The bill, due for its third and final reading next Wednesday, 13 November, "gives people with a terminal illness the option of requesting assisted dying," according to its description on Parliament's website.

If passed, it will legalise both euthanasia and assisted dying in New Zealand.

The letter is signed by leaders of the Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Anglican and Lutheran churches, the Federation of Islamic Associations and the Salvation Army.

"We speak out of our extensive experience of actively caring for the dying and their whanau," the leaders say, adding that they are expressing their ethical, philosophical and practical concerns, not religious arguments.

They list seven concerns about the final form of the bill which will be voted on.

That includes the risk that people will choose a premature death because they lack proper care choices.

The letter refers to Canadian and American evidence which shows that euthanasia/assisted suicide laws have led to numerous patients choosing assisted deaths because of unmet service needs.

High-quality palliative care for the terminally ill is not yet available equitably throughout New Zealand, they write.

"Until it is, there is a strong likelihood that New Zealanders will also choose assisted death because of a lack of other meaningful choices.

In such a context, there is the real risk that people in lower socio-economic groups will find themselves being channeled unnecessarily and unjustly towards a premature death."

The religious leaders also express their fears that the introduction of an assisted death law might have an adverse effect on our already tragic rates of suicide, noting that there is some overseas evidence that it may contribute to an increase in non-assisted suicides.

And they identify the failure of Parliament to include an amendment to the bill that would allow for institutions to exercise a right of conscience not to participate.

The letter describes this failure as "the unethical imposition of assisted death on those carers and healthcare providers for whom the provision of assisted dying would directly contradict their medical, ethical, philosophical, spiritual and/or historical traditions."

The letter says this is not the right time for New Zealand to be contemplating a euthanasia law: "Only when effective palliative care is a real choice for all New Zealanders will we as a country be in a position to have a proper discussion about offering assisted dying as an additional end-of-life option."

Meanwhile, more resources are needed to enhance palliative care nationally and address rising rates of depression and social isolation of our elders, it adds.

Source

• Supplied
• Image: funeral.com

Unlike the last session, where MPs stayed voting until 1 am, the voting wrapped up at 10.30 pm.

Seymour's chief opponent Maggie Barry, was not in the House last night. Read more

"I used to be a supporter of [euthanasia] legislation. But now, with twelve years of experience, I take a different view," says Dr Theo A. Boer.

From 2005 to 2014 Boer was an ethicist on a regional Euthanasia Review Committee in the Netherlands, examining 4,000 euthanasia cases.

He is presently visiting New Zealand.

In 2007 Boer said the Dutch euthanasia law was working well. He wrote, ‘there doesn't need to be a slippery slope when it comes to euthanasia. A good euthanasia law, in combination with the euthanasia review procedure, provides the warrants for a stable and relatively low number of euthanasia."

However, in 2014, he wrote an article for the Daily Mail stating, "But we were wrong - terribly wrong, in fact. In hindsight, the stabilization in the numbers was just a temporary pause."

Boris Jancic, in his column in the New Zealand Herald, quotes Boer as saying: "The availability of euthanasia has very much changed the way we think about dying. Dying is more and more kind of a project. It is something that people are managing.

The initial reasons for euthanasia in the Netherlands was pain … People were beyond hope because there was no pain relief. But what I have seen is that the primary reason is not pain."

According to Boer's research, terminal cancer was the reason behind 95 per cent of cases of euthanasia in 2002, but only 68 per cent by 2016.

He says since the Netherlands legalised assisted dying in 2002 there's been a consistent increase in uptake and a shift from seeing euthanasia as a last resort to a "good death".

Source

• Supplied
• alexschadenberg.blogspot.com
• nzherald.co.nz
• Image: tvnz.co.nz

More than 300 people cast their vote to vote against the End Of Life Bill, which is currently before the Select Committee.

The church's convener, Reverend Stuart Lange, said legalising euthanasia would be extremely dangerous for those who are depressed or elderly. Continue reading

Mary English has worked as a general practitioner for 28 years.

She has a practice in the inner Wellington suburb of Kelburn.

They are both Catholics, but Bill English said euthanasia should not be seen as a battleground between believers and atheists, "just an issue of different belief systems".

