Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Why I arranged mercy killing of Scots socialite

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
11 February 2007
THE Glasgow doctor who arranged for a pioneering businesswoman to end her life at a Swiss clinic last night revealed how the socialite was angry she had to travel there to die.
Libby Wilson, a former GP and family planning specialist in the city, said 82-year-old Elisabeth Rivers-Bulkeley wanted to end her days in her East Lothian home, rather than being forced to fly to another country for a lethal injection.

But although Rivers-Bulkeley had also wanted to publicise her plight before her death last December to highlight voluntary euthanasia, she eventually made the trip in secrecy, to protect the identity of her travelling companion.

Wilson said that despite the setback the cancer sufferer, who did not want to be a "nuisance" to anyone, was cheerful and joking with those around her as she prepared to die.

Rivers-Bulkeley flew to Zurich on December 18 and her life was ended with a fatal dose of barbiturates at the Dignitas clinic in the city a day later. According to Wilson, the 80-year-old UK convener of the voluntary euthanasia group Friends at the End (FATE), who liaised between Rivers-Bulkeley and the clinic, Rivers-Bulkeley said she wanted her death to cause a debate, and had considered how to gain the maximum publicity for her situation.

Wilson said: "She got in touch in September and explained she had terminal cancer and wanted help getting to the clinic in Switzerland

"It is my role to check whether Dignitas will take a particular person, and I knew that if it's terminal cancer then the clinic will accept you.

"She knew she was terminally ill and her condition was only going to get worse, so she wanted to end her life before she felt she was becoming a nuisance to everybody and while she was still in control.

"She was very unhappy she had to go to another country for this, and said she would rather have had the extra time with her family and friends here. But she had to go away while she was still capable of travelling and could get on the plane."

Wilson added: "She wanted to travel alone, and at the beginning she was keen on her situation being publicised. She felt very strongly about the issue. But the policy at Dignitas is that you should be accompanied, and when she learned about that she decided she did not want to expose her friend to publicity."

That phone call in September set in train a three-month scramble for the paperwork for Rivers-Bulkeley to be allowed to die at the clinic. Dignitas first of all insists would-be clients become members of its organisation, which costs a £50 joining fee and £25 per year.

It insists on written opinions from two doctors, recently-certified copies of birth certificates, copies of residence permits or proof of address, and marriage or divorce documents.

Dying at the Zurich clinic costs £3,000, not including flights, the cost of getting documents, or the final night's stay in a hotel on the eve of the death. The organisation decrees that people must arrive the previous day to have some time to think the situation through.

On the day of the death, the member goes to a Zurich flat to be given the barbiturates. The whole process is witnessed and filmed so a tape of the incident can be viewed by local police.

Rivers-Bulkeley was born in 1924, the daughter of an Austrian industrialist. She was an ice-skating champion as a child and found herself in England when the Second World War broke out.

She married in the UK in 1943, and later led a campaign for women to be allowed to become stockbrokers in the City of London. She retired to Scotland but developed breast and bowel cancer about a year ago.

Wilson and Austrian-born Rivers-Bulkeley spoke by telephone on four occasions, as they made the arrangements for her death. Rivers-Bulkeley finally received the go-ahead for the assisted suicide in November.

Wilson said Rivers-Bulkely had always been "very lucid and cheerful and matter-of-fact about the whole thing.

"She even joked about the bureaucracy of getting a copy of her birth certificate from Vienna, which caused frustrations as it took three weeks to arrive."

Wilson said she typically received about five calls a week from people enquiring about suicide, but many were not considered suitable for death at the clinic. Dignitas will only accept those with a terminal or incurable, severe medical condition.

She said: "If someone phones up wanting to die because they feel depressed or unhappy, I either just talk to them or refer them for help or counselling. Very often, it helps people just to be able to talk to someone."

Anti-euthanasia organisations have condemned the assistance Rivers-Bulkeley was given. Phyllis Bowman, the executive director of Right to Life, said: "No matter how lucid this woman may have appeared, it's clear she was suffering from depression. It is quite wrong of organisations to exploit her suffering for their agenda.

"Once she had been helped to deal with her depression she would have wanted to make the most of each moment of life. After all, once you're dead, you're dead for a very long time."

A spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland said: "Deliberate killing is never an answer. Human dignity and human life must be protected."

