use of the ODDA would have experienced very distressing symptoms and complications if they had no choice but to endure their suffering.

4. There is rigorous monitoring and data is made available publicly every year.

Physician-assisted dying is monitored and controlled by stringent criteria and processes, mandatory state reporting by the medical team, and medical board oversight. The justice department also has the power to investigate should concerns ever arise. Assisting a suicide outside the provisions of the ODDA is an unlawful act and subject to criminal penalties.

5. The Oregon Medical Association is neutral on the issue of physician-assisted dying.

Mr Meadowcroft’s assertion about the Oregon Medical Association is false. The Oregon Nurses Association is also neutral, and both organisations support their members to participate in assisted dying in line with their individual values. The Oregon Hospice and Palliative Care Association (formerly OHA) supports the rights of terminally ill Oregonians to choose any and all legal end of life options, as does the American Public Health Association. As of 2017, 57% of US physicians say they believe medical aid-in-dying should be available to terminally ill people.

6. Hospice and palliative care in Oregon is consistently rated among the best in the USA and assisted dying has not had a negative impact.

Oregon is within the top quartile of overall hospice use across the US. I have met with front-line hospice workers regularly over the years to discuss their experiences and whether they supported or opposed physician-assisted dying or the ODDA. There was unanimous agreement that conversations about death and dying improved significantly.

Ninety per cent of those who use the ODDA are enrolled in hospice, which is the gold standard for pain and symptom management. OHA recommended immediately on passage of the ODDA that persons considering a request for a prescription be referred to hospice. Oregon’s hospices were adamant that people should not choose assisted dying because they were in pain.

No hospice in Oregon denies a patient access to their care because they intend to use the ODDA.

No hospice in Oregon will turn away a dying patient because they cannot afford to pay. There is no excuse in Oregon for anyone to die in pain and suffering.

7. Terminally ill patients requesting physician-assisted dying do so for multiple and complex reasons.

Through my experience of Oregon’s law, I came to realise that it was cavalier of me to believe that hospice and palliative care professionals could indeed meet all the needs of people who were dying, or that some needs were less worthy than others, such as the need to manage the circumstances of one’s death. It is true that the vast majority of people who have an assisted death in Oregon cite the loss of their autonomy and/or being less able to engage in activities that make life enjoyable. But suffering is a deeply personal and subjective phenomenon.

Mr Meadowcroft suggests that unless suffering has a physical basis it is somehow unworthy. This is not an accepted viewpoint for anyone who has experience with people who are dealing with a terminal illness.

Fewer persons cite inadequate pain control or concern about future pain as a reason for wanting a prescription. Ninety per cent are enrolled in hospice. Their pain and other symptoms should be managed.

Palliative sedation is an effective way to ease suffering of those whose symptoms cannot be brought under control. However, being sedated to a point of coma is not an acceptable option for most persons whose primary concerns are about losing autonomy, their quality of life, and dignity – as they define dignity.

If patients are not experiencing actual untreatable pain, Mr Meadowcroft suggests that many cases of assisted dying are motivated by a desire not to become a burden. Being a burden is another reason given for using the ODDA. But no one in Oregon can have a prescription simply because they do not want to be a burden. Research confirms that such concerns are held by most dying people, regardless of whether they use, or do not use, assisted dying.

Financial implications of treatment are the least important reasons given for using a prescription under provisions of the ODDA. Nearly all persons who have used the Law have had medical insurance. Hospice is a covered service of private health plans and Medicare. Some private health plans cover the ODDA. The Oregon Health Plan, Oregon’s Medicaid programme for those who lack financial resources, covers treatment for life-threatening illnesses, hospice, and the ODDA. The Oregon Health Plan, however, does not cover drugs or treatments that are considered ‘futile’, or to have less than a five per cent chance of a five-year survival. This should allay Ms Hall’s concern.

8. Mr Meadowcroft’s claim that some patients who receive a prescription for life-ending medication outlive their prognosis misses the point.

Over a third of the terminally ill people who are eventually granted a prescription for life-ending medication do not use it – for many, it is simply ‘emotional insurance’.

This reassurance and peace of mind can result in a general improvement in their wellbeing, meaning some go on to outlive their original prognosis. Some may die during the waiting period, perhaps having been given too much time.

