Posted By Annie Lowrey
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 - 3:22 PM
Share
On Friday, Britons Lady Joan and Sir Edward Downes, a prominent orchestral conductor, committed suicide with barbituates provided by the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland. According to British newspapers, Joan, 74, was suffering from terminal pancreatic cancer and had but weeks to live; Edward, 85, was going blind and deaf and did not want to live without her. The couple had been together for 54 years.
The story has reignited the debate over assisted suicide in Britain -- where every family that makes that horrific trip to Zurich commits a political act.
Indeed, in a brief interview with the Evening Standard, the Downes' son said, "It is a very civilized way to end your life, and I don’t understand why the legal position in this country doesn’t allow it." He also mentioned that he and his sister rang the police themselves to inform them of the deaths.
British police are questioning them, as assisting a suicide is illegal in Britain. But the justice system is unlikely to do anything. At least 117 Britons have committed suicide in Switzerland, where it has been legal to help terminally ill people end their life since 1998. No members of their families have ever been prosecuted. Britain, in essence, turns a blind eye.
I don't have much to say about the validity of assisted suicide laws. But one thing about the story struck me.
It's an expensive way to die -- it costs 4,000 Euros for Dignitas' services, plus the cost of bringing out one's family. And, because it is so expensive, only the wealthy seem to choose to do it. The titled Downeses. Businesspeople. University professors. Doctors.
One can imagine other terminally ill patients, in extraordinary pain and with no quality of life, wishing to end their life in a manner of their choosing, but being unable to do so because of the cost.
Britain's laws, de facto, make it possible for the rich to die via assisted suicide, but impossible for the poor to do so.
It reminds me of one of the common arguments over abortion laws. Women in countries like Portugal (which has restrictive abortion laws) or states like South Dakota (where virtually no clinics provide the service) often need to travel far distances to obtain the service. Which means the rich are able, and the poor aren't.
And access to such services should be determined by law, not class.
The difference between abotion and suicide...
...there are many ways to cheaply kill yourself. The same is not true of abortion.
Actually, there are quite a few cheap & relatively easy ways to cause an abortion, too. Specific herbs, hot stones on the belly near childbirth, physical trauma, and (of course) killing the newborn.
It's just that, as with the cheap & easy ways of suicide, most people are frightened of these methods - they haven't been marketed properly.
None of those are even remotely safe.
Killing a newborn is infanticide, not abortion. There's a difference. My religion holds that life begins at birth, not conception, so I believe there is a real difference involved.
Birth control is a lot cheaper than abortion.
You are correct. The cost of a dignified death must be expensive.
This latest example is a great help to those of us who promote the idea of assisted death.
The question is always asked 'why should this be a illegal in England, also Australia and probably every other country other than Switzerland'? An easy question to answer and it is that the church has influenced the governments to such an extent the separation of church and state is a very unlikely result, ever. Until we have a secular society where clearly matters involving governments are totally isolated from the dictates of the church, once restricted to a Sunday morning. Not any more. So many votes seem to depend on politicians receiving the numbers they require to receive a sinecure for life in a comfortable house of government but the baggage that has created by way of future obligation has allowed the church to adopt a far more influential position in 2009.
So until someone has the courage to state clearly up front that assisted death is on my platform and then to see the support he/she receives as a result, we will never know the regard that people have for the idea of dying with dignity. Over the years, certainly in Australia, advocates for this practice have been hounded wherever they have gone, restricted entry also being a penalty in some countries like the UK when there is any indication that they intend to talk about how this can be done at a cheaper rate than the recent deaths this week in Switzerland.
Death is a very profitable sideline for the mercenary churches through their interest and activities in palliative care, hospitals, nursing homes where there is a subtle encouragement for people to include some form of reward for the church in their wills. Certainly the church is hardly known as altruistic any more and needs to fund its very elegant lifestyle. What better way than to prey on the dying, an easy mark.
So, sadly for the older generation who may feel at 75 or 80 that they do not have a reason or a desire for being on the planet, the chance that they will ever receive the approval of any government for a dignified death of their choosing, is unlikely. However, if you were an animal and unable to be of use or with an incurable ailment, assisted death is quite legal. Something quite wrong there. However, the church is not involved in animal welfare so we can dismiss it this way.
As for your question on abortion, the same players are there again supported by compliant politicians who have the right or otherwise to approve the laws pertaining to that matter as well.
Secularity is the answer but a tough road to hoe. The insidious church has penetrated every avenue of human life to their continuing benefit.
it can be difficult to obtain, especially in places that put severe restrictions on abortion.
Really a educative and informative post, the post is good in all regards,I am glad to read this post
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(8)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE