Sometimes I wonder if I should ever raise my head above the parapet. Some days it feels like new ideas are simply too hard. The publicity surrounding my most recent plans to establish voluntary euthanasia consulting clinics in Adelaide and Hobart ahead of likely pending legislation, has clearly raised many concerns. Strong condemnation has been received by some in the euthanasia movement. Several have used this issue as a reason to resign from Exit International.
This was not a complete surprise. It is a re-run of the fallout from my involvement with the death of retired Western Australian academic Lisette Nigot in 2003. This public death of a well 80 year old prompted considerable criticism from a number of previous Exit supporters. A number resigned. The argument: Her story will prove the existence of the “slippery slope” and be used to undermine political support for legislative change.
In retrospect, I’m glad I supported Lisette. Her actions redefined the voluntary euthanasia issue, moving it away from the simple but restrictive goal of legislative change to allow lawful help for the terminally ill, to that of enunciation of the much broader principal; the right to a peaceful death of ALL rational adults.
My involvement with the death of Lisette also marked a turning point and saw Exit International move away from traditional voluntary euthanasia societies wedded to the goal or restrictive legislative change. This divergence has now resurfaced onece again, this time over the proposed euthanasia consulting clinics. So let’s clear the air
In the words of the American Distinguished History Professor David Thelen, ‘the challenge of history is to recover the past and introduce it to the present’. So, too, the idea of an Exit Clinic.
Back in 1999 when I first floated the idea of a specialized clinic, I was threatened with deregistration by the Australian Medical Association. In apparent unison, Right to Life Australia announced I would be ‘thumbing [my] nose at the law on homicide. Like so many politicians before and after him, then Premier of Victoria Jeff Kennett, simply ran for cover.
Back then, only those involved in the voluntary euthanasia movement supported my idea. My, how things have changed.
Today, it is not only VE advocates who support the idea of a clinic it seems the general public are largely in concordance. Recent polls have shown community support for a service which coordinates the professionals and support services required for the successful introduction of an assisted suicide law.
The courage of South Australian politicians such as Labor’s Steph Key and her Tasmania counterparts such as Green’s leader, Nick McKim and Labor premier Lara Giddings shows that the issue of end of life choices is very much alive. Of course, I have long known this as I have watched attendance numbers at my meetings and seminars rise steadily over the past decade.
While the well elderly are ever-content to come along and learn how to die reliably and peacefully (just in case), self-help knowledge cannot always be a replacement for a strong legislative framework. This is because assistance will always be needed by a small minority of folk, regardless of their age.
There will always be people for whom illness brings utter incapacity and devastation. Whether it is a long, drawn-out, degenerative disease such as MS or an acute bout of terminal cancer, none of us knows what is around the corner and the best laid plans can and do go ary.
For these people, good end of life legislation is a must. It should be their human right not to suffer more than is necessary. While some may believe that the final moments of life offer a redemptive satisfaction one gets closer to God for the vast majority of secular Australia, dying before one’s time is nothing short of tragic.
No one wants to die before their time has come. However, given that some of us will have our lives cut short, surely choosing how we die is the next best thing.
This is why voluntary Exit Clinics will be essential once a law is passed. It will be essential in order to ensure that patients know what is involved. No use putting your hand up to die only to be told that you don’t fit the bill at least not the one passed by your elected representatives up on the hill.
I know this because this is what happened to Broken Hill taxi driver, Max Bell, when he drove up to Darwin immediately after the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act came into force back in 1996.
Dying of stomach cancer, it was not that Max did not fit the bill, it was rather that there was no coordination of services. As a result, Max could not get his paperwork completed. Furious at a system that had let him down, he checked himself out of hospital and with only the clothes on his back, drove (and vomited) his way back south to his small cottage in outback New South Wales.
His parting words struck equal amounts of terror and shame into me then, as they do today. A former boxer, professional bodyguard and pro-golfer, Max told me ‘you didn’t do your homework Boy’ and he was right.
I did not have a network of medical professionals in place to assess his condition and file his paperwork, as the legislation required. Nor did I have a psychologist, counsellor or social worker on hand to support him in working through the legislated safeguards. While I did what I could, it was never enough.
In suggesting a euthanasia clinics for Adelaide and Hobart ahead of the passing of the proposed pieces of legislation, I am, if you like, making good that Max Bell did not die in vain. Back in 1996, I swore to myself that should Australia ever have a law again and should I be involved that this time I would be prepared. This is why an Exit Clinic makes sense and a lot of it.
To suggest that the mere act of passing the Key Bill in South Australia or the Giddings/ McKim Bill in Tasmania is the end of the story is naïve. Rather, it is the beginning of our story, so let's plan ahead and let's be sensible in the hope that the politicians follow suit.
Chinese Nembutal - Is it effective?
