The latest attempt to pass pro-euthanasia legislation in Australia has failed, but the country's foremost "right-to-die" advocate predicts that ordinary people will increasingly take matters into their own hands.
Australian pro-lifers, meanwhile, would like to see laws introduced specifically designed to prevent activists from instructing people on how to kill themselves.
The upper house of the New South Wales parliament in Sydney voted 28-4 against a bill introduced by a Greens lawmaker, calling for a referendum on voluntary euthanasia.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, a euthanasia campaigner known around the world for designing various devices to facilitate suicide, supported the measure by Greens lawmaker Ian Cohen. After it failed to pass a second reading, he showed reporters in Sydney the latest piece of equipment, a device to enable a user to inhale a lethal dose of carbon monoxide (CO).
"It's a simple device and they are getting simpler," he said. Nitschke said in a phone interview Tuesday the device, dubbed the "CO genie," had been designed and modified by members of his organization, Exit Australia, and comprised items available at a local supermarket or hardware store. Readily available chemicals were mixed to produce a pure form of carbon monoxide, he said. Around 200 members of Exit Australia had signed up for a series of workshops around the country where they could learn how to make the device. Nitschke said a manual "which outlines how to build one" was also being developed, for use at the workshops. In a tactic to avoid legal problems for any one individual involved in drawing up the manual, it was being "co-authored" by a group of members, he said.
"It's a case of sharing responsibility. It presents anyone wanting to pursue legal action with a particular problem. It may be easy to [take action against] one author, but when you've got to put 20 authors… that presents a political problem, if not a legal one."
Nitschke has drawn fire in the past for pushing the boundaries of the debate beyond those usually discussed by the voluntary euthanasia movement, by saying euthanasia should be legally available to anyone, not just the terminally-ill.
Australia has one of the higher rates of suicide among Western countries - 14.3 out of every 100 000 people according to World Health Organization statistics for the late 1990s (In the U.S., the rate was 11.3 and in Britain 7.4, while the highest was 34 per 100,000, in the Russian Federation.)
David Cotton, spokesman for New South Wales Right to Life, said Tuesday that Australia's federal and state governments were working with the community to help prevent suicide. Yet at the same time, Nitschke continued both to flaunt the law and try to change the law, as he sought to make it legal for people to kill others and to help them to do so. Cotton condemned Nitschke's campaigning, saying "suicide prevention, not suicide promotion" should be the focus.
"Just ask any grieving child, parent, sibling or friend of one who has suicided, to see whether we as a society ought to be promoting suicide, as Dr. Nitschke does, or preventing it as so many of our care agencies are doing."
Asked whether showing people how to build the device was not risking putting them into the hands of youngsters or others who may be experiencing depression, Nitschke rejected the criticism.
"It takes a bit of endeavor and application to come up with such a device. I don't think it lends itself in any way to the impetuous acts which are so much part of the problem of youth suicide, for example," he said.
"I see it as providing a lot of comfort to a growing number of elderly people who are concerned about the situation they might find themselves in as they reach the end of their lives."
Nitschke said elderly people in that situation were losing faith in the legislative process. The Greens' defeated bill had sought a referendum in New South Wales, Australia's most populous state, on a legally and medically supervised trial of voluntary euthanasia for a period of 18 months.
Nitschke said the failure of the legislation marked for many people "the end of the legislative strategy."
"The attempt to try get politicians engaged on the issue have been unsuccessful, and there's no better evidence than that vote of 28-4," he said.
"This means people are going to put a lot more effort into refining the [euthanasia] technique, so that in a sense the passing of legislation becomes irrelevant."
Under the world's first euthanasia law, in Australia's Northern Territory in 1996, Nitschke helped four people to die, using a device he had designed. The law was subsequently overturned by the federal government. The campaigner, known by his opponents as "Australia's Dr. Death," has been trying ever since to get legislation passed. He said Tuesday there seemed to be an increasing reluctance by politicians to tackle the issue. Nitschke attributed this to concerns in Australia's two major parties - Prime Minister John Howard's conservative Liberal Party and the official opposition Labor Party - about alienating "blocs of people heavily influenced by their religious beliefs."
"Neither major party wishes to risk a significant split within their party… one of the very senior politicians said to me once 'the last thing you want is to find yourself being railed at from the pulpit at pre-election time.' "
Pro-life campaigner Cotton noted that Nitschke admitted in mid-2001 to have had an "intimate association" with at least 20 deaths. Despite this, he was still registered to practice as a medical practitioner in every state of Australia.
"If Dr. Nitschke is to be stopped before the corpses pile up any higher, then we may need an amendment to the criminal law to specifically prohibit and penalize instructing in the methods of suicide in order to stop him and any like him, who seek to glorify and promote suicide, assisting in people's deaths."
A date has been set down for the High Court trial of Wanganui woman Lesley Martin. Martin was charged with attempted murder following the death of her mother Joy Martin on May 28, 1999. Martin, an intensive care nurse, had been caring for her mother, dying of cancer, at home. The trial, in the High Court at Wanganui, is to begin on March 15 and has been set down for two weeks. Martin's lawyer, Donald Stevens QC has said Martin will plead not guilty. Martin is now living in New Plymouth. She is on bail on conditions including surrendering her passport and not talking about euthanasia.
Dr Nitschke said household objects could make up his machine. Australian euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke has unveiled his latest death machine, which involves household objects and a dose of carbon monoxide.
Dr Nitschke, dubbed 'Australia's Dr Death' by euthanasia opponents, said that someone who wanted to end their life only had to take two or three breaths from the machine to succeed.
"It's a simple device and they are getting simpler," he told reporters in Sydney. "We've got 200 people booked in for workshops across Australia where people want to come along and build this device," he said. He denied it was irresponsible to teach people how to build it. "We will endeavour to ensure that the only people who come and take part in these workshops are people that have a good reason to, and this will be elderly Australians," he said.
But he acknowledged that it would be easy for others to hear how to make the contraption, which he said could be made from items like a Vegemite jar and sauce bottle.
"Look, it's not rocket science. Anyone who has done high school chemistry can build one of these machines," he said.
Euthanasia was briefly legalised in Australia's Northern Territory in 1996. Several people died after receiving lethal injections before the legislation was repealed by the federal government two years later.
Dr Nitschke insists those with terminal and painful illnesses have the right to choose when and how to end their lives. He has already introduced the Australian public to a carbon monoxide mini generator attached to nasal prongs, and an "Exit Bag" - a plastic bag with an elasticated seal around the neck.
Nine elderly Queenslanders have built their own suicide devices after attending a Do-It-Yourself Euthanasia workshop. The devices, which produce carbon monoxide, are based on a model launched by euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke earlier this year. None of the group members say they have current plans to use the machines, but will keep them in the event they wish to die. Some members of the group were present when Gold Coast reisdent Nancy Crick took her own life last year and are frustrated they have yet to be charged or cleared of assisting in her death.
