Euthanasia: mad, sad, bad or glad?
How tragic – and brave – that Ray Gosling should admit to helping his loved one pass in those awful, awful circumstances, and then be branded a potential murderer.
- Image by fedfil via Flickr
Now, of course, we are going to be faced with a raft of legal, rather than moral issues and although I suspect – and hope – Ray Gosling will probably be let off with a minor slap on the wrist nonetheless he will probably have to go through the humiliation of “community service” or other such nonsense for so bravely having helped his friend depart as he so wanted to do.
One good thing about keeping pets, as I do, is that when their time comes I can make the decision to put them out of their pain before it becomes unbearable.
When my mother was dying of cancer, though, I could only administer morphine as she changed from being a normal elderly woman to an utter vegetable. I’m just grateful for the fact that because my mother’s cancer had infiltrated her brain towards the end she was completely doo-lally and didn’t know how far gone she was.
With people like Ray Gosling’s partner, though, the fact that they know how far gone they are must be agony. Legal or not legal, I can only sympathise with Ray and hope he doesn’t get incarcerated for what I’m sure was a very unselfish act of mercy.
About SuzanStMaurBusiness, marketing and nonfiction writer, 20+ times published author, Owner and Coach at “HowToWriteBetter.net”
View all posts by SuzanStMaur →
34 Responses to Euthanasia: mad, sad, bad or glad?
All that jazz – All in A Day
Review of: Cousin Alice Jazz Music by Cousin Alice: Elaine Sturgess Reviewed by: Elaine Sturgess Rating: 5 On January 21, 2012 Last modified: January 30, 2012 Summary: What makes Alice so distinctive is her wonderfully smokey voice, a quality that furniture designer William Yeoward found so arresting at a concert she was performing for the [...]
Up until recently, I thought I would do the right thing by the person I loved regardless of the price personally to me.
What changed my mind was this – http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/02/100204_vegetative_state.shtml
And now I have swung completely the other way from being pro Euthanasia to against it entirely!
I’m not sure, however, that being able to think a yes/no response in an MRI machine really constitutes quality of life, though, does it? And if you ask such a person do they want to die and they say yes, under current UK law, you wouldn’t be able to help them.
As I understand it, this brain stuff only affects people in vegetative states (as opposed to comas).
My personal view is that I am pro euthanasia under very controlled circumstances. Not just because grandma is doddery, in the way and has a large fortune!
Up until recently, I thought I would do the right thing by the person I loved regardless of the price personally to me.
What changed my mind was this – http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/02/100204_vegetative_state.shtml
And now I have swung completely the other way from being pro Euthanasia to against it entirely!
I’m not sure, however, that being able to think a yes/no response in an MRI machine really constitutes quality of life, though, does it? And if you ask such a person do they want to die and they say yes, under current UK law, you wouldn’t be able to help them.
As I understand it, this brain stuff only affects people in vegetative states (as opposed to comas).
My personal view is that I am pro euthanasia under very controlled circumstances. Not just because grandma is doddery, in the way and has a large fortune!
whatever ones views about euthanasia, I think there’s much more to this story and it’s not about mercy killing, it’s about Ray Gosling.
Should a famous person be treated any different than a normal person?
I think back to how the MPs were treated over their expenses and how benefit cheats are prosecuted for the slightest infraction, I do wonder what has happened to British justice and fairness.
Fair enough, Nick – but what do you mean, exactly?
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
whatever ones views about euthanasia, I think there’s much more to this story and it’s not about mercy killing, it’s about Ray Gosling.
Should a famous person be treated any different than a normal person?
I think back to how the MPs were treated over their expenses and how benefit cheats are prosecuted for the slightest infraction, I do wonder what has happened to British justice and fairness.
Fair enough, Nick – but what do you mean, exactly?
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
I’m not sure about the Ray Gosling case, I will be interested to hear what Nick means about that one. Unless he is deliberately adding his voice to the campaign for the legalisation of euthanasia, I’m not sure why he spoke about it publicly as he did.
After seeing my mother in law die in pain, after over forty years of living with MS, I think the law needs to change to allow people to make their own decisions on this issue. Her doctor knew that she had had enough, and yet was unable to prescribe more pain relief in case it hastened her death.
That cannot be right.
Of course there needs to be protection for vulnerable people, that goes without saying. And no one should be made to feel that they ought to make that choice.
The current legal position is a fudge that simply isn’t good enough. To allow people who are rich enough and well enough to travel to Switzerland with family support is clearly unfair – and will mean that some people make the decision to take their lives perhaps before they would otherwise do so. People who may discover that they do have something worth living for, when they thought all quality fo life would be lost.
