5.0 Statistics:
Over the years both pro euthanasia and pro-life supporters have compiled a number of different surveys to gain support, calculate statistics and try to come to some resolution about the controversial issues revolving around euthanasia. Doctor Phillip Nitchske, an activist in the Voluntary Euthanasia movement, believes that ‘this new radicalism that is belonging within the voluntary euthanasia movement is a direct consequence of the political suppression of the social movement’ (). For the past thirty years Australian polls have revealed that nearly 80% of Australians want legislation that allows the provision of help to assist a terminally ill person to die. The denial of this large majority’s opinion suggests that most politicians, the major political parties and the organised religious groups are in fear of the inevitable and sit on the fence with their eyes closed ().
Many people believe legalising euthanasia will only make what is already going on in hospitals legal. This is shown in a survey conducted in 1988 by the Centre of Human Bioethics at Monash University, which found that 30% of doctors surveyed had previously broken the law by helping terminally ill patients end their life (Giles, 1989, p.125). By analysing this it can be seen that doctors are already playing God and secretly assisting and accelerating the death of terminally ill patients, suffering excruciating pain (McLean, Britton, 1997, 4) Because of this, the relevant authorities should take more of an insight on the situation today and consider legalising voluntary euthanasia under strict conditions in Queensland.
6.0 A Turning Point for Pro Euthanasia:
The story of Nancy Crick was a major landmark and a great leap forward for the pro euthanasia movement. Crick was a sixty-nine year old woman, who took her life on Wednesday 22nd May 2002, to escape the pain of bowel cancer. Nancy was surrounded by twenty-one of her closest friends and family when she took a lethal dose of barbiturates with a draught of Bailey’s, which put her to sleep (). The twenty-one spectators who witnessed Nancy’s death were automatically questioned to determine whether they had made any contribution or were an assistant in any way to her suicidal passing. These witnesses were not notified, until two years after the event, that they were not being charged with assisting suicide (). This is because it is entirely uncertain whether witnesses of suicide, simply being present and making no contribution at all, are breaking the law (). This case caused great social, political and medical dispute as many people had strong opinions both for and against the situation. However, after the autopsy confirmed that Nancy had not sign of cancer, but evidence of an inoperable twisted bowel at the time of her death, the public opinion, which had been solidly behind her, became confused and there was perception of a bad mistake ().
Robert Syme 2002 suggested that people felt Nancy had been mislead and manipulated, that she was not terminally ill, and that she should not have taken her life or been encouraged to do so (). Syme also reported that all this controversy was misinformed and showed a lack of understanding of all the facts. He made clear that Crick’s views, opinions and emotions were available for the public to access via the Internet (). Nancy’s diary entries were put onto the Internet and the public had the opportunity to write and ask questions about her condition. In her last diary entry (refer to Appendix 4) Nancy said ‘despite the best surgery and palliative care, my life has deteriorated to such an extent that I feel that death
would be a blessed relief. But I could not legally get help to do this and the Premier, Mr Beattie says the law will not change’ ().
Nancy sought advice from pro euthanasia supporter Phillip Nitchski when she was unable to obtain any relief of her symptoms that were deteriorating her body, life and dignity. Although Nitchski was not present when Nancy passed away, many blamed him for manipulating and persuading Crick to put an end to her misery by putting an end to her life (). Nancy Crick was terminally ill at the time of her death. Her symptoms included immense weight loss, constant and agonising pain, constant vomiting and major operations. Palliative care was of no benefit and eventually she refused all treatment (). For these reasons, Nancy decided her life had come to an end and believed it was her time to go. Her inspiring story was a major turning point for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Queensland, and has gained pro euthanasia support from many people. Many people today suffer similar symptoms to Nancy’s and would benefit from the legalisation of euthanasia being introduced into Queensland. If the community accepts this law, it may be a turning point for other pro euthanasia campaigns in Australia’s states and territories.
7.0 Political Movements:
Very few nations around the world have adopted legislation permitting voluntary euthanasia. On April 1, 2002 a bill, allowing terminally ill patients to request assistance regarding suicide, was passed in the Netherlands Upper House. ().
The Dutch, Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide Act, outlines the strict conditions in which euthanasia may occur and the qualified physicians who are eligible to assist in the process (). According to this legislation, euthanasia and assisting with suicide is still a criminal offence however, professional doctors, who have been repeatedly asked to assist a terminally ill patient and have seeked further advice from other general practitioners, will not be prosecuted.
Euthanasia was legalised in Australia’s Northern Territory, by the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act in 1996. However, this law was soon ineffective due to the amendment by the Commonwealth government to the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978 (). This act explained that the Australian Constitution does not guarantee the powers of the Northern Territory legislature, unlike those of the State legislatures (). The Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1996 clearly outlines, in section 7, the conditions the medical practitioner has to abide by before assisting with a patients death (see Appendix 5) (). Section 7 basically outlines that the patient must have attained the age of eighteen, the opinion of the medical practitioner is satisfied on reasonable grounds and that the medical practitioner has seeked advice from another medical doctor who holds prescribed qualifications. The medical practitioners must be satisfied that the patient is suffering from an illness that will eventually result in death, no possible medical measures can be taken in the hope of effecting a cure and that the only treatment available to the patient is confined to pain relief () (refer to Appendix 5).