He said the argument was more about advocating for the collective good than a specific religious view.

Sir Bill English'submission

Bill English said the legislation was flawed in principle and beyond salvaging in practice.

"What starts out as permitted will become desirable, and then for some will become an unconsented necessity - that's the slippery slope and there's actually no way around it."

He said:

• The criteria for who would be eligible to request assisted dying was too broad
• The test for whether a person had consented to die was too low
• There were too few consequences in place for anyone who broke the safeguards of the legislation.

The current bill was being supported by a small group of predominantly highly-educated pakeha, who placed high importance on personal autonomy Bill English said.

Dr Mary English's Submission

She said she was opposed to "state-sanctioned killing".

There was nothing in Seymour's bill sufficient to contain the incredible power over life which doctors would have.

"If you ask [doctors], ‘What is your bottom line?'...most importantly, we don't want to be responsible for the death of a patient that didn't need to happen."

Mary English expressed concern that elderly people would feel under pressure to kill themselves as if they were a burden, with not all families willing to provide necessary support and in some cases taking advantage of them.

Both Bill and Mary English drew a comparison with youth suicide.

"If assisted suicide is a triumph for autonomy and choice, how can youth suicide be a tragedy?" Mary English said.

Listen to submission

Source

• news.com.au
• pro.newsroom.co.nz
• stuff.co.nz
• Image: screenshot

Dr Ross Boswell, a chemical pathologist and former chair of the New Zealand Medical Association which represents doctors, is among 35,000 submitters to the Justice select committee on David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill. Continue reading

The Bishops say that while some popular polls claim that New Zealanders are in support of the Bill, many commentators note that in fact what they are expressing is a view on a misunderstood notion of "choice."

"We are also aware of research which shows that support for assisted suicide significantly drops off when some of the practical implications are included in polling."

In the conclusion to their submission, they say that after consultation and dialogue they think the Bill would be unethical, dangerous and unprogressive.

They note that their extensive network includes:

• Young people in the large network of Catholic schools
• The elderly
• Tangata Whenua on katorika marae
• New migrants' groups
• People serving in rest-homes, hospitals and hospices
• Friends in other faith communities

"Our whanau, our Pasifika, our Asian peoples and our Pakeha all know we can do better," they say.

The Bishops say the End of Life Choice Bill is a giant step backwards.

"As the nation delights in Prime Minister Jacinda and Clarke's news of a baby, we urge that the nation move forward, showing the same delight and respect for our elders and all other vulnerable lives too.

"We call on the New Zealand Parliament to protect the vulnerable, the mentally unwell, the disabled and the elderly.

"We call for a strengthening of support for palliative care facilities and hospices.

"The first Labour Government of this nation saw the need for "care from the cradle to the grave". In a contemporary manner, may compassion, not fear and threat, continue to stand at the heart of our nation."

Source

• catholic.org.nz
• Image: familyfirst.org.nz

Dr Sinead Donnelly said she was affronted by the fact that "a politician would imply he understood the finer details of medicine and medical treatment better than me or my colleagues."

Donnelly said it was unfortunate even to repeat what Seymour said "but I do so to explain my justified outrage.

"For too long we have retained our professional discipline and shown restraint by not reacting publicly to such loose and ill-informed pronouncements."

She said doctors do not intentionally end the lives of patients by giving too much morphine.

"We train under strict supervision according to national and international standards of excellence in the discipline and science of use of morphine and other drugs for symptom control."

On Thursday 30th November in an interview with Hillary Barry on TVNZ, Seymour had claimed doctors were already providing patients with lethal injections and were assisting in their suicide. His words were, "It's happening anyway."

Donnelly said politicians do great harm to the perception of medical practice, and instil unnecessary fear and anxiety in the minds of the public by promulgating, on national television, incorrect, misleading and unsubstantiated statements.

"If Mr Seymour knows he is incorrect, then he is misleading the people. If he does not know that he is incorrect, then he is quite simply showing his abject lack of knowledge on this topic," she said.

Dr Sinead Donnelly trained as a specialist in general and palliative medicine in Ireland, Scotland and the USA. She has worked in Wellington since 2008.