In the majority of cases a predicted life expectancy of six months or less is reasonable, but ultimately Oregon’s law is for dying people to retain complete control over decisions they make about their deaths. To clarify, dying people who want this choice for themselves do not want to die, they want to exercise control over an imminent and inevitable death. Using the ODDA is always a last resort.

Therefore the idea that someone outliving their prognosis is a bad thing or suggests the law isn’t working is, frankly, missing the point.

I hope this letter is helpful in giving a more accurate picture of what really happens in Oregon. I know that your goal is to inform your readers. Mine is to offer open and honest information based on data and facts. Good end-of-life decision making requires good information.

ANN JACKSON, MBA,

Consulting,

3112 Northeast 17 Avenue,  Portland,   Oregon 97212,

www.ann-jackson.com

Read more at https://guernseypress.com/news/voices/readers-letters/2018/04/17/i-am-convinced-that-physician-assisted-dying-can-be-and-is-practised-responsibly/#hDDP5YmikphPU3YP.99

An historic day in Hawaii. Governor David Ige has just signed the Our Care, Our Choice Act into law so the residents of Hawaii will now join those of Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Colorado, and Washington, D.C. in having the option, should they be terminally ill with less than 6 months to live, to end their lives in a humane and dignified manner. April 6, 2018.  Please share this great news.

Parliamentary Inquiry into End of Life Choices ongoing in Western Australia – please note!

by Revd Canon Rosie Harper UK  

“Don’t tell me that the time of someone’s death is purely God’s business. That at the moment when all a human soul wants is for it to end, God stands at the end of the bed and says: ‘No my child, it is my will that you suffer just a few more days.’”………

It’s the beginning of a new year and the script is that we talk about hope. It was a challenging 2017 but things will be OK. New opportunities, fresh blessings, more love and more joy.

So why am I wanting to talk about death? Well, it’s personal and also professional.

It’s personal because I have just booked flights back to Switzerland to go to the funeral of my much loved uncle Albin. He died two days before Christmas, aged 82, gently and peacefully with his family around him. About six years ago his younger brother Otto also died peacefully with his family around him. The difference was that Albin died of old age and dementia, Otto died of a nasty aggressive brain tumour. Albin died ‘naturally’. Otto, being Swiss, was able to request and receive the help he needed to die in a dignified and pain-free peaceful way. This merciful intervention in no way changed the fact of his death, and even now the sorrow is hard to bear, but it did cut short the last bitter agonies of the manner of his dying.

It is professional because in the parish where I work there are a lot of funerals. Mostly the bereaved tell me of the immense kindness of all around; family and friends, doctors and nurses. They tell of the shock of sudden unexpected death and also the oblique conversations about the use of morphine. They also sometimes tell me of bad deaths. Deaths where there is no way of giving the dying person their final wish: ‘Please, dear God, please help me to die.’

Don’t tell me that the time of someone’s death is purely God’s business. That at the moment when all a human soul wants is for it to end, God stands at the end of the bed and says: ‘No my child, it is my will that you suffer just a few more days.’

That is pure fatalism and superstition. Even people who would use language such as ‘God has a plan for your life’ don’t actually mean that everything that happens to them from birth to death is controlled. Of course not. We rejoice in our free will, even in the knowledge that we risk misusing it. That’s part of the deal. Our conception is a risk. We may be born to loving parents, or our mother might have been kidnapped and raped. The will of God? Throughout our lives we make choices and many of them are life and death choices. To smoke or drink or over-eat. To enjoy extreme sports, to ride a motorbike. For all those things we choose and we also take responsibility.

When our lives are nearing the end there are now many societies where that degree of both choice and responsibility remains. That is not the case in the UK.

Just when you might think we need our freedom the most, the medical profession, by law, takes it away from us. Just when you might think that God would most honour the freedom he has given us, the Christian community takes it away from us.

I’m with Hans Küng. If the time comes, and it is necessary for me, I would find it a fulfilment of my life of faith to be able to say to God: ‘Loving Father, I thank you for the most wonderful gift of life. The burden of it is now too much for me to bear and so with every ounce of love and gratitude I can muster I give it back to you.’

Rev Canon Rosie Harper is chaplain to the Bishop of Buckingham and a member of the Church of England’s General Synod.

This article appears on ViaMedia News. in ChristianToday and the Dignity in Dying UK Facebook page.     Thu 4 Jan 2018

It is published here with permission and a photo supplied by the author.

Ian Wood Comment: An excellent article that outlines what a majority of Christians believe is true Christian compassion!