Spokesman John Todd says the people who attended the seminar are frustrated that euthanasia remains illegal in Australia.
"We realise this is a very serious step we are taking but we find ourselves in a situation where the Government is unprepared or not prepared to take steps to give us decent voluntary euthanasia legislation in this state or any state in this country," he said.
Right to Life campaigners say it is a blatant attempt to try and pressure governments into changing laws. Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson says that decision remains in the hands of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
A coroner who has investigated three voluntary euthanasia cases in just over a year is urging Parliament to take another look at the issue. At an inquest on Monday, Nelson coroner Ian Smith ruled that Victoria Ellen Vincent, 83, committed suicide by suffocation. Her husband, Ralph, was investigated by police after she was found dead with a plastic bag over her head last September. The couple had been long-time members of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society.
Mrs Vincent had arthritis, osteoporosis and, unknown to her when she died, invasive cancer. She had trouble sitting up for long periods and suffered pain and discomfort.
Detective Sergeant Kevin Tiernan told the inquest that in the days before her death Mrs Vincent had talked of wanting to die soon and of having accumulated enough pills to achieve her aim. Mr Tiernan said police had found at her home two books relating to voluntary euthanasia. They contained details on how to commit suicide. Hamilton coroner Gordon Matenga and Auckland coroner Dr Murray Jamieson told the Herald yesterday they held no statistics on the incidence of voluntary euthanasia, because it could be difficult to distinguish from any other suicides. But Mr Smith said it was an easy matter in the three cases he mentioned.
"The sharply distinguishing feature is that all had plastic bags over their heads," he said. They also left suicide notes explaining that they were in great pain. "The post mortem reports showed what they were suffering from, and we put the whole scenario together."
Mr Smith, a coroner for more than 10 years, said three such cases in just over a year marked an increased incidence. He attributed this to publicity about voluntary euthanasia, including "the Australian scene", and the rejection in July of a bill to legalise voluntary euthanasia.
Australian euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke showed his carbon monoxide suicide machine to an Auckland audience in April.
Mr Smith said the current law must be upheld, but it was up to Parliament to resolve the issue. "The reality is that this will continue. It's something we as a society have to come to grips with. When someone's quality of life is so bad ... they have to do something to alleviate their suffering. If I have had three… how many others are there around the country?"
Asked for his personal view on voluntary euthanasia, he said: "When quality of life is to the point that it's not there - I suppose if I'm not functioning… I probably don't want to be here."
Mr Vincent said he was surprised and heartened by Mr Smith's comments. "I am quite sure that, with the spread of knowledge, there has been a great deal more than [three deaths], and there will be quite a few cases that raise no suspicion with the police at all and are put down to natural deaths," he said. "My heart goes out to anyone who is too sick to carry out the suicide option with dignity on their own. They want to say, 'This is my life and it should be my choice when I choose to leave it', and certainly not the Government's. I can only hope this will get through to the politicians eventually."
Mr Smith expected the issue would be discussed at the Australasian coroners' conference in Christchurch next week and he would raise it at the next meeting of the New Zealand Coroners Council.
DIY suicide machine to be shown»
Tasmanians will be shown the latest in do-it- yourself death technology this week during a visit by the man dubbed "Doctor Death". Euthanasia campaigner Dr Philip Nitschke will demonstrate his controversial carbon monoxide generator, used for suicide, during the three-day visit, starting with a public meeting in Launceston tomorrow night. Dr Nitschke said he would provide information to elderly people about assisted suicide options.
He said the CO generator, which caused a quick and painless death within minutes by releasing a lethal gas, was a simple device made from readily available PVC piping and medical equipment.
"If there is enough interest in it, we will look at setting up construction workshops where people can build their own," he said. "We are expecting quite a reaction from the authorities."
The first construction workshop was due to be held at an undisclosed location in Brisbane later this month, with similar events planned for Sydney, Melbourne and New Zealand. The device could be assembled in a couple of hours for less than $100 and used chemicals available from hardware stores. Dr Nitschke said there was no crime in an individual sourcing the materials, building and using such a device. He said people would continue to do so because the Federal Government was reluctant to deal with the issue.
"These self-help, do-it-yourself methods will become more and more prevalant with the failure of governments to legislate," Dr Nitschke said. Dr Nitschke was not confident that Greens and Democrats efforts to introduce euthanasia legislation in NSW, South Australia and Western Australia would be supported by the major parties.
Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Tasmania president Sheila Howe said in the past few years, Tasmanians had become more tolerant about the issue of voluntary euthanasia.
Dr Nitschke will meet private patients, hold closed workshops in Hobart and Devonport on Friday, and public meetings at 51 York St in Launceston tomorrow at 7.30pm and at the Devonport Community and Health Centre in Steele St on Friday at 7pm.
The euthanasia advocate who faces a trial over the death of her terminally-ill mother, can expect high-profile support when the case goes before the High Court. Four years after her mother's death, Lesley Martin has been committed for trial on a charge of attempted murder.
Martin admitted in a book 'To Die Like A Dog' that she gave her mother an overdose of morphine and smothered her with a pillow.
She has confirmed that euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke will be in court to support her when the case is heard, possibly early next year. Dr Nitschke has already said his organisation 'Exit Australia' will assist Martin with legal expenses, which are expected to be considerable. Supporters of voluntary euthanasia say the two JPs hearing Lesley Martin's case had little choice but to commit her to trial. Voluntary Euthanasia Society spokesman Jack Jones says he is surprised depositions into the case were heard only by two Justices of the Peace. He says the pressure of publicity meant they had to send the case to trial. Mr Jones says going to trial will not necessarily be a bad thing, because at least it will be before a judge and jury.
Voluntary euthanasia campaigner Lesley Martin, who was committed for trial yesterday for attempting to murder her mother in 1999, says she is "not a martyr" - but is willing to go to prison.
"No, I don't want to go to jail," she told National Radio this morning. "But to be really honest, until you've been truly bitten and deeply hurt by being trapped within in a process like this, with no legal redress… you don't fully commit to it. I do know the true meaning of commitment through this process… I have been wanting a trial on this all along."
The Wanganui District Court was told yesterday that Martin, 40, placed a pillow over her terminally ill 69-year-old mother Joy Martin and held on tightly until she stopped breathing. But her mother survived the suffocation attempt and died from an earlier fatal overdose of morphine administered by Lesley Martin. She died the day after the morphine injection in May 1999 of respiratory arrest caused by either morphine administration or broncho pneumonia.
Martin's lawyer, Wellington QC Donald Stevens said Martin would plead not guilty. She was remanded to November 18 for a High Court callover and her trial is not expected to be held until next year. As part of her bail conditions, she is not able to speak about events leading up to mother's death. When she published the story of her mother's death, To Die Like A Dog, in September last year, she said she knew it would probably end in court.
"I had my book ready to print - at that point I had to decide… a very important part of the process is the trial itself, because it's a trial that New Zealanders will be following closely. This issue is very important to every New Zealander… it's a matter of life and death… I just feel so strongly about my experiences, especially with my mother, that we could be handling our death and dying experiences so much better than we do."
