Tuesday, 05 December 2023
KaitaiaWhangareiDargavilleAucklandThamesTaurangaHamiltonWhakataneRotoruaTokoroaTe KuitiTaumarunuiTaupoGisborneNew PlymouthNapierHastingsDannevirkeWhanganuiPalmerston NorthLevinParaparaumuMastertonWellingtonMotuekaNelsonBlenheimWestportReeftonKaikouraGreymouthHokitikaChristchurchAshburtonTimaruWanakaOamaruQueenstownDunedinGoreInvercargill
NZ HeraldThe Northern AdvocateThe Northland AgeThe AucklanderWaikato HeraldBay Of Plenty TimesRotorua Daily PostHawke's Bay TodayWhanganui ChronicleThe Stratford PressManawatu GuardianKapiti NewsHorowhenua ChronicleTe Awamutu CourierVivaEat WellOneRoofDRIVEN Car GuideThe CountryPhoto SalesiHeart RadioRestaurant Hub
Voyager 2023 media awards
Subscribe

Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.
Home / Politics

Editorial: Euthanasia - the devil is in the detail

NZ Herald
10 Jun, 2015 05:00 PM3 mins to read
Saveshare

Share this article

facebookcopy linktwitterlinkedinredditemail
Euthanasia campaigner Lecretia Seales' funeral was held in Wellington yesterday. Photo / Supplied

Euthanasia campaigner Lecretia Seales' funeral was held in Wellington yesterday. Photo / Supplied

Nobody in Parliament except Act's David Seymour is anxious to take up the euthanasia cause in the wake of the Lecretia Seales case, and no wonder. More experienced MPs have seen previous private member's bills on this subject and know that inexpertly drafted bills cannot deal with all the practical difficulties the subject poses.

Labour and the Greens are urging the Government to put properly prepared legislation into the House but the Prime Minister is unwilling. He thinks a select committee inquiry as a response to a public petition would be a better way to proceed.

The reluctance of all parties is perfectly understandable because the practicalities of voluntary euthanasia are as difficult as the principles it raises. Putting principle to one side, it is easy to say a doctor should be able to accede to a dying person's request, but at what point exactly can that request be made? Advocates of voluntary euthanasia agree the request would have to be made when the person is clearly mentally capable of making it and the doctor is confident no external pressure is being brought to bear.

That would require the arrangement to be made well ahead of the patient's need, which is indeed what Ms Seales was seeking. But is it then to be up to the doctor to carry out the request, like an organ donation, at the time the doctor decides? Almost certainly no doctor would do so without a subsequent request or some form of consent from a conscious patient to act immediately. Doctors do not even act on the previously expressed will of organ donors without the consent of the nearest relatives at the time of death.

Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.

Can immediate family be consulted if a person who has previously requested euthanasia is no longer able to communicate? The need to protect the vulnerable from undue pressure says relatives should have no part in the decision to act. But that is placing a terrible responsibility on the doctor and denying the patient the ability of someone nearest and dearest to know what the patient most wants.

These and other details are difficult enough for medical and legal ethicists to resolve and lawmakers to express in subtle and precise language. They cannot all be decided by referendums, nor by courts hearing cases that would vary in their circumstances and take a long time to build a body of reliable law. That is the reason Justice David Collins in the Seales case ruled that any change was properly left to Parliament.

Even the Supreme Court of Canada, whose unanimous ruling in February inspired the Seales case here, has done no more than uphold a right to euthanasia in principle. The judges suspended the effect of their decision for a year, in which Canada's federal and provincial Governments and its medical profession are supposed to resolve the practical details. For example, they will need to reach a working definition of the court's "grievous and irremediable medical condition" and decide whether it extends to people who are not terminally or even physically ill but chronically depressed.

The devil really is in the detail.

Related articles

New Zealand

Editorial: Right to die contradicts value of life

05 Jun 05:00 PM
New Zealand

Lecretia's legacy: A call for debate

05 Jun 05:00 PM
New Zealand|Politics

Key and Little kick for touch on euthanasia

08 Jun 05:00 PM
New Zealand|Politics

Act plans assisted dying bill

08 Jun 05:00 PM
Saveshare

Share this article

facebookcopy linktwitterlinkedinredditemail

Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.

Latest from Politics

Politics

Labour calls for visas for family of Kiwis stuck in Gaza

05 Dec 02:14 AM
Politics

Stirring haka as Te Pāti Māori swear allegiance to Te Tiriti before King Charles

04 Dec 11:47 PM
New Zealand|Politics

Te Pāti Māori MPs sworn in to Parliament

Politics

Inquiry launched after confidential Cabinet papers published

04 Dec 09:54 PM

Top toys of 2023 for kids & ‘kidults’

sponsored

Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.

Latest from Politics

Labour calls for visas for family of Kiwis stuck in Gaza

Labour calls for visas for family of Kiwis stuck in Gaza

05 Dec 02:14 AM

So far 19 NZ citizens and residents have been assisted in escaping Gaza.

Stirring haka as Te Pāti Māori swear allegiance to Te Tiriti before King Charles

Stirring haka as Te Pāti Māori swear allegiance to Te Tiriti before King Charles

04 Dec 11:47 PM
Te Pāti Māori MPs sworn in to Parliament

Te Pāti Māori MPs sworn in to Parliament

Inquiry launched after confidential Cabinet papers published

Inquiry launched after confidential Cabinet papers published

04 Dec 09:54 PM
Toy trends for Christmas
sponsored

Toy trends for Christmas

About NZMEHelp & SupportContact UsSubscribe to NZ HeraldHouse Rules
Manage Your Print SubscriptionNZ Herald E-EditionAdvertise with NZMEBook Your AdPrivacy Policy
Terms of UseCompetition Terms & ConditionsSubscriptions Terms & Conditions
© Copyright 2023 NZME Publishing Limited
TOP