Euthanasia? All life is terminal!

While I appreciate that the Hippocratic Oath in effect stipulates physicians should  “do no harm”, this is not the end of the matter.

To only allow (or disallow) a “terminally” ill person to decide when they wish to end their life is looking at this problem from the wrong end. It is not if they are ill, terminally or otherwise, but a person’s quality of life – their perception of that quality, which should be the main issue.

Recall and understand that all life, repeat ALL life, is terminal – we cannot escape the end. It is terminal! Sooner or later we all die – ill or not. Palliative care, however well administered, will not halt this process. Furthermore it is impossible to accurately determine the exact time or date in the future as to when a person will die. So to stipulate a time or date (following the Victorian “model”, six months is suggested), sometime in the future which may determine whether or not a person is “allowed to die” is regrettable, to say the least. 

Furthermore, why should anyone have to “live” according to another person’s expectations? We have no “right” to interfere. It is not our life; it is not our choice.

We, and by “we” I include all humans, were presumably born to live in the world. Now if a human being decides, because of the status of their health, that the life he or she is currently experiencing in the world is not a “quality life”, who is to say they are wrong? We, you or I, cannot experience that person’s view with all the emotional, stressful or painful events they may have suffered or endured during their life to date. How can anyone, other than the person concerned, determine what level of “quality” is acceptable or unacceptable? 

We can have no idea how this expression of life plays out; or how life events (particularly their health) affect a person’s outlook, towards themselves or others – no one can “know” this except the person concerned. They make a choice based on such experience – good, bad or indifferent. It is their decision. You or I are in no position to say they are wrong. 

Similarly, what evidence, what insight do we have such that we can proclaim that a particular person’s view or expression of life (as currently experienced) is wrong and that we (or at least the “experts”) alone know better? We may not like or approve of their view but - so what! 

Likewise, what evidence is there for the “experts” to state that those who wish to end their life may be suffering from a “mental disorder” (hence the proposed requirement - for a totally subjective - psychiatric assessment on any person wishing to end their life). Disordered from what? From “normal”? As far as I can determine there is no accepted definition of “normal”. Possibly those considered “mentally disordered” react to life’s trials and tribulations differently from those around them. Are they “wrong”? Or are those who condemn euthanasia just being intolerant and lacking in understanding, compassion or empathy? 

Then there is widespread over prescription of antidepressant and antipsychotic medications (remember that, allegedly, one in five people (1 in 5) will, allegedly, suffer from a “mental illness” in their lifetime). There are many reasons why all concerned should be critical about psycho-pharmaceutical drug treatment, such as uncertainty regarding the causes of mental disorders, the problematic accuracy of the few diagnostic tools available, poor understanding regarding the mechanism of drug actions and their many side-effects together with the related problem of publication bias. Then there is commercial conflict of interest, [Note:The reanalysis of the – originally ghost written - GlaxoSmithKline Study 329 relating totheir antidepressant drug formulation paroxetine,Paxil, (also known as Serotax or Aropax) provides an illuminating, if unfortunate, example of these issues]. 

Also there is extreme pain. Anything that results in an actual or perceived loss of personal control will (possibly) bring about a loss of dignity and of “hope” - those most subjective attitudes of mind.

Furthermore for some to say that only God can decide when any person dies is surely a gross over assumption – how do they know? What special insight do they possess? Is it not possible, because (I assume) God gave us free will, that God may have already decided to allow a person who wants to die, to die?

Then what about those who say that the legalization of euthanasia would see the end of compassion? Surely it would be more compassionate to allow someone who wishes to end their life to do so in a private setting of their choice, with (possibly) family and friends in attendance?

Far rather this than, to get their way, forcing a person to take extreme actions – starving, drinking or drugging themselves to death; shooting themselves; jumping off a high rise building or cliff; driving at high speed into the support column of a freeway overpass or into a tree on a country road; consume rat poison or drink some corrosive liquid (such as ammonia) and take four days, in agony, to die.

Recall also that the British philosopher David Hume (1711 –1776) said, “I believe that no man ever threw away Life while it was worth keeping.” 

Finally I will repeat a quote, from the Indian sageJiddu Krishnamurti (1895-1986), who said, “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society”. 

There we have it – in a nutshell! 

Dr Nitschke and assisted suicide.