While she disputed her husband's claim that she had "a martyr complex", she admitted her hope was that her case would galvanise public opinion. She said New Zealanders from all walks of life - including the medical profession - had offered their support.
"Complete strangers have placed a lot of faith and trust in me to speak on their behalf and keep pushing; this shows me that we need to keep this in the public consciousness." One doctor - a long-standing member of the New Zealand Medical Association (NZMA) had contacted her to say he disagreed with the NZMA's opposition to the Voluntary Euthanasia Bill, which was lost in Parliament earlier this year. He told her he and many other colleagues were angry the NZMA had never canvassed members before making the statement.
Last month, MPs voted by 60 to 58, with one abstention, that New Zealand First MP Peter Brown's Death with Dignity Bill should not go to a select committee for consideration. However, Martin said a 1˝ hour debate was not sufficient to do such a complex issue justice.
"It was such a close vote - this showed every New Zealander it should have gone through a much more thorough investigation."
Voluntary euthanasia campaigners say the "right to die" should be decided by Parliament - not the courts. A spokesman for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, Lindsay Hunter, said he had "mixed feelings" over Martin's committal to trial.
"Our hearts go out to Lesley because she has lost her mother and the grieving goes on with this investigation and now the court case; the compassion she has shown her mother is something of which we are fully cognisant," he said today. "However, we firmly believe this issue is one that should be decided by Parliament rather than the courts." He said members were "extremely disappointed" that MPs voted out New Zealand First MP Peter Brown's Death With Dignity Bill last month.
In the conscience vote, MPs voted by 60 to 58, with one abstention, that the bill should not go to a select committee for consideration.
"They listened to their own consciences rather than the consciences of the greater public," said Mr Hunter.
Public polls consistently showed the electorate supported legislative reform by a ratio of three to one, he said. "In our view, an hour of debate was simply not long enough to deal with this issue that is of such great importance to New Zealanders."
According to the society's estimates, about 75 people a year were dying in "uncontrolled pain" in New Zealand, he said. "The hospice movement - which does a wonderful job for most people - just can't help everyone. Our concern is those 75 people, for whom this is a life and death issue."
An Australian-based voluntary euthanasia lobby group - Exit Australia - is raising money to support Martin's legal crusade. The group's Philip Nitschke - dubbed Dr Death - said yesterday he would attend Martin's trial and give evidence if required.
"She also made it clear in her mind and I totally agree with her that unless these things do go to trial there's less likelihood there will ever be change in the rather oppressive legislation both your country and mine are saddled with."
Martin is the New Zealand representative of the group, and has addressed conferences in Australia. New Zealand First MP and author of the Death With Dignity Bill, Peter Brown, said MPs had violated the "democratic right" of people who were suffering by dumping the bill at such an early stage.
"They not only missed their chance, I think they actually did a huge disservice to New Zealanders," he said today. "They weren't being asked to pass the bill, but they should have given the public at least a chance to debate it by select committee… To deny it going to select committee was to deny a democratic right, especially for people who are suffering." However, he promised the "fight will go on".
Since the bill was thrown out by a narrow vote at the end of last month, he said he had had more mail in support than ever before. "I haven't given up. When it was defeated I thought, 'Well that's me, I've done my bit, I haven't set out what I hoped to achieve', and I felt awful. But the feedback from the public has been extremely encouraging and I'm prepared to continue." So far he had attended two public meetings on the issue, with more scheduled over the next couple of weeks. "We're in the throes of dissecting the bill that we had - it needed to be a bit tightened up in areas." While he was confident the bill included adequate safeguards against abuse, he said there were "technical clauses that could be added to make the intent clearer".
"For instance, there was some confusion that the proposed legislation could apply to children or people with mental illness… we want no ambiguity." While "in all probability" the bill would be submitted, he said he was looking at "alternative options".
"Resubmitting it means it may have to sit in the ballot box for years and years. And we'd have to make sure we've got enough MPs onside to send it to a select committee. Whether we can do it with this crowd of 120 remains to be seen: MPs' egos and their pride can get in the way of them changing their vote, it might have to bide its time."
There were three main areas of concern for people, he said. The palliative care sector had said the legislation was not needed. However, Mr Brown said there were some who were beyond help of palliative care. Based on overseas figures, he said about 30 people a year would take advantage of the legislation in New Zealand.
"When you think that 28,000 people die a year, it's a very small percentage. But it would ease the stress of people who are seriously ill, who know their time is running out… they might not take advantage of the legislation but they know there's something there if their suffering becomes unbearable."
Secondly there were fears the legislation would lead to euthanasia, when other people would make the decision to end someone's life. However, he said he believed the legislation could be "ring fenced" to prevent this.
"Thirdly, some people oppose it on religious grounds, and this was the toughest call for me personally. I wouldn't describe myself as a devout Christian, but I do try to live by Christian principles and I had to ask myself whether this bill was compatible with those principles. I believe it is - I don't believe that Christian philosophy wants anyone to suffer terribly in the latter part of their life." He said he had received many letters of support from people in the medical fraternity - mostly nurses. "I think this is because they actually see the whole thing: the doctor oversees everything but the nurse is actually there and becomes part of a person's life and actually feels the emotions."
However, many doctors had written saying the issue at least needed to be debated.
"It was never my desire to split the medical fraternity for whom I have a great deal of respect."
The question of legalizing euthanasia should be decided in Australia by referendum - not by lawmakers, who tend to be reluctant to antagonize the church, a leading euthanasia proponent has argued.
Philip Nitschke, an Australian physician known around the world for designing and promoting various suicide devices, said opinion polls in Australia consistently show that around three-quarters of the population support euthanasia.
With that level of public backing for legalization, he said, "you'd think politicians would be breaking their necks" to support it.
"That's not what's happening ... the politicians are reluctant to alienate the forces of the church."
Nitschke was participating in a recent campus debate in Sydney in which he was matched against a prominent Roman Catholic bio-ethicist and bishop-elect, Prof. Anthony Fisher.
The debate was part of a "Life Week" program organized by the University of Sydney's Catholic Chaplaincy. As such, some concerns were raised beforehand that it would be arranged in such a way as to unfairly benefit the Catholic viewpoint, but debate co-ordinator Anthony McCarthy said it was carefully structured to avoid inequality between the speakers.
A packed Great Hall at the university heard the two advocates for and against euthanasia spell out their positions and debate each other. Nitschke pointed to Oregon as an example of a place where a referendum had led to legalization of euthanasia, and said Australia should follow its lead. The 1994 referendum passed the Death with Dignity Act by 51-49 per cent, and Oregon's citizens in 1997 again voted against repealing it, by a 60-40 margin.
Fisher, founding director of the John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family, responded that there were good reasons why some controversial issues should not be decided by referendum. At a particular time in Australian history, for instance, a majority would perhaps have been in favor of policies detrimental to a particular ethnic or religious group - possibly amounting ultimately to genocide against indigenous Aborigines.
