- The Current Situation
- Specific Dangers
- What could arise from the Review.
- Strategy
The Current Situation:
Normalisation and Fatalism, dealt with by self-knowledge, education, and advocacy.
Specific Dangers:
- Present concerns in the current law (the EOLC Act) can be summarised as:
- 1. Lack of Independent Witnesses (in contrast to making a Will)
- 2. Lack of Safeguards (s.10 is very weak)
- 3. Lack of Oversight (0)
- 4. Issues with Eligibility (s.5)
- 5. Lack of Freedom of Conscience Rights Protection (S. 8, S.9)
- 6. Draconian Secrecy – what are they hiding? (S.36)
- 7. Deception, including falsifying documentation (eg Schedule Part 1 – amendment to Coroners
- Act 2006 inserting S.71 (4) so that ‘self-inflicted’ does not include a death that was the result
- of assisted dying under the EOLC Act.)
What could arise from the Review?
It has become apparent what the priorities are of the euthanasia-pushers, by way of amending
the EOLC Act. They appear to include these:
- 6 months to live requirement being extended to a longer time, or the requirement being
deleted altogether. - Allowing euthanasia for the sole reason that the person ‘….is suffering from any form of
mental disorder or mental illness; or has a disability of any kind; or is of advanced age’ - Forbidding ‘health practitioner’ Initiating discussion with a patient. This raising of the topic
‘in substance’ is currently not allowed, but might be, as reportedly suggested by the
current Associate Health Minister. This would allow not only a medical doctor but a
‘health practitioner’ to raise it and discuss it. - Forcing hospices and hospitals to provide euthanasia.
What are some specific changes that might be attempted?
Examples are in particular Sections 5, 8, 10, 33, 35, 36
S.5 (Eligibility) to extend to mental illness alone, disability alone, old age alone, and extend or
abolish expected time to live in order to be eligible for Euthanasia – refer S.5 (1) (c).
S.8 (Conscientious Objection Rights – to limit them further or abolish them)
S.10 Health Practitioner not initiating discussion of Euthanasia (at present S.10 forbids it,
but it has been proposed to allow Health Practitioners to raise this with patients,) When raised by
a Health Practitioner, it could be seen by a patient as pressure or an expectation to have
Euthanasia. When raised by a Health Practitioner, it could be seen by a patient as pressure or
an expectation to have Euthanasia. Because of this, if serious illness is at issue when a person
consults a Health Practitioner, it may be a good idea to take along a support person, who can
also act as a witness.
S.33 (Allowing Advanced Directives which are not at present allowed).
For more information on this, please check out:
www.euthanasiadebate.org.nz;
www.voiceforlife.org.nz/euthanasia
www.righttolife.org.nz
Of particular note when studying the EOLC Act are the Sections already mentioned, as well as
S.35 which interferes with Contracts and S.36 which has drastic secrecy provisions.
A recent petition called for Advance Care Directives (ACD) to be placed on a National Register.
Implied in this is that they should be legally enforceable. This may also increase pressure to
amend the End of Life Choice Act which at present regards such directives as null and void.
(Ref: Sections 32 and 33). These Directives should remain null and void.
Strategy: What Can We Do About It?
We can do lots! For example:
- Learn about it so we keep up, and gain, confidence in our position, and can communicate it to
other people as the opportunities present themselves.
We can maintain and extend our own knowledge, including what is in the EOLC Act. You
can get lots of information at www.euthanaisadebate.org.nz
Or ask at [email protected] and you can be sent information, including a copy
of the EOLC Act.
Of particular note when studying the EOLC Act are the Sections mentioned above (5,8,10,33),
as well as S.35 which interferes with Contracts and S.36 which has drastic secrecy provisions. - Talk about it – wherever the opportunity arises. It other people talk about it, we can make
helpful points if we are well-informed. We don’t rely only on the media, because they don’t
always get it right. We can correct errors put out by media if we have knowledge. That includes
talkback. - Write about it. Take back the language and be prepared to challenge assumptions.
- Be brave! Be Assertive! Be determined! Those pushing euthanasia want us to be quiet. We
don’t have to play their game. We can join with others, at meetings, gatherings, sign and
promote petitions (see details below), give out leaflets, hold cottage meetings, write letters, put
messages on social media, visit Members of Parliament (we have a free guide sheet for this,
available on request.). All this is to peacefully express concern. In a democracy, this can have
effect.
As was pointed out years ago in an Oxford-based study, wherever euthanasia is legalised, there
is a tendency over time for the boundaries to widen and the number of cases to increase.
Canada proves that!
In addition, a public opinion poll was taken before the referendum which allowed the euthanasia
law to be put into effect. This poll showed that many people thought that the new law would
allow what was already allowed, such as the right to decline treatment and to be made
comfortable and allowed to die. - Contacting MPs
We have available a Guide to use in visiting MPs and also a Guide for making
Submissions. We need to be ready to make submissions if the opportunity presents itself.
A list of MPs and their email addresses is very useful for expressing concern and after the most
recent election no doubt needs updating if not already done. For further info, the links below may
help (just copy and paste a link into your browser)
Members of Parliament – New Zealand Parliament (www.parliament.nz)
Contact an MP – New Zealand Parliament (www.parliament.nz)
We are still, of course, opposed to legalised euthanasia. But we are very opposed to extending it.
Leave a Reply