Source

• New Zealand Herald
• Scoop
• TVNZ
• Image: Stuff

He is pleased that the Health Committee Report on the subject noted that complexity.

Kleinsman is the Director of The Nathaniel Centre, the Bioethics Research Agency for the New Zealand Catholic Bishops Conference.

The Nathaniel Centre is however, disappointed that Report does not give the assurances needed by the New Zealand Parliament to change the current law, " assurances that it won't pose substantial risks of coercion and abuse for those who are most vulnerable, the elderly, sick and disabled."

Kleinsman thinks anyone who reads the Report in full with an open mind will left be with huge concerns about the ability of any proposed law to supply adequate safeguards, "the sort of safeguards that would work in the real world."

Read full media release from the Nathaniel Centre in which the following points are made:

• The Health Committee report did not engage more with the solid evidence that was presented by many individuals and groups.
• In the absence of clear and irrefutable evidence that the most vulnerable would be adequately protected on an issue when the stakes are life and death and when a mistake is permanent, the precautionary principle must apply.
• "It is not up to opponents to prove beyond doubt that a law would be dangerous. It is up to proponents of euthanasia and assisted suicide to prove beyond doubt that it would be safe and this Report clearly does not deliver the required level of assurance.
• The Report identifies, in multiple places, that the desire to ‘not become reliant on others' and ‘not wishing to be a burden' is what motivates many to make euthanasia and assisted suicide available.
• "This reinforces the Nathaniel Centre's view that a law change would initiate a change in the way society would view the disabled and those who are dying, as well as the way we care for these people.
• Of even greater concern is that these persons would come to view their own place in society in a much more tentative way.

Source

• Supplied: Amanda Gregan Communications Advisor - NZ Catholic Bishops - Te Huinga o nga Pihopa Katorika o Aotearoa
• Image Change.org

"The Health Committee has considered Petition 2014/18 of Hon Maryan Street and 8,974 others and recommends that the House take note of its report."

The the Committee recognises that that euthanasia is a very complicated, very divisive, and extremely contentious issue.

"We therefore encourage everyone with an interest in the subject to read the report in full, and to draw their own conclusions based on the evidence presented in it."

Committee chairman Simon O'Connor said the report did not make any formal recommendations to the Government about whether euthanasia should be legalised. It instead provided a summary of the arguments for and against assisted dying.

The committee has tried tried to distil all the arguments so as to help parliament, and the people of New Zealand, come to a deeper understanding of what's been asked around the issue of assisted suicide and euthanasia.

The Care Alliance has welcomed the report. Matthew Jansen, Secretary of the Care Alliance said it is a careful and thorough summary of both sides of the issue. They are is encouraging all those with an interest in the subject to read it in full.

Between 75 and 80 per cent of the submissions were opposed to legalising voluntary euthanasia.

But O'Connor says it is not simply a numbers game. "It is about actually understanding the arguments for and against and making a decision about which ones are correct,"

The report was unanimously backed by political parties, though New Zealand First said any decision about legalising assisted dying should require a referendum, rather than a conscience vote in Parliament.

Source

• New Zealand Herald
• Scoop Politics
• NewsHub
• Image: Care Alliance

Euthanasia Report makes one important recommendation]]> 97410 https://cathnews.co.nz/2017/06/29/act-euthanasia-bill-dangerous/ Thu, 29 Jun 2017 07:54:37 +0000 https://cathnews.co.nz/?p=95779 ACT's euthanasia bill is dangerous a Welsh professor of palliative medicine and cross-bench member of the House of Lords says. Ilora Finlay has arrived in New Zealand to challenge David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill. Finlay said that going by what had happened in Oregon and Belgium, the legalisation of assisted suicide in New Read more

"We have grave concerns about the unintended consequences of the proposed legislation", warns Director of The Nathaniel Centre and bioethics researcher Dr John Kleinsman.

"It is our view that any attempt to grant people the legal right to choose to have their lives ended prematurely will mean many more will have their control and choice eroded."

"The people of New Zealand have recently spoken out on the question of legalising euthanasia in unprecedented numbers and they have overwhelmingly rejected any such move as too dangerous by a measure of 4 to 1," said Dr Kleinsman, referring to the Health Select Committee Inquiry initiated by the Voluntary Euthanasia Society Petition.