"I'm glad that our leaders don't just go by the current fad or public opinion poll, or ideology that reigns," he said. "Part of why we elect them is [for them] to take a stand on behalf of our most vulnerable minorities and on behalf of our most crucial values, and to give the lead."
Fisher also questioned Nitschke's opinion poll figures, saying groups commissioning polls could word a question in a way to get any result. If asked the question, "Are you in favor of giving people help in their dying?" he said, the result in favor would certainly be at least three-quarters.
Nitschke responded that the question actually used in the polls was: "If a suffering person, a dying person, asks for help from a doctor to die, should it be lawful for that doctor to give help for that dying person to die?" Fisher countered that this still dodged the issue of just what that "help" entailed. It could leave survey participants with the impression it could include pain relief or palliative care.
"Why not be frank and say: "Are you in favor of giving lethal injections to those who want them?" The reason you won't ask it that way is because you won't get seventy-five per cent [saying yes]."
Nitschke in 1996 saw the world's first euthanasia law passed by lawmakers in Australia's Northern Territory, and he used it to help four patients to die. But the federal government quickly overturned the territory's law, and Nitschke has been fighting for euthanasia to be legalized throughout Australia ever since.
In the Sydney debate, however, he said his group, Exit Australia, was no longer focusing on law change.
"We've effectively abandoned the legislative solution; we are pursuing a technical solution. And it's not difficult to do - this is not a cure for cancer we're looking for." In recent years, that "technical solution" entails making available to those who want it the means to commit suicide as easily and painlessly as possible.
Nitschke has promoted suffocation bags, oxygen-deprivation tents and, lately, a machine that enables a person to breathe in deadly carbon monoxide gas. He has also given advice on how people can obtain lethal drugs not generally available but used by veterinary surgeons to put down sick pets - "befriend a vet."
In his debate position statement, Nitschke called access to death at the time of one's choosing a "last great social reform" that was being frustrated by the church and the medical fraternity.
"The church wants to force us to accept their truth that our life is not ours to dispose of [and] the medical profession want to extend their tentacles into yet another area in which their role and authority is questionable."
Fisher's position statement argued that the euthanasia debate was no longer about a last-resort, dignified death for terminally-ill patients who could find no relief from pain.
"Now the euthanasia crusaders want death on demand - cancer patients who don't even have cancer, sick people who aren't terminally sick, people who aren't even sick, depressed people, lonely people, young people," he said. "Surely Australians can find better, more creative, more compassionate ways of dealing with suffering than lethal injections and gas bags."
During a question-and-answer session, Nitschke confirmed his support for infanticide under certain circumstances.
If a child is born and its parents assess that it will lead a life that is not worth living, "it is sometimes appropriate for that child to have their life ended," he said.
Fisher replied: "Handicapped people deserve the same love and respect as the rest of us and perhaps, some extra love and respect, given their weakness - and that's whether they're little or big." He disputed Nitschke's view that the treatment given to keep disabled children alive at any cost was obscene. "It's not a choice between killing the handicapped baby and keeping them horribly in various forms of treatment." A much more reasonable "third way" would see ethical specialists, in consultation with the family, providing palliative care in some cases, and much more active treatment in others where the prospects for improvement were greater, Fisher said.
"I think we can care well for babies, as we can for the elderly, without either over-treating them or under-treating them, without either poisoning them or giving them inappropriately burdensome forms of care."
A University of Sydney media official Andrew Potter said Monday the debate had been unusual for a campus one, with "no interruptions or catcalling" from the large, attentive audience.
Psychology student Nicole Lam said she found it telling that Nitschke had attacked the church. "In my opinion, this signaled that he was avoiding answering the real questions by trying to distract the audience."
Lam said the debate changed her stance from a pro- to anti-euthanasia one, and she felt Fisher had "won" the debate by making his points without trying to please the audience.
Catholic Student Australia delegate Daniel Hill agreed that Fisher had the stronger argument. It was noteworthy, he said, that "Fisher did not mention the church or morality once; he argued solely from a reasonable and ethical premise. His opponent, on the other hand, was complaining about the church well within the first minute of his presentation."
Medical student Dave Bradshaw thought both speakers had presented their cases well, and felt the debate provided the opportunity to better understand a complex issue. "After hearing both speakers' arguments and considering the issues presented, I continue to hold the view that active euthanasia is not appropriate medical practice."
Australian euthanasia proponents have held a public event to test motor cars' exhaust emission levels, to establish which vehicles would produce sufficient toxic gas to kill them. Derided by critics as a macabre publicity stunt, members of the Queensland branch of the euthanasia lobby group Exit Australia used a carbon monoxide (CO) meter to measure the output of six vehicles, by inserting a probe into the exhaust pipe. Five of the six produced sufficient levels - more than 800 ppm (parts per million) - to be toxic, Exit Australia spokesman John Edge said Monday. The exception was a four-year-old Japanese sedan, which "just would not produce." Edge said the group was particularly interested in one car, more than 20 years old, which had produced "copious amounts of carbon monoxide, very quickly." They had subsequently rigged up that car with a hosepipe, inserted it through a side window, and then taken a meter reading inside the car to demonstrate its suitability for suicide.
Exit has become notorious for its founder, Dr. Philip Nitschke, who has designed and promoted a range of devices aimed at facilitating suicide.
Pro-lifer campaigner and other critics have long called for Nitschke to be put on trial and jailed for some of his activities, but although his association with some suicides has been investigated, he continues his controversial promotion of "easy" ways to die. Margaret Tighe, president of Right to Life Australia, called the CO demonstration "bizarre" and "macabre," saying Exit's activities had reached a dangerous new low.
Edge dismissed the criticism, saying Exit's critics had a right to their opinion, but he did not see the event, held in a public car park, as bizarre. What was "really bizarre," he said, was the decision by Australia's federal government to overturn the world's first euthanasia law several years ago.
Australia's Northern Territory legalized euthanasia in the mid-1990s, and four people killed themselves using a machine designed by Nitschke, linking a computer with an intravenous line. The federal government moved quickly to throw out the territory's law, much to the enduring anger of campaigners.
"I thought that was pretty bizarre, where an elected parliament's decision is overturned by the federal government on nothing more than a technicality," Edge said. Although media were invited to observe the CO display, Edge denied that it was a publicity stunt. "Our members are mainly senior citizens, who for a long time have believed that carbon monoxide provides a very pleasant means of death, should the need arise," he said.
In recent times, there had been a number of reports suggesting that modern cars may be unable to produce sufficient levels of CO to be lethal. To dispel the "confusion," members of the organization had contributed to the purchase of a widely available, U.S.-made CO meter, and decided to hold the demonstration. Edge said that some of those who had taken part in the event, including himself, also planned "in the very near future" to build a device designed by Nitschke, called the CO generator or "COGen."