The full article contains 921 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 10 February 2007 7:12 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Euthanasia
 
1

www.scottwebb.co.uk,

11/02/2007 00:42:25

People should be allowed to die with dignity, in a place of their choosing

2

Scaramouche,

11/02/2007 00:43:51

So Right To Life and the Catholic Church believe it's more dignified to see out the end of your days in extreme pain and suffering, even though the drugs obviously don't work!

Says a lot about them, doesn't it!

As said before, I applaud the lady's strength of will to end her life without more pain. She was a brave woman. And she did what she thought was right for her. No-one else need say otherwise. They have no right.

3

Bill, Dunblane,

11/02/2007 01:00:09

I only know that I would want the right to decide for myself.

Religion, thank God (!) has never played any part in my life, and should have no part in deciding my death. It is after all, the very last thing I can do.

Agree totally with 1, 2 and 3.

4

zeno,

11/02/2007 01:12:49

See Friends at the End's website at www. friends-at-the-end.org.uk.

5

Wisnaeme,

Sent to Coventry. 11/02/2007 04:52:43

Aye, about right. I lost a lovely lady,a soul mate in the prime of life after a four year illness.She was a nurse who specialised in the care of the terminal ill and the elderly so there was little she didn't know about her condition.That lady had been there,witnessed and cared for folk with the same terminal illness.
One of her worries was I wouldn't be able to cope and she would end her days in a hospice or hospital ward no matter how caring and considerate those places might be.
Before she lost her ability to speak she made her wishes known that she wanted to be surrounded by her things, in her own home, in her own bed with dignity and that was done so.No undertaker's for her either.Done the old way,four days at home and then taken by myself ,family and friends to her rest.

That was the way of it and I would hope that though folk do not often have everything they may have perhaps wished for in life ,can if they have the time to prepare for death have at least their wishes respected to die in the place of their choice.
Sometimes that is not possible but as some previous comments have stated, it is not the the place of the holy than thou or those in authority and their interpretation of convention that have the right to deny death with dignity and and respect for freedom of choice.

6

jim lad,

the capital 11/02/2007 07:24:04

#3 i think you put it eloquently,i certainly agree perhaps others night have a problem with the religous element,but i think you speak for the many rather than the few.In death we only have dignity,dont take that away.

7

Conan,

Here 11/02/2007 07:41:51

Bravo, Mrs. Wilson - Thank You for being there when you were very much needed. You are a brave and compassionate woman who has done nothing but good all your days, and you make me proud to be in your company ..... you truly are building that veritable 'stairway to heaven', which you will so richly deserve when your turn comes (which I do hope will be a long time iin coming).

8

Chaz,

Edinburgh, Scotland 11/02/2007 08:03:30

It's MY life, it's MY death....let me live and die the way *I* want to.
It's so sad that for some reason we can't get the laws changed here.
That poor woman had to leave her home, her country, her friends, her family...to die in peace.

9

Wingnut,

Cambuslang 11/02/2007 08:49:49

Right on everybody. More and more of us should be joining euthanasia organisations (any suggestions) to lobby for how we choose to die should some terrible debilitating illness befall us.

10

Stax6557,

Falkirk 11/02/2007 09:47:25

9# I thought it obvious from the majority of postings that people want and deserve the right to die as they wish. Suicide is a bad idea but only when taken as a result of indecision. This brave lady had made that decision. She obviously felt opiates were not a viable option for her.
Perhaps you, Phyllis Bowman and The Roman Catholic Church should listen to what each and every human being wants and at the very least deserves.

11

Keir Hardie,

Inverness 11/02/2007 09:52:38

Does the writer of the article think I'll be more sympathetic to the woman's plight if she he tells me she was a socialite? He's gravely mistaken if so.

12

MaryG,

Nairnshire 11/02/2007 10:01:45

Problem is, it can be the thin end of a big huge wedge. How long before "loving" relatives decide that Granny has outlived her usefulness, and the nursing home fees are eating away at "their" inheritance, so we'll morally blackmail her into doing the decent thing by us. No way, Jose, it's up to The Man upstairs to say "Come in, number seven, yer time's up".
Never forget, it's how Hitler started, euthanasia for the handicapped, moving on to Gypsies, Jews, Communists, people who disgreed with him...
It's like abortion. The Act was passed with the best of intentions, now it's retrospective birth control.