"This is the real measure of people's views on the topic and it is paramount that these views inform politicians' understanding going forward."

"This is an extremely complex matter and it cannot be decided on the basis of emotion. Many people will likely think of the terminally ill when considering how they feel about it, but this Bill goes much further and opens up assisted suicide and euthanasia to anyone 18 years and over with a grievous and irremediable physical or mental condition, which in their own view makes their life unbearable", he says.

"This Bill is not designed just for a small number of very seriously ill people nearing the closing stages of their lives, but will encompass large numbers of sick or disabled people living, what most would consider, near normal lives, young and old alike. It's a recipe for euthanasia on demand.

As our nation struggles to curb a tragic growing epidemic of youth suicide, it will also send a dangerously mixed message to our young people if this becomes law.

On the one hand we will be telling young people to see the value in their lives, but then saying it is ok for some people to end their lives as a response to unbearable suffering. It ultimately amounts to a ‘some suicides are ok' approach.

We must not ignore the suffering that people with irrecoverable conditions or people who are dying face at the end of their lives and good palliative care achieves this. But legalising euthanasia or assisted-suicide is not the solution," says Dr Kleinsman

Source

• Supplied
• Image: assets.change.org

The controversial bill represents the best chance for voluntary euthanasia to be legalised in New Zealand - although the issue is deeply polarising and many MPs including Prime Minister Bill English are firmly opposed. Continue reading

Professor Jan Bernheim believes New Zealand should adopt laws to give terminally ill patients the right to choose to end their own life. Continue reading

Matthew Jansen, Secretary of the Care Alliance, said the submissions reflect the depth and breadth of public attitudes about euthanasia.

The Health Select Committee investigation began in response to a petition presented to Parliament in June 2015.

"Quite simply, the Voluntary Euthanasia Society were able to get 8,975 signatures on a petition, but could muster less than half that number in actual submissions," said Jansen.

"By contrast, 16,411 people took the opportunity to say no to euthanasia."

Opposition to euthanasia was dominant across all submission lengths. For example, of the submissions longer than one page, 1,510 submissions opposed euthanasia while 523 supported its legalisation.

"We became aware last year that pro-euthanasia advocates were spreading a message that opposing submissions did not meet their standards for length, uniqueness or the use of religious arguments."

"We thought that was disrespectful to the thousands of New Zealanders who took the time and effort to share their views with Parliament, for and against. So we set to work to find out the facts."

"Care Alliance volunteers read every submission to record views on legalising euthanasia, the length of the submission, and whether or not religious arguments were used by the submitter."

"This work was completed in April, and a random sample from the full analysis was checked by an independent research company."

It concluded that "we can say with at least 95% confidence that the overall classification percentages are accurate within no more than 0.4% variation."

Jansen added that "While the Care Alliance never argues this issue from a faith perspective, we respect the right of any New Zealander to do so, for or against, if they wish."

"That is a real and existing right protected by the Bill of Rights Act."

"In the event, more than 82 percent of submissions opposed to euthanasia contained no reference to religious arguments."

"Jansen said that many of the submissions, for and against, contained deeply moving personal stories regarding illness, dying and suicide."

"The Select Committee has been provided with incredible testimony. We trust that they will hear that there is much more that needs to be done to improve mental health, disability and end of life services in New Zealand, but that the overwhelming majority of submitters say that euthanasia is not a solution."

Source

carealliance.org.nz

He has been conducting suicide seminars and encouraging vulnerable people to illegally smuggle the prohibited class C lethal drug Nembutal, into New Zealand. Continue reading

Read also: Susan Austen in court on euthanasia drug charges

The debate will take place at the Transitional Cathedral in Latimer Square, running from 9.30am - 2.30pm on Saturday 1 April, and will feature four speakers for and against voluntary euthanasia.

The Dean of Christchurch, the Very Rev Lawrence Kimberley hopes the forum will open up informed conversations, and equip Anglicans with the tools to think through end of life issues, before any law change comes before parliament. Continue reading

In letter to the secretary of Right to Life written in December last year Little said, "Labour's position is to support the cross-party select committee inquiry".