It comprises a small canister in which chemicals are mixed to produce a pure, odorless form of CO, which is then inhaled through a special nasal tube. The device gradually reduces the amount of oxygen and increases the amount of carbon monoxide being inhaled.
During an annual conference in California last January of the U.S. organization formerly known as the Hemlock Society, Nitschke demonstrated to participants how the device worked.
Edge, 67, said he planned to build one, "just in case." He has suffered from rheumatoid arthritis for some years, and wanted to be prepared in the event that it became "very nasty."
"I saw a guy die from this a few years ago and it left a lasting impression in my mind. No way in the world would I ever go down that path. I'm also totally opposed to being incarcerated in a nursing home should my health deteriorate to the point where I can't look after myself," Edge said. "Why should people like me, who don't want to be kept alive if we get to that situation, be forced to live on - at great expense - when we wouldn't want to be here?" he asked. Unlike many of his pro-life opponents, Edge said, he and most of the others in his organization had either no religious beliefs whatsoever, or no "traditional Christian" convictions.
"[Pro-lifers] have every right to have their beliefs. It's just that I don't want them forcing their beliefs onto me. When they start talking about the taking of life being a sin against God ... it's meaningless to me," he said.
A spokeswoman for the Queensland Police said Monday police had been aware of the CO display but did not take any action. "All they were doing as far as we were aware was doing emission-testing, and there's no law against that. I don't think it's any surprise to anyone that you can kill yourself from emissions from some vehicles."
The spokeswoman said the campaigners were not handing out leaflets giving instructions on "how to do it."
"There's nothing the police can do in those circumstances," she said.
Exit last week set up a branch in neighboring New Zealand, one day before lawmakers were considering a bill to legalize euthanasia. The bill was narrowly voted down in its first reading last Wednesday, but the branch - which claims to have 400 members - has vowed to step up its promotion of euthanasia.
Nitschke is on record as suggesting that not only those with terminal diseases should have the "right" to die.
Days after a Death With Dignity Bill was defeated in parliament, a suicide guide is being planned by euthanasia proponents Exit New Zealand. A graphic Australian version of the handbook is already being distributed, offering readers explicit instructions on how to kill themselves, even though it is illegal to incite suicide. About 200 copies of the Australian book are in circulation here, detailing lethal doses of drugs and the best ways to suffocate. It also tells people how to cover up a suicide and ensure relatives are not implicated in any death.
Exit New Zealand is now planning a local version of the guide after the Death with Dignity Bill, backed by Exit head Lesley Martin, was defeated by two votes last Wednesday. The bill proposed a binding referendum on whether terminally ill people should be allowed to end their lives. Martin is facing charges of attempting to murder her mother in 1999.
Exit New Zealand, a lobby group set up last month which now has 400 members, is publishing its handbook for workshops it has planned. About 120 copies were given to participants of voluntary euthanasia workshops here run by Exit Australia head Dr Philip Nitschke in April, and dozens more were handed out in 2001.
Police, the Ministry of Health and Internal Affairs have no plans to take action over the guide, even though police are aware of the handbook's contents. It says drugs to use include the sleeping tablet Neur-amyl (amylobarbitone), animal anaesthetic Nembutal (pentabarbitone), anti-depressant Endep or Tryptanol (amitriptyline hydrochloride) and analgesic Doloxene (dextropropoxyphene). It suggests some are better taken with alcohol and gives recommended fatal doses. The book says narcotics, such as morphine and heroin, are less suitable because of difficulties working out a lethal dose.
Non-drug methods highlighted include using an Exit bag - a plastic bag with an elasticized cuff which fits over the head; a debreather - an airtight face mask; a low-oxygen Exit tent; and carbon monoxide gas, including Exit's Cogen, a carbon monoxide generator. It also discusses the pros and cons of gassing yourself in a car.
Strategies are listed to avoid the death being detected as suicide, such as asking those finding the bodies to remove evidence they killed themselves.
Right-to-die advocates say the handbook is a lesser evil than leaving people to botch suicide attempts because they don't know how to do it properly. They say increasing numbers of terminally-ill people will be forced to take their own lives, often too early, because voluntary euthanasia remains illegal.
NZ First MP Peter Brown's Death with Dignity bill was killed off last week with MPs voting 60-58 against legalising voluntary euthanasia for terminally ill people.
Martin faces an attempted murder charge after admitting in her book To Die Like a Dog that she tried to help her terminally-ill mother die. Martin told the Sunday Star-Times it seemed harsh to publish a booklet with graphic suicide details but it was necessary because New Zealand lacked voluntary euthanasia legislation.
If it's seen as an evil, it's a far lesser evil to be informed than to enter into this choice ill-informed and most likely to botch it up and end up brain-damaged or paralysed from the neck down, she said. Hanging is grotesque - shooting yourself is grotesque, she said.
In New Zealand, it is an offence under the Crimes Act to incite or counsel someone to commit suicide if that person takes their life or attempts to. It is also an offence to aid and abet suicide but is not illegal to kill yourself. The law is yet to be tested in New Zealand, but a similar booklet to Exit Australia's came under legal scrutiny in England in 1983. The English voluntary euthanasia society's booklet, A Guide to Self-Deliverance, detailed methods of suicide for members.
The court found it would be difficult to prove an offence was committed. It would need evidence the supplier provided the book to a specific person they knew was contemplating suicide, with the aim of encouraging them to kill themselves and that it did encourage the person to end their life.
A legal opinion provided to the Sunday Star-Times said it was most likely the New Zealand act would result in a similar finding.
Workshop participants must sign a disclaimer in Exit Australia's handbook stating that none of the information provided will be used to advise, counsel or assist in the act of suicide. Dr Nitschke said he was yet to face legal challenges in Australia over the handbook but was mindful of its potential risks. He was unable to take it in or out of the country because of Australian customs laws and had to email a copy to New Zealand prior to his earlier visits. All the events of last week are going to increase the demand for the things that Exit does, including the workshops, he said.
Critics say a publicity stunt by pro-euthanasia group Exit Australia - to rate car exhaust fumes on their suitability for suicide - will backfire. During the bizarre demonstration in a public car park on the Gold Coast, the Queensland coordinator of Exit Australia John Edge and several elderly people tested their car exhausts to determine if they emitted enough poisonous carbon monoxide fumes to kill quickly.
Right to Life Australia president Margaret Tighe said the group's activities had reached a dangerous new low. "It is an illustration of the level of their thinking and what a dangerous organisation they are," she said. "It's bizarre and it's macabre and I hope it will serve to illustrate to the community what a dangerous organisation it is and the dangerous ideas of Dr Philip Nitschke."
Exit Australia's founder Dr Nitschke observed the demonstration in a car from a distance, but did not take part. The display included attaching a hose to an exhaust pipe to turn a 26-year-old Toyota Corolla into a suicide chamber. Within seconds toxic levels of carbon monoxide were measured inside the passenger area of the car. Owner Joy Overell said she would use the car to take her life if necessary. "I'm in remission from cancer and when I'm ready I shall use it if there is nothing better but I am hoping that by that time they will come to their senses and realise there are many people suffering that need not suffer," she said.