Not to mention that I find the lack of transparency about the financial position of Dignitas somewhat disturbing.
I think Terry Pratchett’s suggestions made in the Dimbleby Lecture were well thought out.
Ann, I caught the tail end of his interview with BBC Radio 4 and eh said he came out about it because during the filming of his documentary on the issue of assisted killing, so many people had opened up to him about their own actions and this made it hard for him and not to speak up about what he had done all those years ago.
Twitter: ethnicsupplies
Hmmm…people being what people are, there are several rumours flying around as to why this is. He must have known that the police would take an interest in his admission. But to allege that this admission was a publicity stunt – as I’ve heard – seems a little too cynical even for a hardened old goat like me.
The next thing we know, some idiot will allege that Gosling smothered the guy in the first place as a publicity stunt…
I think if I had done something like that I would not talk about it ever, but as you say, Ida, Gosling may have felt guilty – not for doing it, but for not having the b*lls to be upfront about it.
Indeed he may have felt that by making the information public it would re-open the debate about “mercy killing” and he was right – it has.
I have a funny feeling that this is a topic the politicians and law enforcers are all too keen to brush under the rug, so episodes like this oblige everyone to think about it again.
A good thing too, in my view.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Thanks Ida and Suzan
I too can imagine it is something that would prey on one’s mind. And you know, he shouldn’t have had to take that action, should he? There should have been some legal and professional help available, some way to make it more bearable for everyone.
I do think there’s far too much willingness to brush this one under the rug – and yet it is something that seems to affect many of us.
I’m sure from what what I’ve read recently that a good many doctors do sometimes make death easier and faster – but of course they can’t say so publicly or they risk being branded a Shipman.
And there are some very vocal groups, some religious and some associated with disability groups – speaking out against assisted dying, and suggesting it’s a slippery slidy slope and one step towards some kind of mad eugenics programme – which is clearly not the intention – and which could actually be more preventable, if the legal position was clear.
I’m not sure about the Ray Gosling case, I will be interested to hear what Nick means about that one. Unless he is deliberately adding his voice to the campaign for the legalisation of euthanasia, I’m not sure why he spoke about it publicly as he did.
After seeing my mother in law die in pain, after over forty years of living with MS, I think the law needs to change to allow people to make their own decisions on this issue. Her doctor knew that she had had enough, and yet was unable to prescribe more pain relief in case it hastened her death.
That cannot be right.
Of course there needs to be protection for vulnerable people, that goes without saying. And no one should be made to feel that they ought to make that choice.
The current legal position is a fudge that simply isn’t good enough. To allow people who are rich enough and well enough to travel to Switzerland with family support is clearly unfair – and will mean that some people make the decision to take their lives perhaps before they would otherwise do so. People who may discover that they do have something worth living for, when they thought all quality fo life would be lost.
Not to mention that I find the lack of transparency about the financial position of Dignitas somewhat disturbing.
I think Terry Pratchett’s suggestions made in the Dimbleby Lecture were well thought out.
Ann, I caught the tail end of his interview with BBC Radio 4 and eh said he came out about it because during the filming of his documentary on the issue of assisted killing, so many people had opened up to him about their own actions and this made it hard for him and not to speak up about what he had done all those years ago.
Twitter: ethnicsupplies
Hmmm…people being what people are, there are several rumours flying around as to why this is. He must have known that the police would take an interest in his admission. But to allege that this admission was a publicity stunt – as I’ve heard – seems a little too cynical even for a hardened old goat like me.
The next thing we know, some idiot will allege that Gosling smothered the guy in the first place as a publicity stunt…
I think if I had done something like that I would not talk about it ever, but as you say, Ida, Gosling may have felt guilty – not for doing it, but for not having the b*lls to be upfront about it.
Indeed he may have felt that by making the information public it would re-open the debate about “mercy killing” and he was right – it has.
I have a funny feeling that this is a topic the politicians and law enforcers are all too keen to brush under the rug, so episodes like this oblige everyone to think about it again.
A good thing too, in my view.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Thanks Ida and Suzan
I too can imagine it is something that would prey on one’s mind. And you know, he shouldn’t have had to take that action, should he? There should have been some legal and professional help available, some way to make it more bearable for everyone.
I do think there’s far too much willingness to brush this one under the rug – and yet it is something that seems to affect many of us.
I’m sure from what what I’ve read recently that a good many doctors do sometimes make death easier and faster – but of course they can’t say so publicly or they risk being branded a Shipman.
And there are some very vocal groups, some religious and some associated with disability groups – speaking out against assisted dying, and suggesting it’s a slippery slidy slope and one step towards some kind of mad eugenics programme – which is clearly not the intention – and which could actually be more preventable, if the legal position was clear.
