Recent News

NZ Herald 15 December 2017
Family First Comment: “I am a palliative medicine physician with 28 years experience in caring for patients and their families at the end of life. I am affronted by the fact that a politician would imply he understood the finer details of medicine and medical treatment better than me or my colleagues. To Mr Seymour I say, how dare you accuse my profession and my colleagues of illegal practices. How dare you confuse quality and ethical care with the intentional ending of a person’s life. What makes you think you know better than the World Medical Association or the New Zealand Medical Association?… Politicians do great harm to the perception of medical practice, and instil unnecessary fear and anxiety in the minds of the public, by promulgating, on national television, incorrect, misleading and unsubstantiated statements.”
www.PROTECT.org.nz to make a submission

In support of his bill that seeks to change the law in New Zealand, David Seymour claims, “It is ok if a doctor intentionally ends your life by giving you too much morphine and claiming that’s a double effect. All that is ok. All that happens without any regulatory safeguards whatsoever.”

I am a palliative medicine physician with 28 years experience in caring for patients and their families at the end of life.

I am affronted by the fact that a politician would imply he understood the finer details of medicine and medical treatment better than me or my colleagues.

To Mr Seymour I say, how dare you accuse my profession and my colleagues of illegal practices.

How dare you confuse quality and ethical care with the intentional ending of a person’s life. What makes you think you know better than the World Medical Association or the New Zealand Medical Association?

It is unacceptable that such uninformed statements go unopposed. For too long we have retained our professional discipline and shown restraint by not reacting publicly to such loose and ill-informed pronouncements. It is unfortunate to even repeat what has been said, but I do so to explain my justified outrage.

We do not intentionally end the lives of our patients by giving too much morphine. We train under strict supervision according to national and international standards of excellence in the discipline and science of use of morphine and other drugs for symptom control.

Morphine is not used to euthanise people in Netherlands or Belgium, morphine is a very effective analgesic in patients suffering from moderate to severe pain and it is safe in the hands of medical prescribers who are trained as we are in its use.

There is no evidence that doctors are using morphine to kill patients in New Zealand.
There are extensive safeguards in the training and practice of medicine. The correct titration of all the drugs we use to relieve symptoms and minimise side-effects is at the heart of training in palliative medicine.

More and more these days such training occurs at undergraduate and postgraduate levels for all doctors, including GPs and hospital doctors.
Politicians do great harm to the perception of medical practice, and instil unnecessary fear and anxiety in the minds of the public, by promulgating, on national television, incorrect, misleading and unsubstantiated statements.

If Mr Seymour knows he is incorrect, then he is misleading the people. If he does not know that he is incorrect, then he is quite simply showing his abject lack of knowledge on this topic.

• Dr Sinead Donnelly trained as a specialist in general and palliative medicine in Ireland, Scotland and USA. She has worked in Wellington since 2008.
READ MORE: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11959454

National
NO!
Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi, Maggie Barry, Andrew Bayly, David Bennett, Simon Bridges, Simeon Brown, Gerry Brownlee, David Carter, Judith Collins, Jacqui Dean, Sarah Dowie, Bill English, Chris Finlayson, Paul Goldsmith, Jo Hayes, Steven Joyce, Nuk Korako, Denise Lee, Melissa Lee, Tim Macindoe, Todd McClay, Ian McKelvie, Todd Muller, Alfred Ngaro, Simon O’Connor, Parmjeet Parmar, Chris Penk, Shane Reti, Alastair Scott, Nick Smith, Louise Upston, Nicky Wagner, Michael Woodhouse, Jonathan Young, Lawrence Yule (35)
YES
Amy Adams, Paula Bennett, Chris Bishop, Jonathan Coleman, Matt Doocey, Andrew Falloon, Nathan Guy, Harete Hipango, Brett Hudson, Nikki Kaye, Matt King, Barbara Kuriger, Mark Mitchell, Jami-Lee Ross, Scott Simpson, Stuart Smith, Erica Stanford, Anne Tolley, Tim van de Molen, Hamish Walker, Jian Yang (21)

