Monday, 23 March 2015

Lecretia Seales’s life is not Bob McCoskrie’s to meddle with

So, how in any way is it Bob McCoskrie’s business whether or by what means a woman with terminal cancer chooses to end her own life at the time and in the manner of her choosing?

Lecretia Seales is a very brave woman, a lawyer with an inoperable brain tumour, who says it's a "fundamental human right" to choose to end her life with medical assistance, and she is going to court to assert that right so that a doctor may be legally able to euthanase her without prosecution if she finally chooses that.

That legal right would allow her to choose the time and manner of her passing, to be able to do it with friends present, and to discuss the ending of her life with her doctor without the usual euphemisms and double-dealing or any fear of prosecution – of for her to choose not to.

After all, whose bloody life is it anyway?

The fact we have laws preventing folk exercising this fundamental right, should they choose to, is appalling. That it means Lucretia might spend her last months wrapped up in court is a painful thought, but perhaps the least of the pain the politicians have inflicted who refuse to remove the legal ban on legally-protected voluntary euthanasia.

Family First’s Bob McCoskrie agrees at least that Ms Seales shouldn’t have to spend her last precious months on earth fighting through the courts, but he cries crocodile tears in a carefully-worded press release saying, “Patients facing death have a fundamental human right to receive the very best palliative care, love and support that we can give to alleviate 'intolerable suffering' that they fear.”

Which sounds to me like a right he’s just this minute made up.  But it makes it necessary to point out that the most fundamental right is the right to your own life – which has as a corollary, the right to be left alone to end it

Which  makes me wonder: who’s this “we,” Bob?

And what business is Ms Seale’s life, or death, of yours?

[Hat tip Paul Litterick]

RELATED READING:

17 comments:

  1. Sorry for linkspamming, but in second half of below post I've given Family (Suffering) First a serve as well: bastards:

    http://lifebehindtheirondrape.blogspot.co.nz/2015/03/lecretia-searles-takes-her-fight-to-die.html

    The more I deal with the Xian conservatives, the more I realise they can be no part of a Libertarian society: the need to meddle is far too strong in them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not sure what a Xian conservative is and would be grateful for a definition. Hopefully its not a one issue limit because, if so, I'll be well stuffed having views on lots of things. Fam First won't make policy and if this issue was resisted by Xians in isolation the progressive left would be frothing at the mouth to accommodate what you want - I don't think Xians have any real influence on politics.

    3:16

    ReplyDelete
  3. You do have that God-like omniscience across these threads 3:16 :) Said nicely. And yeah, of course there are differences, also the three men of Eternal Vigilance, but that's why I said Christian 'Conservatives'. There are plenty of them: look at comments to some of my euthanasia posts.

    And then of course there's scripture, which my father feels himself bound by to suffer ludicrously in the hospice he is now bed bound in - and he's at the point now where even if he's changed his mind, he's out of communication, so stuck with the embrace of morphine which works ... almost, but not quite. Suffering is what the Bible teaches. Family First are being dead true to that meddling fiction. The Xians I deal with seem dead against Islam because of the Koran, but then seem unable to understand a literal interpretation of their own tract is little better.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So lets get this straight:

    you castigate Bob McCoskrie for "interfering" in Scales life
    but...
    think its OK for Scales to interfere in other doctors lives?

    Logic breakdown on a massive scale

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Total moron. It is voluntary for both the person wanting euthanasia, and the doctors (plural) providing it. Not only are many doctors happy to provide such compassion in future, they do so now, and officially so: NZMA state it is okay to provide pain medication to extent it shortens life. Rights giving legislation here finally puts the humane practice above board. It is the rights based, and the ethical route.

    Perhaps after you leave Sunday School you'll grow up. It's Voluntary, FFS.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mark
    Fact: its not welcomed by the medical profession
    Fact: Scales is trying to circumvent parliament.
    Fact: you're rude, insulting, unconvincing and boring


    ReplyDelete
  8. Fact: NZMA has never pooled its members.
    Fact: UKMA has polled its members who overwhelming voted it was an issue for society to decide, not doctors.
    Fact: assisted dying is practised ethicaaly in major jurisdictions across large populations. Read my blog.

    What right has parliament got to stop Searles self-manage her health issues. What is a legal system for if not to test and by precedent make law? You want a totalitaria of incompetent, meddling MPs?