I appreciate that I can have a laugh here, exchange views and sometimes get stretched – and this post is one of the latter.
It’s set me thinking along many lines:
It’s my understanding that the medical profession has long had its own unwritten code as to how those in it deal with the extreme malformation of babies coming into the world and, at the other end, the exit strategy of those whom medicine of the day couldn’t help.
I don’t know whether it still happens with PC-ness so rampant.
We, as loved ones or relatives, would get the sanitised version.
I’ve yelled, berated the world and cried my eyes out (alone in the shower) when I’ve contributed to the ending of our feline friend’s life on this earth. Yet, on the other hand been grateful that, when told there was absolutely no hope we could say: “okay – please stop the pain.”
When my father was in hospital many years ago with an ‘unspecified’ illness and rapidly started to go downhill I remember him saying: “They wouldn’t treat a dog the way they’ve treated me.”
This was an intelligent man who was having test after test (some painful in and of themselves), being told nothing and feeling worse by the day. I asked his wife if we should get him transefered to The Royal Marsden (I had the contacts back then) but she wanted him to stay locally so that she could continue to see him every day. I didn’t like it but I understood.
The final straw was when I heard one of the doctors telling a subordinate to stop all medication apart from pain killers. I faced him out and he said something asinine like “Where there’s life there’s hope.” My father died within days, whilst being ‘turned’ in the early hours of the morning for his ‘comfort’ and to prevent bed sores .
If my father had been given a choice, what would have been his decision? I’m not sure it’s one I would have had the guts to take on his behalf.
Twitter: Linda_Mattacks
I have to say, my husband died of cancer 5 years ago. When he knew it was aggressive and terminal, he simply asked to leave hospital. He came home specifically to avoid being kept artificially alive, and to die of multi organ failure (which he did within 2 days). It was a brave decision, which I couldn’t have taken on his behalf, but there is no doubt in my mind it was the right one.
His mother, on the other hand, couldn’t forgive him for not fighting tooth and nail to the bitter end. But he preferred to leave us with good memories, not horrific ones.
So sorry you lost your husband. He must have been a very courageous – and very kind – man.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Thank you, Suze. Given how many hundreds came to his funeral, I imagine I wasn’t the only one who thought so. He was indeed very kind and courageous, and in many ways I did not appreciate this so fully when he was alive.
I appreciate that I can have a laugh here, exchange views and sometimes get stretched – and this post is one of the latter.
It’s set me thinking along many lines:
It’s my understanding that the medical profession has long had its own unwritten code as to how those in it deal with the extreme malformation of babies coming into the world and, at the other end, the exit strategy of those whom medicine of the day couldn’t help.
I don’t know whether it still happens with PC-ness so rampant.
We, as loved ones or relatives, would get the sanitised version.
I’ve yelled, berated the world and cried my eyes out (alone in the shower) when I’ve contributed to the ending of our feline friend’s life on this earth. Yet, on the other hand been grateful that, when told there was absolutely no hope we could say: “okay – please stop the pain.”
When my father was in hospital many years ago with an ‘unspecified’ illness and rapidly started to go downhill I remember him saying: “They wouldn’t treat a dog the way they’ve treated me.”
This was an intelligent man who was having test after test (some painful in and of themselves), being told nothing and feeling worse by the day. I asked his wife if we should get him transefered to The Royal Marsden (I had the contacts back then) but she wanted him to stay locally so that she could continue to see him every day. I didn’t like it but I understood.
The final straw was when I heard one of the doctors telling a subordinate to stop all medication apart from pain killers. I faced him out and he said something asinine like “Where there’s life there’s hope.” My father died within days, whilst being ‘turned’ in the early hours of the morning for his ‘comfort’ and to prevent bed sores .
If my father had been given a choice, what would have been his decision? I’m not sure it’s one I would have had the guts to take on his behalf.
Twitter: Linda_Mattacks
I have to say, my husband died of cancer 5 years ago. When he knew it was aggressive and terminal, he simply asked to leave hospital. He came home specifically to avoid being kept artificially alive, and to die of multi organ failure (which he did within 2 days). It was a brave decision, which I couldn’t have taken on his behalf, but there is no doubt in my mind it was the right one.
His mother, on the other hand, couldn’t forgive him for not fighting tooth and nail to the bitter end. But he preferred to leave us with good memories, not horrific ones.
So sorry you lost your husband. He must have been a very courageous – and very kind – man.
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
Thank you, Suze. Given how many hundreds came to his funeral, I imagine I wasn’t the only one who thought so. He was indeed very kind and courageous, and in many ways I did not appreciate this so fully when he was alive.