Labour
NO!
David Clark, Anahila Kanongata’a-Suisuiki, Damien O’Connor, Jenny Salesa, William Sio, Jamie Strange, Rino Tirikatene, Phil Twyford, Poto Williams (9)
YES
Kiri Allan, Ginny Andersen, Jacinda Ardern, Tamati Coffey, Liz Craig, Clare Curran, Kelvin Davis, Ruth Dyson, Paul Eagle, Kris Faafoi, Peeni Henare, Chris Hipkins, Raymond Huo, Willie Jackson, Iain Lees-Galloway, Andrew Little, Marja Lubeck, Jo Luxton, Nanaia Mahuta, Trevor Mallard, Kieran McAnulty, Stuart Nash, Greg O’Connor, David Parker, Willow-Jean Prime, Priyanca Radhakrishnan, Grant Robertson, Adrian Rurawhe, Deborah Russell, Carmel Sepuloni, Jan Tinetti, Louisa Wall, Angie Warren-Clark, Duncan Webb, Meka Whaitiri, Michael Wood, Megan Woods (37)

NZ First
YES (All MPs!)
Darroch Ball, Shane Jones, Jenny Marcroft, Ron Mark, Tracey Martin, Clayton Mitchell, Mark Patterson, Winston Peters, Fletcher Tabuteau

Greens
YES (All MPs!)
Marama Davidson, Julie Anne Genter, Golriz Ghahraman, Gareth Hughes, Jan Logie, Eugenie Sage, James Shaw, Chloe Swarbrick

ACT
David Seymour

NewsHub 13 December 2017
A Bill on legalising euthanasia has passed its first reading after gaining majority support in Parliament through a conscience vote.

Seventy-six MPs voted in favour and 44 voted against.

It will now pass to the justice select committee and be open to public submissions.

ACT MP David Seymour’s End of Life Choices Bill seeks to give people those suffering a terminal illness or a grievous or incurable medical condition the option to request medically assisted death.
New Zealand First has supported the bill under the provision that a nationwide referendum is held on the issue.

NZ First MP Tracey Martin said: “Not a single one of us is smarter than the people who placed us here, not a single one of us has more of a conscience or less of a conscience than the people who voted us here. This issue should go to them, this is too big an issue for this House to decide.”

National leader Bill English opposed the Bill, saying it’s not creating a medical procedure but “an exemption from the criminal law against killing for a certain group”.
“I don’t think anyone can in their heart of hearts believe that this bill will make life safer for the disabled, that it’ll make our community more warmly embracing of our aging population. Who pretends that?”

Green MP Julie Anne Genter supported the Bill, but wants to see it amended to ensure there was no risk of abuse particularly for those with disabilities and other vulnerable people.
READ MORE: http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/12/assisted-dying-bill-passes-first-reading-in-parliament.html

Keep up with family issues in NZ.
Receive our weekly emails direct to your Inbox.

Media Release – EuthanasiaFree NZ  13 December 2017
Family First Comment: Widespread confusion about what euthanasia actually is…
“Dr Amanda Landers is a palliative care doctor in the South Island, caring for people with a range of life-limiting conditions. She also gives presentations to nurses, doctors and the general public. She says that many patients, and even some doctors, are unaware that stopping life-prolonging treatment and medication is legal and ethically acceptable. This means the person dies from their underlying illness – which is completely different from an intervention which deliberately ends their life prematurely.”

A new Curia Market Research poll shows New Zealanders are confused about what ‘assisted dying’ even means.
“This groundbreaking poll challenges the validity of most other polls on the issue. It shows that support for euphemisms such as ‘assisted dying’, ‘aid in dying’ or ‘assistance to end their life’ should not be taken as support for a law change,” says Renée Joubert, executive officer of Euthanasia-Free NZ.