The Northern Territories, Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1996, should be considered during the process of legalising euthanasia in Queensland. Adopting a law very similar to the Northern Territories blocked legislation would be a huge benefit to our society. This would give doctors and medical practitioners the ability to assist terminally ill patients under very strict conditions. These conditions should be the same as those outlined in the Northern Territory’s act however, more emphasis must be added to the condition of the patient’s clear consent, through verbal communication or a living will ().
8.0 Social and Legal Issues Related to Euthanasia
Euthanasia is an extremely controversial issue, which is the reasoning behind the many social, political and legal disputes between opposing stakeholders. These arguments have been existent for many years, however due to the worlds enhancing technology these issues have developed into sensitive and ethical opinions. The two distinct campaigns opposing each other in this controversial topic are pro-euthanasia (pro-choice) and pro-life. Both campaigns have diverse moral views and opinions of the issue and aim to publicise these beliefs in the hope of further public support.
8.1 Professional Opinions
Dr Phillip Nitschke is a well-known euthanasia practitioner and campaigner. He believes that doctors are already playing God in hospitals and by legalising voluntary euthanasia the government is only making an issue, which is already occurring legal (). During the euthanasia debate in Sydney between Bishop Fisher and Dr Phillip Nitschke, Nitschke opened his case by stating ‘one can provide palliative care by, for example, increasing the drug dosage at the request of the patient to the point where it brings death’ (). By putting forth such a crucial issue for pro-choice, Nitschke has outlined that this situation is euthanasia and it has been occurring for many years. In response to Nitschke’s opinion Father Fisher claimed that breaking a law does not give total reason to remove it (). Fisher also argued that life is a gift from God and by assisting another to die you are offending and disrespecting him. In disagreement to this Nitschke questioned, ‘what sort of gift is it if God gives us a life we can’t escape from?’ ().
Fr Fisher remarked that the agenda of Dr Nitschke and his supporters went far beyond the killing of those in extreme pain. He explained that today pro-euthanasia supporters advocate killing defective infants, the unconscious and the non-competent elderly. (). In reply to this Dr Nitschke argued that the killing of the unconscious and the non-competent elderly are decided through the family or a living will. The legalisation of voluntary euthanasia must clearly outline conditions, which the medical practitioner must follow in aid of categorising whether euthanasia is the best option. Also this legislation must explain that the patient is required to give clear and identifiable consent to euthanasia, through either verbal communication or a living will (). Nitschke believes that terminally ill patients have two options, to acquire to drugs that will provide them with a peaceful death and take them while they still can, or risk becoming trapped in their body enduring a slow and inevitable death. He explains that the only other possibility involves asking a loved one or doctor to break current law and help them to administer a lethal dose, however, the assistant risks a twenty-year imprisonment sentence ().
Nitschke’s dominant argument is that across Australia suicide is a legal act, but advising, counselling or assisting suicide attracts a life imprisonment penalty. Nitschke questions ‘how can it be that to advise someone on an action that is legal, can be considered so illegal as to attract a penalty of twenty years in prison?’ (). Nitschke views the Australian laws as unjust and states that unjust laws are meant to be broken, which is the reasoning behind the continuous help he gives to the terminally ill ().
8.2 Social Opinions
Many past or present patients have advertised their stories in the aim of supporting either the pro-euthanasia or pro-life movements. Nancy Crick is an ideal example of a terminally ill patient, who’s life could have been made a lot easier if she was allowed to seek medical aid with her request to die. Rosemary Dewick is another high-profile campaigner for voluntary euthanasia. The irony of her close brush with death through a massive brain haemorrhage allowed Dewick to realise the need of euthanasia from a terminally ill perspective (My Right to Die).
Pro-euthanasia supporter, Dr Gerrit Kimsma, believes that the legalisation of euthanasia will allow the terminally ill to focus on things they really want to do, which lightens the pressure off the patient as they realise and Their suffering will soon come to an end (). Dr Peter Ravenscroft opposes the legalisation of euthanasia. He believes that if a patient is diagnosed with an incurable disease, they should be given palliative care. Ravenscroft agrees, along with a large majority of society, that if euthanasia became legal, it may be easier to choose death over continuing research for better treatment ().
It is debatable that legislation of euthanasia should include strict conditions, which determines whether the patient should be allowed to request termination of life. These guidelines will make euthanasia available to the terminally ill but restrict it from those who are not, for example the handicapped, the disabled and the defective (Mike Hume, Times, p.16) Pro-life encourages that there is no good reason to end a life. They support the idea that many good and unfortunate events occur throughout life, but that’s what its all about. Pro-euthanasia
10.0 Recommendations
Euthanasia should be legalised to the terminally ill citizens of Queensland and under strict conditions this can be made possible. These conditions must be made entirely clear in the legislation and greater emphasis should be put on the patient’s absolute consent.
