NEWS ARCHIVE:
Roman Catholic Diocese of Saskatoon
Editor: Kiply Lukan Yaworski, Communications
Phone: 306-242-1500; Toll Free: 1-877-661-5005
[email protected]
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition
speaker outlines dangers of legalizing
euthanasia and assisted suicide
By Kiply Lukan Yaworski
Legalizing euthanasia and assisted
suicide will threaten vulnerable people,
the director of the Euthanasia
Prevention Coalition told a gathering in
Saskatoon Oct. 20, 2013.
Alex Schadenberg, Executive Director of the Euthanasia
Prevention Coalition spoke in Saskatoon Oct. 20, 2013.
While supporters of legalizing
euthanasia and assisted suicide assert
that this is a matter of providing people
with a personal choice, the real issue is
about the safety of everyone in society,
said Alex Schadenberg.
“I don’t live in a Utopia,” he said at the
talk co-sponsored by Alliance for Life
and Campaign Life Coalition Saskatchewan, suggesting that if euthanasia or assisted suicide is
legalized, abuses are inevitable.
Legalizing euthanasia also opens the door to ever-broadening use of the procedure, as
incidents and advocates push the envelope of what can be allowed, Schadenberg said.
He cited cases and studies from countries and states that have legalized euthanasia, which
demonstrate that safeguards do not always work, and abuses do occur. Medical personnel do
not always abide by regulations, with studies revealing that vulnerable people, such as the
disabled and the elderly – those whom one Dutch doctor describes as “bed blockers”—are
being killed without their consent.
Recent studies concerning the Belgian euthanasia law show that 32 percent of the assisted
deaths are done without request and 47 per cent of the assisted deaths go unreported in one
region. “Let us not be naive, and think it is all voluntary,” Schadenberg said.
CONTINUED ....
PAGE 2
Where assisted suicide and euthanasia have been legalized,
there have been incremental extensions over time, broadening
what the law covers, to go beyond what was originally
envisioned, he said.
In the Netherlands, after the legalization of euthanasia for
consenting adults, the “Groningen protocol” was developed to
regulate the euthanasia of newborn children, in the wake of incidents in which newborns with
disabilities were killed to alleviate suffering. In Belgium there is now a debate about expanding
the law there to allow euthanasia for children with disabilities, or those with dementia,
Schadenberg reported.
There is a strong link between depression and requests for euthanasia and suicide, he said. For
instance, a 2005 study in the Netherlands by M.L. van der Lee reported that the request for
euthanasia was four times higher among patients demonstrating depression. “Almost half of all
the requests for euthanasia were made by patients who were depressed and 44 percent of the
patients who were depressed requested euthanasia, “ he said.
In Belgium, the son of Lieve De Troyer is taking issue with the euthanasia death of his mother,
who suffered from chronic depression. Although the 64-year-old woman had no other disease or
incurable condition, her euthanasia death was carried out on the recommendation of a single
psychiatrist, described Schadenberg. Her family was only informed of the decision the day after
her death.
Recently, in the Netherlands a woman was killed by lethal injection because she was deemed to
be suffering unbearably from the prospect of going blind, related Schadenberg. “Does this issue
affect how we view disability and those who are living with disability?” he queried.
Disability rights advocate Amy Hasbrouck of the group “Toujours Vivant - Not Dead Yet” states:
“People with disabilities, chronic illness and seniors are negatively affected by assisted suicide
and euthanasia because it leads to the impression that our lives are lacking in meaning and value
as compared to other Canadians.”
It is important to clearly define terms, and examine the language of legislation and the words
used by advocates of euthanasia and assisted suicide, said Schadenberg.
“Euthanasia is an action or omission, which is intentionally done to cause death. There is a clear
intention to cause death. Death is the result, usually done by lethal injection,” he said. “It only
differs from homicide in its intention to relieve suffering.”
Withdrawing or withholding medical treatment is not euthanasia, he stressed, “especially
treatment which is useless, or burdensome or futile.” Using large doses of medication to control
pain or suffering is not euthanasia, nor is sedation, he added.
Assisted suicide involves providing assistance for someone to kill himself or herself. “It might be
a doctor who writes a lethal prescription, knowing that you are going to use that lethal
prescription to kill yourself, whereas in the case of euthanasia, they are giving a lethal injection
CONTINUED ....
to you,” he said.
PAGE 3
A common myth holds that there is no difference between
killing and letting die, even though this is clearly not true,
added Schadenberg. By saying there is no difference, advocates
can argue that euthanasia is already happening, so we may as
well legalize it so it can be regulated, he said.
In Quebec, Bill 52 (“an Act respecting end-of-life care”) is an
attempt to legalize euthanasia through the back door,
Schadenberg said. “The Quebec government is proposing to define euthanasia as ‘medical
treatment,’” with health care falling under provincial jurisdiction, whereas the Criminal Code is a
federal concern.
Both Bill 52 in Quebec and the 2002 Belgian euthanasia law define palliative care as including
“medical aid in dying,” which is actually euthanasia, Schadenberg said. “The doctor will
administer a lethal dose: that’s euthanasia, it isn’t anything else.”
The Quebec bill also refers to “terminal palliative sedation,” without clearly defining the term, he
added. “Palliative sedation and terminal sedation have two different connotations. When you put
it all into one (phrase), what does it mean?”
The Act would create a right to palliative care – but if palliative care includes euthanasia, as it
does in Bill 52, that would therefore create a right to euthanasia, he said. “It’s one thing to say
you are going to legalize euthanasia – which I completely disagree with – but it is another thing
to create a right to euthanasia.”
In the Carter case in British Columbia – which was recently struck down by the provincial court
of appeal and which now may go on to the Supreme Court of Canada – the original ruling said
that the law banning assisted suicide violated the rights of gravely ill or disabled persons,
suggesting they had a “right” to suicide, added Schadenberg. “There has never been a court or a
judgment that has ever said we have a right to suicide.”
By using the language of rights, advocates create an expansive model, cautioned Schadenberg.
Although assisted suicide legislation in the American states of Washington and Oregon originally
intended to address those suffering terminal illness, the reality is that the practice has gone
beyond the original intention, he said. “Here is what they say: you must be suffering a physical or
psychological condition, an incurable, serious illness. And of course, there are incurable, serious
illnesses that are not terminal.” Nor does the legislation define physical or psychological
suffering, he added. “And really, it’s not possible to define that, since it’s about your personal
experience.”
Court challenges continue to come forward, he said, describing a new case in British Columbia
seeking to define spoon feeding as “medical treatment,” and therefore, something that can be
withdrawn.
Schadenberg urged those concerned about the issue of euthanasia and assisted suicide to
continue to write to political representatives, and to support organizations such as the
Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, which is actively working to intervene in assorted court
challenges.