A test on a newer model vehicle found far lower carbon monoxide levels. Mr Edge said modern pollution control systems appeared to make new model cars less effective for suicide. "I personally will not, under any circumstances, go into a nursing home," said Mr Edge. "I'm 67 years of age I have rheumatoid arthritis if it gets bad enough the option to me will be something like this and I want to know, I want to be informed what is available." Mr Edge is the primary focus of a police investigation into the death of euthanasia crusader Nancy Crick on the Gold Coast.
A group of elderly witnesses watched Mrs Crick in May last year take her life, but they could face up to life in prison if charged and convicted of assisting with her suicide.
Voluntary euthanasia campaigner Lesley Martin is vowing to continue the fight to let New Zealanders have their say on mercy killing. Even though MPs on Wednesday night threw out a proposal to hold a binding referendum on whether terminally ill people should be allow to end their lives, Ms Martin, of New Plymouth, was yesterday pushing to get the issue back to Parliament.
Ms Martin spent the day with New Zealand First MP Peter Brown, who brought the Death with Dignity Bill to Parliament, and other politicians who supported the bill going to referendum, to look at a new strategy. "There are other avenues that the politicians can follow to track this issue into a referendum. We have been discussing options. "We are not going to let it fade away and stall for another 10 years. It is simply too important. "There are people today in New Zealand who would have watched this decision and feel absolutely gutted," Ms Martin said.
MPs voted by 60 to 57, with one abstention, that the Death with Dignity Bill should not go to a select committee for consideration. They voted on their conscience and not party lines.
Ms Martin, who faces a charge of attempted murder after admitting in a book that she tried unsuccessfully to kill her mother Joy in May 1999, said she was disappointed when the bill fell over because of a few votes. "Peter Brown is pretty saddened and disappointed by the whole process. It was so close. I had to leave the Parliamentary gallery and switch off my cellphone until I trusted myself to speak. "I think it was a distinct failure of the democratic system."
Ms Martin would now be focusing her time on building the newly-formed Exit New Zealand – a chapter of Australian Philip Nitschke's organisation Exit Australia. The group would be pro-active in pushing for the voluntary euthanasia issue to go to a binding referendum, in the hope that it would become law. "I want the legal option. I believe most New Zealanders feel that way. They want a legal option open to them, but at present they don't have that," Ms Martin said.
An attempt to legalize euthanasia in New Zealand died an early death late Wednesday, when lawmakers voted narrowly against a bill that would have allowed seriously ill people to ask a physician to help them kill themselves.
The Death with Dignity Bill was defeated in its first reading by 60 votes to 57. An individual member of parliament (MP) introduced the bill, not the government, and MPs were allowed to vote according to their conscience, rather than along party lines. It placed the euthanasia issue before the New Zealand parliament for the first time since 1995, when an almost identical measure was defeated by a considerably larger margin. A similar attempt is now not expected to come up for another several years.
Peter Brown, a member of the small New Zealand First Party, introduced the bill. If passed into law, it would have required a national referendum to be held before euthanasia became legal.
Opinion polls have shown that a large majority of New Zealanders would vote in favor of such a referendum, although euthanasia opponents argue that the wording of the questions in surveys can have a significant impact on the outcome.
Brown expressed frustration Wednesday night that parliament had not sent the bill on to a select committee for full consideration, saying MPs had "let the people of New Zealand down." During the sometimes-emotional debate earlier, Brown urged colleagues to vote to send the bill ahead. "I believe everyone who has led a decent, law-abiding life is entitled, when his or her time has come, to die with dignity," he said. Parliament heard several accounts of friends or family members who had suffered before dying.
One of those arguing against the bill was the leader of the official opposition National Party, Bill English, who was quoted as telling lawmakers that those supporting euthanasia were often more concerned about themselves than the loved one who was suffering.
"This is always how the argument arises: 'I want death with dignity because it gives me discomfort to watch the pain.'
"Well, pain is part of life, and watching it is part of our humanity, and many of us have become more human for having watched it, whether we liked it or not," he said. English also warned that the most vulnerable members of the community could be put at risk by the proposals.
Earlier, the New Zealand Medical Association argued against the bill, saying if it became law, doctors would be required to act in an unethical manner. "Doctor-assisted suicide and euthanasia involve taking people who are at their weakest and most vulnerable and placing them in a situation where they believe their only alternative is to kill themselves," said the association's chairman, Dr. Tricia Briscoe. "How a society treats its weakest, most in need and most vulnerable members tests its moral and ethical tone."
Euthanasia opponents have called for more resources to be made available to institutions providing palliative care to dying patients.
Wednesday's debate on the bill was watched by Lesley Martin, a euthanasia campaigner who faces attempted murder charges after she published a book in which she admitted trying to help her terminally ill mother commit suicide.
On Tuesday, one of the world's most controversial euthanasia advocates, Australian doctor Philip Nitschke, launched a branch of his pressure group in New Zealand, where he said there had been a recent surge of interest. Martin is to head the group's New Zealand branch.
Controversial euthanasia tool, the Exit bag, may soon be available in New Zealand. The creator of the bag Dr Philip Nitschke plans to set up a New Zealand chapter of his voluntary euthanasia organisation. He says Exit New Zealand will run alongside the Australian branch, enabling the organisation to apply more pressure to both Governments.
Dr Nitschke is currently running workshops in Australia teaching people how to make the bags, and hopes to introduce the seminars to New Zealand in the near future. He says having more of a presence in New Zealand makes sense as 10 per cent of his organisation's membership comes from New Zealand.
The proposed Death with Dignity Bill is expected to have its first reading in Parliament Wednesday.
The bag, which has an adjustable collar, works with the help of a sedative drug, often Nembutal. The patient falls asleep with his or her head in the bag. While unconscious, the patient uses up all the oxygen in the bag, dying from hypoxia.
Philip Nitschke has announced the opening of a New Zealand chapter of his voluntary euthanasia organisation EXIT. Dr Nitschke said EXIT NZ had been set up in response to public demand and a need to support increasing calls for legislative change across the Tasman. Dr Nitschke said he had been struck by the number of New Zealanders who wanted to join EXIT when he visited the country for a series of workshops this year. "Around 10 per cent of our members are from New Zealand and it has become increasingly clear to me that the speed with which the cause of voluntary euthanasia has taken root in that country requires greater attention from us in Australia," Dr Nitschke said in a statement.
The announcement came days before the New Zealand parliament debates a private member's bill to legalise voluntary euthanasia. "Once again, we look likely to trail New Zealand on an issue of social progress and development," Dr Nitschke said.
It also came before EXIT NZ principal Lesley Martin is to stand trial next month over the death of her terminally ill mother. "Her plight and the need to help defend people like Lesley has also been a major motivating factor in setting up a New Zealand chapter," Dr Nitschke said.
Dr Nitschke said EXIT NZ would also help to increase the knowledge and skills flow between the two countries. "There has been enormous interest in what we here in Australia have been doing with the development of the CO (carbon monoxide) generator and other devices," he said. "We, in turn, could draw on the experience of those Kiwis like Ralph Vincent and Lesley Martin who have continued to champion the cause of voluntary euthanasia, despite continuing pressure from the courts and other NZ authorities."
Nine months after obeying his dying wife and helping her kill herself, Alexander Gamble Maxwell yesterday sought something simple for himself. "I just want it to end, and to be left alone," he said.
Jostling against the gathered media, Maxwell, 56, of the Melbourne suburb of Kew, left Victoria's Supreme Court on a suspended jail sentence after he had pleaded guilty to aiding or abetting his wife Margaret's suicide. In sentencing Maxwell to 18 months' jail, suspended for 18 months, Justice John Coldrey, his voice breaking, said: "Since the law continues to regard what you did as an offence, the denunciation of it and the deterrence of others remain elements of any sentence to be imposed.
"However, I do not believe that thoughtful members of the community, knowing all the facts relating to you personally and the unique circumstances of this tragic case, would regard your immediate imprisonment as necessary.
"In my view this is a case where justice may be tempered with mercy."
The judge said Maxwell, witnessing his wife's ever increasing suffering and faced with her wish to die, felt obliged to help her, despite his misgivings and distress.
Mrs Maxwell, 59, who had had a mastectomy, was already wasted from inoperable cancers in her chest wall, lymph nodes, ribs, spine and pituitary gland when she died on October 19 last year.
In sentencing, Justice Coldrey said Mrs Maxwell, who was diagnosed with cancer in 1994, was a strong-willed and single-minded person "very concerned about being in control of her own destiny".
By August last year she had only months to live. The judge said she selected a grave site at the Phillip Island cemetery and, when Maxwell persuaded her not to starve herself to death, "she made you promise to assist her to end her life if her health did not improve", Justice Coldrey said.
"None of us would wish to face the dilemma with which you were confronted," he told Maxwell.
On the day Mrs Maxwell died, Maxwell, following a method his wife had read in the book Final Exit, hired a helium bottle and bought a plastic bag and length of hose.
He then drove her to their caravan on a block of land at Phillip Island, where he helped her die. "Her very last wish," he told police, "was that she wanted to lay down in nice clean pyjamas in a nice clean bed and cuddle up under the doona."
Maxwell rang a funeral director, then lay with his wife. Police arrived soon after.
The euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke yesterday praised Justice Coldrey's decision. "It is with some relief that we've seen a very compassionate decision handed down," he said. "Alexander Maxwell had already gone through more than anyone should have to go through when motivated by kindness, compassion and love." Although the decision was comforting for those considering helping a loved one to die, it offered no guarantees, Dr Nitschke said. "Knowing they're risking a decade in prison, people have to be careful."
A spokesman for the NSW Right to Life Association, David Cotton, welcomed the conviction but would not comment on whether a custodial sentence should have been imposed. "We welcome the conviction, for it demonstrates that the taking of a life - no matter how compassionately motivated - is breaking the law," he said. "If we were to compare sentences, we would say lenient sentences do weaken the protection that homicide laws give society."
Yesterday's decision is the second such ruling by Justice Coldrey. In April last year, he handed down an 18-month suspended sentence to Raymond John Hood, who was charged with assisting the suicide of his lover, Daryl Colley, in April 2001. Hood, then 31, testified that Mr Colley, who had HIV and was depressed, had taken Panadeine tablets and had asked Hood to help him. The plan was that if the tablets did not work, Hood was to suffocate him. Hood later told police that the tablets failed, Mr Colley was taking too long to die and that he covered his lover's nose and mouth with his hand to suffocate him. There was no evidence that Hood actually caused Mr Colley's death by obstructing his airways. Unlike Maxwell, Hood told the court he believed it was "morally wrong" to watch his lover die.
Judge Coldrey said yesterday it was "not the function of court to enter on a debate on euthanasia, combining as it does issues of law, medicine and morality". He said the law recognised a person's right to take his or her own life, but prohibited assisting or encouraging anyone in that course of action.
Lesley Martin is facing charges of attempting to kill her dying mother Joy. She writes of her campaign to have euthanasia legalised.
Funny how life has a habit of spinning you round isn't it? And sometimes it's not funny at all. If someone had told me five years ago that I'd be in the position I am now, and that my mother had died, I would have laughed in their face… or cried, or both.
In the past few months there's been a bit of both. Laughter? Surely not. But sometimes that's the only way to get through those days when it feels as though the whole world is against you. Such is the feeling of "being in the crapper", as my husband so eloquently put it.
I get the feeling that in writing To Die Like a Dog, I've annoyed a good cross-section of the population. Let's see: the medical profession, hospice, the church (especially the pope), the judiciary, a yet-to-be-counted percentage of MPs, definitely the police and most certainly every individual who feels compelled to dictate to those around him how they should live their lives.
But, as Clark Gable - my mother's favourite actor - used to say "frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn". Because the people who have been brave enough to contact me since To Die Like A Dog was released, complete strangers who have trusted me with their most painful and dangerous memories, are the people I'm fighting for now, and for all those people who are blissfully unaware as yet of how cruel dying can be at times.
On a personal level, yes, for the people I love as well, because I never want to be in this position again and I feel so strongly that no one should be.
I believe in personal autonomy and freedom of choice.
These are my reasons for supporting Peter Brown's Death with Dignity Bill. The time has come to begin working on this issue. The cry for voluntary euthanasia legislation will not be silenced. The voices are only going to become louder, stronger, more strident.
In 1997, the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust funded a study on euthanasia by a Dunedin GP, Dr David Crook. He concluded that "New Zealand should prepare itself now for possible introduction of voluntary euthanasia. The first reason is that those who are requesting voluntary euthanasia are being denied their choice because we are not ready for it. If we can become ready, we are obliged to do so. The second reason is that we should prepare for all future eventualities including widespread open flouting of the law".
Six years on, what progress have we made? None. So, every few months another case enters the spotlight, and another New Zealander faces the courts for assisting someone they love to die as peacefully as possible, according to their wishes. The only legal response we have to these cases is a serious criminal charge with life-changing consequences.
The courts deliberate and agonise over the obvious mercy aspect of the situations, handing down sentences reflective of the compassionate humanitarian nature of the cases. When are we going to stop attempting to slap Band Aids on this and start addressing the issue, before people are branded as criminals? Hell, I haven't even been to depositions yet and I can't exercise my real estate agents' licence in order to assist my husband in his business. The Real Estate Institute is OK, but the licensing board is not, stating that it's in the best interests of the public that my application be declined. So much for innocent until proven guilty.