Legislation should include these five main conditions:
- Only registered medical practitioner may carry out active voluntary euthanasia
- The patient must explicitly request active euthanasia is such a way that there can be no doubt concerning his or her desire to die
- The patient’s decision must be well-informed, voluntary and enduring
- There must be no available way of improving the patient’s condition which is acceptable to the patient
- The medical practitioner must consult at least two other medical practitioners (who also have to confirm the above points)
(Giles, 1989, p. 125)
If these five conditions are clearly identified, doctors will not be given total control of the situation. This reduces the chance of voluntary euthanasia evolving into compulsory euthanasia.
If order of legalising this procedure sections 284, 296 and 311 need to be completely left out of the Criminal Code and the conditions outlined in the Northern Territory’s Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1996(see Appendix 5) need to be considered. Once these amendments are made many terminally ill patients will feel they have control over their lives and will be able to endure a peaceful and lawful death at their own choice. (McLean, Britton, 1997, p. 39) This will reduce the number of unhappy patients and families, as they will not be required to endure or watch a loved one endure such worthless and agonising pain.
Bibliography
Websites
Crick, N. Diary Entry – 21 May 2002, found at (online), last updated: 21 May 2002, Viewed: 22/08/04
Docker, C. Exit’s – Fastaccess – A Starting Point, found at (online), last updated: 2003, viewed: 20/08/2004
Euthanasia Advocate says Bring on Crick Charge, found at (online), Updated: May 12 2003, Viewed: 14/07/2004
Exit Australia, Media Release Crick Family Demands Answers, found at (online), Updated: 2002, Viewed: 10/08/2004
Kennedy, L. Euthanasia Lobbyist to Fight Attempted Murder Charge, found at , Updated: May 7 2003, Viewed: 14/07/2004
Kevorkian, J. Euthanasia, found at (online), last updated: 05/09/2002, viewed: 10/08/2004
Kimsma, G. A Doctor who SUPPORTS Euthanasia, found at (online),
Koop, C. Euthanasia, found at (online), last updated: 10/04/2004, viewed: 28/07/2004
Mobbs, F. Bishop Fisher and Dr Philip Nitschke in Sydney euthanasia debate, found at (online), Updated: October 2003, Viewed: 10/08/2004
Nitschke, P. Voluntary Euthanasia – a new radicalism, found at (online), Updated: May 27 2002, Viewed: 10/08/2004
Northern Territory Consolidated Legislation, found at (online), Updated: 2000 Viewed: 21/08/2004
Ravenscroft, P. A Doctor AGAINST Euthanasia, found at (online), Updated: April 1997, Viewed: 20/08/2004
Roberts, G. Too Tired to go on, Ruth, 80, takes Lethal Dose, found at (online), Updated: December16 2002, Viewed: 20/08/2004
Saunders, P. Twelve Reasons Why Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalised, found at (online), Viewed: 20/08/2004
Syme, R. Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria Inc – Nancy Crick, found at (online), Updated: June 5 2002, Viewed: 10/08/2004
Webmaster’s World Eycyclopedia, Euthanasia - Voluntary, found at (online), Undated: 2004, Viewed: 16/07/2004
Books
Britton, A. McLean, S. 1997, The Case For Physician Assisted Suicide, Harper Collins Publishers, London
Bryan, J. 1982, Medical Ethics, Wayland Publishers, East Sussex
Gray,A. Kenman, S. 1999, Legal Studies in Action 2, Jacaranda, Milton
Healey, K. 1997, Issues for the Nineties Volume 75 – Euthanasia, The Spinney Press, Balmain
Lawler, M. 1983, The Queensland Law Handbook 7th Edition, Caxton Legal Centre inc, Darwin
Scheelbeek, T. 1992, Understanding the Law 2, Edward Arnold Australia, Caulfield East
Television
GNT People, Phillip Nitschke Interview, Broadcasted 6.30pm on 11/06/2003, episode 19
(found at: http://acb.net.au/dimensions_people/Transcripts/s876025. html)
Legislation
Amendment of the Northern Territory Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1996 - Euthanasia Laws Act 1997 s. 50
Guardianship and Administration Act 2000, Chapter 11, part 2
Queensland Criminal Code Act 1899, s. 284, 296, 311
Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1996, s. 4, 7
Class Handouts
Euthanasia by Joshua King
Articles (newspapers etc.)
BBC news, Nurses Support Euthanasia, Australian Nursing Journal, February 2004, Vol. 11 Issue 7, p. 35.
Dutch Push Teen Euthanasia, The Australian, August 12 1999, p. 17
Hume, M. We must Reject the Idea that Death is a Solution to the Problems of Living, The Times (United Kingdom), 28/06/2004, pg. 16
Euthanasia Opposition, Northern Territory News, 25/06/2004, p.4
Euthanasia Requests, The Advertiser (Adelaide), 28/06/2004, p.11
Green, G. My Right to Die, The Courier Mail, March 8 2001, pg. 15
Jones, D. Girl Who Chose to Die, Sunday Mail, March 12 2000 p. 25
Romei, S. Whose Death is it Anyway? The World – Australia, 14 – 15 August 1999, p. 18
Rebecca Adams
Year 12 Legal Studies