"Euthanasia is a conscience issue, not a party political issue, and it is not one of Labour's priorities.

"This is why no Labour MP is introducing a bill on euthanasia to Parliament".

In his letter Little went on to say "The select committee process allows members of the public to submit ideas for what any change in the law could look like."

"Louisa Wall was making use of this process as an individual, as is her democratic right."

"It does not reflect Labour's view and Labour will not be introducing a private member's bill on euthanasia."

Orr said the Labour Party has a long and illustrious history of defending life.

"Andrew Little's stand is in the tradition of its great leaders who defended life; Michael Savage, Peter Frazer, Walter Nash, Arnold Nordmeyer, Bill Rowling, David Lange and Mike Moore."

"This is a welcome assurance, that should Labour be elected to govern at the general election on Saturday 23rd September 2017, a Labour government would not present a bill promoting Euthanasia," said Orr

" It is also reassuring that should a private members bill on Euthanasia be drawn from the ballot, Labour members would have a conscience vote, " he said.

Source

• Supplied

"Catholic teaching regarding the end of life is well known, however we would like to share with you our extensive and long experience of our priests and chaplains accompanying the dying and with those who are grieving," Cardinal Dew said.

"In my more than 40 years as a priest I have been with countless people towards the end of their life, and personally witnessed moments of tenderness, forgiveness, laughing together, saying sorry, expressing gratitude and appreciation, admiration and respect,"

"I have no doubt that many families and the dying will be robbed of these deeply human moments if legalised euthanasia is available,"

"We see the dedication and commitment of family members, but also know only too well that families are complex and messy,"

"Families face many struggles, strains and challenges, especially when caring for someone who is elderly, dying or disabled,"

"Pope Francis has a phrase he likes to use: Our 'families do not drop down from heaven perfectly formed'. Personal experience tells us that even the best families have times of real struggle.

"Sometimes this leads to fractured relationships; a carer or carers can feel isolated and unable to cope and the person being cared for is extremely susceptible to feeling like they have become a burden. No one should feel unsupported or feel that they are a burden to their family or community,"

"In these situations, the very availability of euthanasia will create a demand because its legalisation will send the message that it is not just socially acceptable but socially desirable - many people will feel that their best or only option is euthanasia or assisted suicide,"

"We cannot emphasise enough that this part of the natural process of living and dying is essential to quality of life. It is what dying people and the people around them deserve,"

Cardinal Dew ended by challenging the MPs saying "You will be asking society to judge someone's quality of life, and a person's family and carers and themselves will be drawn into that judgement. And really who are we to judge?"

For the full text of the presentation click here

Source

• Supplied
• Image: philippatston.com

It shows that at one level she has taken on board some of the concerns raised by opponents of a law change. However, the proposed Authorised Dying Bill falls short on a number of serious counts:

Wall assumes, along with most New Zealanders, that any euthanasia or assisted regime will involve health professionals as the direct agents.

However, as the World Medical Association and NZMA statements point out, even if euthanasia or physician assisted suicide became legal it would remain unethical for doctors to be involved in any way - these practices are fundamentally incompatible with the very core of the nursing and medical professions.

It strikes at the core of the doctor-patient relationship which is based on an unimpeachable trust - it will put a serious question mark over that trust for many patients.

Kliensman said Wall also fails to recognise that moving what I call ‘the bright line of prohibition' does not solve the problem of the hard cases.

It simply shifts the problem because it immediately creates new ‘hard cases' on a different boundary line. If as a country we allow access to euthanasia or assisted suicide to some on the basis that they have a right to choose it, it is quite rightly and logically argued that it is discriminatory not to allow it for others who are suffering. The boundary she proposes is totally arbitrary.

The debate in the Netherlands and Belgium started in exactly the same place Louisa Wall wants her law to start.

It was all about offering people who were terminally ill the opportunity to control the manner of their death.

The debate in Holland now is about giving anyone over 70 access to euthanasia whether or not they are dying. New Zealand would go the same way and it is naïve to think otherwise.

Any law will lead to significant numbers of people choosing needless premature deaths. The key issue is not where we start but where a law will take us.

Source

• Supplied
• Image: d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net