The more strongly a person supports ‘assisted dying’, the more likely they are confused about what it includes.
Of those who strongly support ‘assisted dying’:

• 85% thought it includes turning off life support
• 79% thought it includes ‘do not resuscitate’ (no CPR) requests
• 67% thought it includes the stopping of medical tests, treatments and surgeries.

In all three cases a person would die from their underlying medical condition – of natural causes.

These ‘end-of-life choices’ are legal and people can make their wishes known via Advance Care Planning.

Dr Amanda Landers is a palliative care doctor in the South Island, caring for people with a range of life-limiting conditions. She also gives presentations to nurses, doctors and the general public.
She says that many patients, and even some doctors, are unaware that stopping life-prolonging treatment and medication is legal and ethically acceptable. This means the person dies from their underlying illness – which is completely different from an intervention which deliberately ends their life prematurely.

“I was caring for a man in his 60s who was on peritoneal dialysis. He thought he would be committing euthanasia/suicide by stopping it.  This belief was weighing heavily on his mind as he thought it was morally wrong. 
“Once I explained to him that stopping dialysis was acceptable and that it would allow a natural death from his underlying illness, he stopped it. 
“His family was unaware of his fears of dying by suicide/euthanasia and that he wanted to stop the dialysis.  It was a very emotional moment for them when they heard how he was feeling, but ultimately they supported him in his choice.”

ACT MP David Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill proposes ‘assisted dying’ by administering drugs to end someone’s life, either by injection or ingestion through a tube (euthanasia) or by giving a lethal dose to a person to swallow or administer (assisted suicide).

There are subtle differences between suicide, assisted suicide and euthanasia: It’s suicide when a person ends their own life. It’s assisted suicide when a person receives help to access the means to end their life but then takes the final action themselves. It’s euthanasia when the final action is performed by another person.

Only 62% of the 894 respondents polled thought that ‘assisted dying’ includes receiving deadly drugs to swallow or self-administer (assisted suicide).
Only 68% of respondents thought that ‘assisted dying’ includes receiving deadly drugs by injection (euthanasia).

New Zealanders are significantly less supportive of the administration of lethal drugs to end someone’s life than the notion of ‘assisted dying’ as a whole.
After hearing which practices the proposed Bill would be limited to, support for ‘assisted dying’ dropped from 62% to 55%, opposition rose from 22% to 26% and unsure/refuse responses rose from 6% to 11%.

“We would expect public support to drop even further when people consider the wider implications and unintended consequences of euthanasia and assisted suicide legislation,” says Ms Joubert.

“A case in point is a 2014 UK ComRes poll which showed that public support for the Falconer Assisted Dying Bill dropped as low as 43% when people heard various arguments against changing the law or were provided with certain facts – for example the fact that six out of ten people requesting a lethal prescription in Washington State said a reason for doing so was their concern about being a burden on friends, family or caregivers.”
ENDS

Otago Daily Times 12 December 2017
Family First Comment: “Seymour’s event at Parliament was disrupted by Dr Russell Franklin, a former paediatrician and GP, who is opposed to the move. Franklin confronted Dr Havill as MPs spoke to gathered media, saying it was “going back to the era of Nazi Germany” and went against the ethics of the medical profession.”

The first vote in Parliament on a bill to legalise voluntary euthanasia is near but National MP Maggie Barry’s description of it as a “licence to kill’ and a disruption at Act leader David Seymour’s campaign launch in support of the bill showed how heated the issue will be.

Seymour, whose bill was drawn from the ballot last term, launched the campaign at Parliament today alongside MPs from other parties, End of Life Choice’s Dr Jack Havill and Matt Vickers, the husband of the late Lecretia Seales.

Seales unsuccessfully took the issue to the High Court after she was diagnosed with a non-operable brain tumour and died in 2015 soon after the High Court ruled it could not grant her wish and said it was up to Parliament to change the law.

The first reading of the End of Life Choice Bill could be held tomorrow night or early next year, and MPs will have a conscience vote on it.