I think everybody should have the right to make a living will to specify what should happen in the event of their life becoming too awful to carry on. I certainly wouldn’t want to have to make that decision for anybody, but I hope I wouldn’t hesitate to help if they asked me.
My mother had Alzheimers for six years before she died. We watched her go from 13 stone to 6, from 100% with us to maybe 10% on a good day. (My son-in-law and I measured her day-to-day awareness like that – 30%, 60%, however much she seemed to know about what was going on round her.)
But still I couldn’t say she should have been helped to die. She thought it was 1935 and my dad had just gone out to the shop (this all started when he died). She didn’t know me or anybody else in the family, but she didn’t seem to be in any distress – the thing about Alzheimers is you can’t know what’s going on in the person’s mind, by definition. If she’d made a living will, we’d have known where we stood.
Terry Pratchett has made his decision and has stood up to say so in public, and good for him. Ray Gosling’s partner wasn’t able to make that statement, perhaps, but clearly knew what he wanted.
I just wish people would stop making decisions on other people’s behalf in matters like this. I saw a bumper sticker in America once “Don’t believe in abortion? Don’t have one!” and I think this is another area where the law should assume that people have control over their own bodies and lives unless proved otherwise.
That’s exactly the point, Ruth, that really gets my goat. The fact that some people really seem to think it’s their right to make those decisions for us.
It does seem from the various surveys recently that more people are in favour of having the option of assisted suicide available – and also in favour of being able to create living wills.
And yet again there’s a story in the news today that Gordon Brown doesn’t think the law should change – again probably from personal religious conviction
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brown-takes-stand-against-assisted-suicide-1908651.html
Freedom of religion should not mean the freedom to impose religious views on others, or so I thought.
I think everybody should have the right to make a living will to specify what should happen in the event of their life becoming too awful to carry on. I certainly wouldn’t want to have to make that decision for anybody, but I hope I wouldn’t hesitate to help if they asked me.
My mother had Alzheimers for six years before she died. We watched her go from 13 stone to 6, from 100% with us to maybe 10% on a good day. (My son-in-law and I measured her day-to-day awareness like that – 30%, 60%, however much she seemed to know about what was going on round her.)
But still I couldn’t say she should have been helped to die. She thought it was 1935 and my dad had just gone out to the shop (this all started when he died). She didn’t know me or anybody else in the family, but she didn’t seem to be in any distress – the thing about Alzheimers is you can’t know what’s going on in the person’s mind, by definition. If she’d made a living will, we’d have known where we stood.
Terry Pratchett has made his decision and has stood up to say so in public, and good for him. Ray Gosling’s partner wasn’t able to make that statement, perhaps, but clearly knew what he wanted.
I just wish people would stop making decisions on other people’s behalf in matters like this. I saw a bumper sticker in America once “Don’t believe in abortion? Don’t have one!” and I think this is another area where the law should assume that people have control over their own bodies and lives unless proved otherwise.
That’s exactly the point, Ruth, that really gets my goat. The fact that some people really seem to think it’s their right to make those decisions for us.
It does seem from the various surveys recently that more people are in favour of having the option of assisted suicide available – and also in favour of being able to create living wills.
And yet again there’s a story in the news today that Gordon Brown doesn’t think the law should change – again probably from personal religious conviction
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brown-takes-stand-against-assisted-suicide-1908651.html
Freedom of religion should not mean the freedom to impose religious views on others, or so I thought.
There’s an update on the euthanasia issue on today’s BBC News website, here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8536231.stm
The article claims that “New guidance has been issued to clarify the law on assisted suicide in England and Wales.”
For some reason the words “clear as mud” keep resonating around my little brain…
Suze
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
I’ve just been reading about it, Suze. It seems that the focus will be on the motives of the person assisting the suicide now, rather than on the health status of the deceased.
It seems to me that the health status of the deceased is still very relevant, but also you have to allow for the fact that a very cunning money-grabber would simply get someone else to assist in the suicide, so their motive was not questioned!
As you say, clear as mud.
There’s an update on the euthanasia issue on today’s BBC News website, here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8536231.stm
The article claims that “New guidance has been issued to clarify the law on assisted suicide in England and Wales.”
For some reason the words “clear as mud” keep resonating around my little brain…
Suze
Twitter: SuzeStMWrites
I’ve just been reading about it, Suze. It seems that the focus will be on the motives of the person assisting the suicide now, rather than on the health status of the deceased.
It seems to me that the health status of the deceased is still very relevant, but also you have to allow for the fact that a very cunning money-grabber would simply get someone else to assist in the suicide, so their motive was not questioned!
As you say, clear as mud.