    I'm rude, from someone who would stop voluntary transactions between consenting adults because why? Are you afflicted with the Christ virus?. You're a cruel, compassionless, inhumane arse.

    Euthanasi is voluntary; you who don't want it aren't being forced so you have NO say.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry, late night typo: NZMA has never polled its members.

    On my blog you can read my correspondence with them, and why their stated position is not only unethical, but negligent.

    There will be many doctors happy to provide this service as there are overseas.

    I know this issue, you're writing from a position of ignorance, ie, religion.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The people you blame for resisting are not the ones that will ever be listened to so you need to slag off the control freaks in parliament who have attempted to offend Christians at every opportunity they can. Some Christians may have a view that differs from yours but they will not be the reason the legislation you want is stalled. Your fixation is with Christians yet they are not the problem. We will be banned by you liberterians soon enough.

    As an aside an elderly couple with whom I have been friends for many years have suffered illness for some years. Mrs has been depressed for some time as causes and effects are worked out (too darned slowly but she is old and not worth spending public money on) and on Sunday she tried to top herself. I'm not torn between saying good effort and sorry for not assisting or being compassionate and helping her to recover. We know death is not what she really wants but it sure would be convenient so we could get on with important stuff like the flag debate.

    3:16

    ReplyDelete
  11. @DrCP: You do understand what the word "voluntary" means, don't you? No, probably not.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @3:16: You do show a deep knowledge of something or other, 3:16. Not libertarianism, mind you, but definitely something or other.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nothing wrong with being a complex weirdo Peter. I like the concept of liberterianism very much but think that mankind is so consistently good at fuckupppery its not a realistic option in a pure form. "My kingdom is not of this world" is a quote that comes to mind and for that reason, as a Christian, I have no wish to influence politics in any fashion beyond keeping the political bastards out of my life. We are probably closer than you would suspect on most things (and I have bought some of the books you feature) but I happen to find Christianity compelling.

    3:16

    ReplyDelete
  14. I agree, Peter, it is not Bob McCoskrie's business what Lucretia Seales choses to do with her own body, and I do wish her luck in her court case. However, goodwill is one thing. Sadly, in practice, it is the secular medical profession that holds the most moral authority in this situation, given its professional expertise and practical experience, and the New Zealand Medical Association opposes euthanasia and assisted suicide. The best hope for change would be to press for reform of this paternalist and statist policy within the NZMA, as has already occurred within Dutch, Belgian, Luxembourg Canadian, Oregon, Washington state and Quebec's national and state medical associations. One may find McCoskrie's diatribe annoying, but unfortunately, the man does have the right to free speech, no matter how abhorrent one finds his stance.

    ReplyDelete
  15. A person must give clear intentions in writing as to circumstances he/she should be let go from life.
    I have done this. This is if I am not in a real life, and a burden to myself and others with pain or disability,which is not treatable towards improvement, to natural life..
    Now the senior medical people would at this stage talk to relatives; and may even have to contact overseas.
    This is very tricky. Medical seniors can not positively act, they must negatively not act.
    ie. The patient is showing massive allergic symptoms to abntibiuotics and so we must withdraw that support.

    ReplyDelete
  16. My mother died of cancer in hospital, before euthanasia was legalised in the Netherlands. To her and the family it was a horrific couple of months. She was in a coma for weeks, her breathing became shallow and noisy. We watched her change into an unrecognisable skeleton, unable to eat or drink. An experience I don't wish to my worst enemy.
    In 2005 my best friend had euthanasia, she too was dying of cancer and wanted to do so with dignity.
    The process was handled very well and therefore I am all for euthanasia being legalised.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lindsay and Lorraine2 Jun 2015, 07:16:00

    hi everyone..thank you all for taking the time to read the very private journey and the brave fight of two wonderfull people,,lecretia and matt..my wife is also on a similar journey having been diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor located in the centre of the brain,the medical term is Glioma grade4..(google it folks at least you will have a small glimmer of the effects and progress of this condition and some knowledge to consider before you jump on the band wagon) We would just like to let matt and lecretia know that we fully support and understand your battle..i suspect that there are many people who will not understand your plight until they have first hand knowledge and that if it were possible to involve the professional medical judicial political religious ethical etc,,mob,,of those making comment who have or are on this journey,then and only then will others take notice..i suspect that like my wife and I it is all we can do to keep ourselves on track...so I encourage others in a similar plight to speak out,share,ask the universe...kia kaha,,be strong..

    ReplyDelete

1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.