Family First has said it will campaign strongly against the bill.

Seymour’s event at Parliament was disrupted by Dr Russell Franklin, a former paediatrician and GP, who is opposed to the move.

Franklin confronted Dr Havill as MPs spoke to gathered media, saying it was “going back to the era of Nazi Germany” and went against the ethics of the medical profession.
READ MORE: https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/heated-words-euthanasia-vote-nears

MPs need to hear from you today! The politicians are voting on the 1st Reading of ACT MP David Seymour’s euthanasia / assisted suicide bill tonight. No other euthanasia bill in the past has ever succeeded at the 1st Reading – and for good reason. Don’t let this one!
Please contact your local MP and all other MPs today.
CONTACT DETAILS FOR MPs – www.HaveYourSay.nz
SUBJECT LINE: Vote NO on David Seymour’s Euthanasia Bill
MESSAGE (points you could cover):
* Parliament has already considered this issue with the recent Inquiry – 21,000+ submissions – 80% opposition
* ‘Safe’ euthanasia is an illusion
* Euthanasia will remove the ‘choice’ of many vulnerable people
* Safeguards, while sounding good, would not guarantee the protection required for vulnerable people
* Promotion of assisted suicide is a message that will be heard not just by those with a terminal illness but also by anyone tempted to think he or she can no longer cope with their suffering – whatever the nature of that suffering
* Safeguards can only go so far. Coercion is subtle
* Opposition comes from disability sector, senior citizens, human right advocates, health sector, advocates for economically disadvantaged
* focus on what New Zealanders really need and want – a focus on providing the very best palliative care and support for vulnerable people, whether they are at the end of their life, or momentarily wishing they were at the end of their life
* We are voters in your electorate, and this issue is a key one for our support (if applicable)
Thank you for speaking up!

 
Bob McCoskrie
National Director

Stuff co.nz 5 December 2017
Family First Comment: An excellent commentary..
“It’s the unintended consequences of allowing euthanasia that particularly perturb me, whereby shifting societal values would make seniors and the disabled increasingly feel like a financial and emotional burden, and obliged to seek termination.”
OPINION: At a time when Canterbury – and the wider nation – is rightly distressed about our shameful, unshakeable suicide epidemic and the clamour for effective mental health services, the notion of sanctioning assisted suicide seems crudely incongruous.
As the Medical Association (NZMA) points out, legalising euthanasia would saddle New Zealand with the grey area of “rational” suicides and “irrational” ones. The Care Alliance soberly warn that it would lead young people to think suicide was an acceptable response to suffering.
Act MP David Seymour is optimistic his End of Life Choices Bill will be read for the first time in Parliament this month. Like most Kiwis, I wrestle with the issue, its nuances and complexities, that no up or down referendum, nor casual opinion poll can befittingly do justice to.
It’s a profoundly vexing issue, but in all good conscience, the notion of legalisation leaves me cold.
Last year, Sir Geoffrey Palmer laudably crafted a proposed law-change with an extensive set of criteria to strictly govern assisted suicide for a person with “a grievous and incurable medical condition that caused intolerable suffering.”
The person would have to be at least 18 and capable of making decisions, their condition would have to be certified by two medical practitioners, a willing doctor would have to be available and the Family Court would certify whether the criteria had been met.
It’s hard to see how some of these hurdles could be surmounted, given the steadfast opposition of the NZMA to euthanasia. Would we have to form a Guild of Certified Death Doctors?
The NZMA chair, Dr. Stephen Child self-effacingly observes, “Doctors were not always right in forming a patient’s prognosis. 10-15 per cent of prognoses are deemed incorrect, during autopsies.”
READ MORE: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/99496797/watching-my-uncle-die–and-his-mood-swings–confirmed-my-opposition-to-euthanasia