However, the support for voluntary euthanasia legislation is well documented at a steady 70-74% but is disseminated, the exception being the voluntary euthanasia societies, of which there are two. Now there's a thing. You'd think that in a country our size, it would make sense to amalgamate, to form one cohesive unit to best make use of resources. That is, of course, assuming that such a group exists to do anything more than finance the same representatives, year after year, to attend international conferences and distribute quarterly newsletters that outline what everyone else is doing overseas to push for change. Do I sound a bit miffed? I had (perhaps naively) assumed support because I was open in everything I was doing, confident that they actually understood my efforts. However, all such illusions were dispersed the day I came home to find on my voicemail a very strange recording of a telephone conversation between the "official spokes-person" for New Zealand VE and another person. No accompanying message explained why the recording had been left or by whom, it was just a segment of a conversation in which the spokesperson was openly hostile about me.
So. That was the hierarchy of one group. The "official spokesperson" of the other was even more openly hostile at a recent conference, not realising, bless him, that he was talking to my husband, despite having been introduced and having conversed with him at length. Please forgive me now, for abandoning hope that the New Zealand VE movement as it stands will actually assist anything. I think it can be best summed up by the comment of one of its committee recently: "but if legislation comes in, what will we do?!"
Those members of the various voluntary euthanasia groups (and there are certainly many informed, enlightened members that I know of personally) and any person interested in supporting the most significant social reform in our history now have the option of joining Exit (Australia/New Zealand). Exit is committed to listening to you, ensuring your voices are heard and continuing projects that illustrate to our politicians the need for humane legislation. When I was arrested on March 6, I was staggered to hear that Peter Brown's bill was drawn from the private members' ballot box on the same day. It goes to its first reading in the next few weeks and I would urge all MPs to vote with a collective conscience. I would urge those members of the medical profession who not only agree with VE but have practised it, albeit covertly, to network and make a stand in support of this legislation. I would urge every person to embrace this legislation. Ironically, those people who are stringently opposed to VE should be the ones lobbying the hardest for this legislation.
The euthanasia that exists in our society has reached the point now where legislation is needed to ensure that it is, indeed, voluntary.
Interest in To Die Like A Dog continues to spread. As a result of a recent Exit conference in Sydney, interest within Australia is growing and Australian distribution has been arranged. Negotiations are developing with an interested Chinese publisher for rights to mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan and film/TV rights have been optioned to an Academy Award-winning, Los Angeles-based film production company. It all sounds very busy, but it comes in waves and when the waves threaten to swamp me, I have a handful of close friends and my rock of a husband who throw me rope. They know how hard it's been for me to work with this, to constantly keep a lid on my feelings so that I can talk about it all with a degree of clarity because at the heart of it all is still my mother, the love we shared, and every shocking thing she endured in her last months. They know my frustration at being in limbo, in no-man's land, waiting. They can see the tsunami coming, as can I, and when it does I shall take a leaf from Clark Gable's book because the law of this land cannot, will not, hurt me more than it already has.
Lesley Martin, PO Box 7160, Wanganui, email: m-press@xtra.co.nz
A rally to celebrate the first anniversary of the death of a euthanasia campaigner sent a misguided message to young people that suicide was okay, right-to-life advocates said.
About 70 people gathered on the steps of Adelaide's Parliament House to commemorate the death of Shirley Nolan, the Australian responsible for establishing the world's first bone marrow donor register, who took her own life after suffering Parkinson's disease for 25 years.
Catholic priest and director of the Southern Cross Bioethics Institute, John Fleming, said the rally was misguided and insensitive. "It is misguided because Ms Nolan's death was not a case of euthanasia where one person kills another, but a case of self-killing," Dr Fleming said. "It is insensitive because the decision of some politicians to celebrate her death by speaking at a political rally sends a clear message to the community as a whole, including young people, that suicide is somehow okay."
GP Toni Turnbull, one of four pro-lifers to attend Tuesday's rally, said legalising euthanasia would give too much power to doctors, who would then take the easy way out. Dr Turnbull said she had been approached by two patients who wanted to die. "But really, they aren't saying please kill me, they are saying this (pain) is terrible, I can't stand it," she said. "Most intolerable pain you can make tolerable."
She said euthanasia laws would lead to the death of not only those that were hopelessly ill but also "old ladies that don't want to be a trouble.
"It's a very dangerous thing to say someone has the right to take away the life of another person. We should never allow it," she said.
SA Greens MP Kris Hanna rejected religious arguments against euthanasia and told the rally: "According to testament, Jesus could have avoided that death but he chose to let it happen. "How can people then be condemned (for taking their own lives)? That's the great irony and I think it's unanswered by your critics."
Controversial euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke, in Adelaide to see six patients, scoffed at suggestions the rally would encourage youth suicide. "Are we to do nothing because of the very, very vexed problem of youth suicide?" he said.
Fred Thompson cared for his ill wife - who 'couldn't even raise a knife and fork to her mouth' - for 10 years before killing her.
A NSW man who has confessed to killing his terminally ill wife has still not been charged by police almost 11 months after her death. Fred Thompson, from the Central Coast, committed what he describes as an "act of love" on his beloved wife Katerina on August 12 last year. The 70-year-old retired plumber gave his sick wife of 43 years sleeping pills before holding a pillow over her face in their Toukley home. Mrs Thompson, 62, had battled with multiple sclerosis for 36 years and for the last 10 years of her life, Mr Thompson cared for her full-time. "She had lost every function she had except her hearing," he said. "She couldn't even raise a knife and fork to her mouth. She said to me, 'I would like you to do this final thing for me', and I said, 'do you know what you're asking me to do?' "
The couple discussed euthanasia many times and Mrs Thompson wanted her husband to decide when the time was right. "She said, 'I don't want to know when or how, I'll let you make up your mind,' " he said. "I put the pillow over her and a minute later she was gone. I went in the other room and sat and cried."
About six weeks after killing and burying his 'Katie', Mr Thompson confessed to his crime. "No one would have charged me," he said. "But I had to be a man. I'm not guilty of murder or manslaughter. I did it and I call it an act of love. I could face prison for the rest of my life or what's left of it."
Mrs Thompson's death certificate said she died from her crippling disease.
A police spokeswoman said Wyong detectives have taken so long to complete their investigation because of a number of factors. She said they had to obtain statements from his son in New Zealand, Mrs Thompson's body had been cremated and the crime scene had been contaminated. Police are preparing a brief of evidence, to be delivered to the Department of Public Prosecutions at the end of the month.
The father-of-two said detectives had been sympathetic to his case, but he believes he will be charged.
"They've speeded up the process since I went public," he said. "Basically I think they didn't want to charge me. I have good relations with the two detectives." Mr Thompson said police wanted to take into account that he was dying from cancer. He is currently refusing to take any medication for his illness and his daughter won't speak to him, but Mr Thompson is soldiering on, promoting euthanasia.
He is organising a pro-euthanasia meeting on the Central Coast at the end of the month, to be attended by mercy killing activist Dr Philip Nitschke.
"I want to help as many people as I can to change the legislation," he said. Mr Thompson believes he has less than a year to live, but he can see a bright side. "I want to join my wife."