Dear Oh dearie me! Here we go again. People are getting on their high horses over who may die, by what means and when. The Australian Medical Board (or any such organization) should know better than to dictate what a doctor may or may not do, in this case Dr Philip Nitschke, who has had his medical practitioners licence suspended because he admitted to supporting 45-year-old Perth man Nigel Brayley in his decision to commit suicide despite knowing he was not terminally ill.

People differ in their attitude to life and their emotional experiences to the daily “grind”. Who, other than the person concerned, is “qualified” to determine if they are “right” or “wrong” about this?

If any person has decided, for whatever reason, that life is no longer worth living and they are determined to end their life, who has the right, the knowledge or the moral authority to state that such a decision is “wrong”?

To claim that there is no such thing as “rational” suicide is ignoring the facts. The world we live in today – our dysfunctional society that allows the irrational behaviour, the injustices practiced (racism, sexism, domestic and child abuse) , the increasing prevalence of homelessness and poverty, the staggering disparity between the very rich and the very poor all give rise to frustration, to stress and to anger. All this may lead to despair because of a loss of control which in turn may lead to depression and then, possibly, to a person’s determination to escape from life, as currently experienced, by whatever means available.

Are they wrong? Are they “mentally ill”? Are they no longer “rational”?

Look to the cause – not the result. It is worthwhile repeating the quote from Jiddu Krishnamurti (May 12, 1895 to February 17, 1986) that, “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society”.

For any “authority” – statutory body, organization or individual – to demand that any person they know who wishes to end their life MUST be directed to a “mental health professional” and compelled to be assessed and compelled to accept treatment is wrong. Such a process and such treatment, in my experience, consists principally of medications.

Before anyone says, “OK. What is wrong with that”? please read what follows below.

“UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FDA Product Information Warning:-
Patients with major depressive disorder, both adult and paediatric, may experience worsening of their depression and/or the emergence of suicidal ideation and behaviour (suicidality), whether or not they are taking antidepressant medications, and this risk may persist until significant remission occurs. Although there has been a long-standing concern that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depression and the emergence of suicidality in certain patients, a causal role for antidepressants in inducing such behaviours has not been established. Nevertheless, patients being treated with antidepressants should be observed closely for clinical worsening and suicidality, especially at the beginning of a course of drug therapy, or at the time of dose changes, either increases or decreases.  Consideration should be given to changing the therapeutic regimen, including possibly discontinuing the medication, in patients whose depression is persistently worse or whose emergent suicidality is severe, abrupt in onset, or was not part of the patient’s presenting symptoms.”

Now, is there still reason to believe that medication is the best form of treatment as dictated and directed by a “Mental Health Professional”?

Furthermore the findings in the 2012 report of the Australian National Mental Health Commission are very disturbing. According to the report the Commissioners found that:

“Most Australians may not know that treatments with prescribed psychiatric drugs may lead to worse physical health. There are increased risks for some specific treatments such as antipsychotics and for those with underlying vulnerabilities such as diabetes. This can mean that the antipsychotic medications that are prescribed to manage severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, contribute to the risk of having severe physical illnesses.

The national survey of psychotic illness uncovered the extent of general health problems for people in this group:

·         Diabetes was at a rate over 3 times found in the general population.

·         One third carried the risk of a ‘cardiovascular event’ within five years.

·         Half have metabolic syndrome, which is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and diabetes as a side effect of prescribed antipsychotic medications.

·         They have nearly twice the rate of being obesely overweight.

·         They smoke at a rate 2 to 3 times higher than the general population.

·         They have high blood cholesterol levels at 5 times the rate of the general population.

It is evident that people with the most severe mental illness have a worse level of overall health than people with more common mental illnesses, which compounds the health difficulties they need to overcome.”

NOW is it still considered appropriate to subject anyone suspected of “mental illness” to this form of treatment?

For some to state that suicide is wrong because “only God can decide when a person should die” – how do they know? What about the possibility that God may have already “decided” and allowed the expression of free will, that God gave us all, thus freeing the person who wants to die, to die, in the manner of their choosing?

Presumably free will allows a person to make a choice – good, bad or indifferent.  What is “wrong” with that?  

For the Medical Board of Australia to suspend euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke because he "presents a serious risk to public health and safety", is ludicrous and beyond reason.