The Australian 22 November 2017
Family First Comment: Victoria makes a deadly decision – and even then, the supporters aren’t happy, because it doesn’t go far enough!
Philip Nitschke has described the Victorian government’s voluntary assisted dying bill as the “world’s most unworkable end-of-life law” as he warned the legislation would not satisfy all those seeking ¬assisted suicide. The country’s leading proponent for assisted dying and head of Exit International congratulated the Victorian government for passing the bill through the upper house, but warned the “conservative” bill was behind world standards… “It’s not going to change the growing demand by elderly people to have access to their own choice.”
…The former president of the Victorian arm of the Australian Medical Association Stephen -Parnis, who has led a public campaign urging the parliament to ¬reject the legislation, said he was concerned vulnerable people would not be inadequately protected. “I suppose not just for me, but the MPs, the doctors, the many community activists who oppose these laws, it’s a profound disappointment. Ultimately we weren’t successful,” he said. “This is going to become law and we hope that our fears for the system will ultimately be proved wrong. But time will tell. “I say to the Premier and Minister for Health: it’s incumbent on you to use all of the authority at your disposal to enhance the palliative care as a matter of urgency. Without that sort of system in place, people dying don’t have the choice you want to offer.’’ Victorian AMA head Lorraine Baker said she recognised the changes marked a “significant shift in medical practice in Victoria” that would cause anguish for members of the profession…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/nitschke-says-victorian-euthanasia-bill-unworkable/news-story/807a16f8cfbeacc3869afe8a1dd0b5ff

Keep up with family issues in NZ.
Receive our weekly emails direct to your Inbox.

Historic euthanasia laws pass in Australian state of Victoria
Stuff co.nz 22 November 2017
Family First Comment: “The Australian Medical Association said the passing of the legislation marked a significant shift in medical practice in Victoria. “The outcome of this parliamentary vote will cause anguish for some members of our profession, as well as the public,” AMA Victoria president Lorraine Baker said.”
Voluntary euthanasia is set to become legal in the state of Victoria in Australia after historic laws passed the upper house, despite ferocious opposition from conservative MPs.
The bill passed the upper house with 22 votes to 18, after a marathon 28-hour sitting that began on Tuesday afternoon and ended on Wednesday afternoon.
There were emotional scenes in the upper house as MPs, who had debated the bill all night, wept in their seats or got up to embrace their colleagues.
Greens MP Colleen Hartland wept into her colleague Samantha Dunn’s shoulder as the final vote was declared.
Hartland, who is set to retire at the coming election, has been a long-time supporter of a voluntary euthanasia regime.
Although the bill has already passed the lower house with a strong majority, it must go back in its amended form for a final vote.
READ MORE: https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/99153494/Historic-euthanasia-laws-pass-in-Australian-state-of-Victoria?cid=app-iPhone

Sydney Morning Herald 16 November 2017
Family First Comment: “I have not yet seen it possible to develop adequate legislative safeguards to protect people from the misuse of these laws. I have not yet seen a legislative model in this area that cannot be exploited or manipulated. And I cannot support any gaps for exploitation when the consequences are so final”.
Exactly – ‘safe’ euthanasia is a myth
www.RejectAssistedSuicide.nz
State MPs have voted down a bill to introduce voluntary assisted dying laws in NSW following a full day of emotional debate.
The bill was defeated in the Legislative Council by 20 votes to 19 in a vote that took place just after 11pm on Thursday.
It is a disappointing end for a campaign launched by a cross-party working group of MPs in a bid to convince the Parliament to support the bill based on similar laws in the US state of Oregon.
Advocates were hopeful the bill was sufficiently conservative to garner support of the upper house.
It proposed that terminally ill NSW residents over the age of 25 with less than 12 months to live be allowed to legally end their lives with medical assistance.
Safeguards included a requirement to consult two doctors, one a specialist in the illness, and a psychiatrist or psychologist.
READ MORE: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/voluntary-assisted-dying-bill-defeated-in-nsw-upper-house-20171116-gzn25g.html

Keep up with family issues in NZ.
Receive our weekly emails direct to your Inbox.