13

LAM,

Edinburgh 11/02/2007 10:05:29

I agree with the majority. When my times comes I want to die with dignity, with my loved ones around me, and in a place of comfort for my last moments. This lady should have had the right to do that also. It is truly sad that she didn't. There are a lot of horrible painful ways to die an most of us neither want them nor want our families to see us going through that. It is fine for those to say it is wrong but until your in that persons shoes... don't think your opinion counts much!

14

ochone ochone,

11/02/2007 10:10:30

Honestly Keir, pick the irrelevent padding up why don't you? I suspect you have a shed full of axes regularly ground. Oh dear. As to Rulesbutnotrulers assertion that opiates can relieve the harshest pain - um no they don't - they only create a sort of disembodied sensation so you care less. I know. Everyone COULD have a decent exit if it weren't for the malevolent interference of the pro-lifers. MOST GPs know their patients and COULD be relied on to know when it was time to administer a stronger drug. How can they risk it now though with the Right and the Good questioning their abilities?

15

karenw,

LONDON 11/02/2007 10:24:50

Euthanasia is wrong. Human life should be preserved and pain, if present, alleviated with analgesics. People who are "laughing and joking" are manifestly not in severe distress.

16

Em.C.Spiteri,

11/02/2007 10:38:54

I do not criticise the women who suspected to be in a lot of pain as her sickness progresses.
But it is totally stupid to criticise the catholics beleive in life. Why is it always the Catholic church that comes to mind, how about the Jehova Witnesses, they got the Bible all wrong anyway.

17

Scaramouche,

11/02/2007 10:57:30

#18. I mentioned the Catholic Church because they were part of the article. Beleive me, I include every major and and minor religion, denomination, sect, cult or whatever, who comes up with this "martyr to pain" complex claptrap.

Why? Why should a person suffer so much pain and agony and have to rely on huge amounts of morphine to alleviate it? What's the point? To show everyone how "brave" we are in the face of it?? To show a mythical being that we are up to its "saintly" standards and therefore are worthy of a place at its side in "heaven"?

That's fine if you're into religion and believe that's what your god wants. But many of us don't believe in these 'supernatural' entities, and we don't see why their religious or societal rules should apply to US! But they don't like that do they??

No, what a religion or society fears is self-determination. That's what it boils down to. Fear of individualism and the right to self-determination. That's why they build congregations and proselytize.

As for the bible .... it's just another book. I can't beleve I waded through all of that ..... and it still still didn't tell us what the overall plot was. I though I was reading sodding Rankin!!!

18

Keir Hardie,

Inverness 11/02/2007 11:02:52

#26 it just jumped out at me, and it distracted me from the story, that was the problem. I do agree with people's right to die in such circumstances, although I wouldn't want to have to say where the line was.

19

Swilly Tisher,

Loch Maree 11/02/2007 11:03:10

Better than dying in Cumbernauld !

20

Keir Hardie,

Inverness 11/02/2007 11:03:11

#16 I mean

21

Justy,

Edinburgh 11/02/2007 11:25:47

I wonder why the apparent unbeliever, or jittery theologian, Bill from Dunblane wastes his time thanking a Deity in whom he obviously disbelieves?
Because he (the e-mailer, hasn't a clue about the issue in question?

Justy

22

Bill, Dunblane,

11/02/2007 11:48:00

25 - Justy

If you can't understand a simple bit of sarcasm - what do you think the exclamation mark in brackets was for?

For 'Pete's' sake!

23

Alex.,

11/02/2007 12:19:08

Live with dignity and die with dignity. Other superstious people and organisations should not bully the terminally ill by deciding how, when and how long they should suffer and die.

24

WI in GA,

11/02/2007 12:36:54

If I had a terminal illness I'd want the right to choose to end my life when it gets particularly bad (constantly in pain but yet the VERY expensive drugs/treatments don't help). I am a very independent person. If I am getting to the stage where I have to depend on someone to get me a glass of water/turn the page when I read a book/change my diaper etc. Euthanise me! Why live a half life? Just to make up numbers?

25

Chikderic,

Inverness 11/02/2007 13:15:20

#9 It is just not true that all pain can be managed by opiates. When I was in hospital and had pain in the bladder, I was told that opiates are no use in this case as the pain I suffered was on a differnt "circuit" to most other pains.

The fundamantal question here is one of individual freedom. Thsoe who do not believe in suicide need not apply it to themselves. They have no right to inflict their views on others. I am not harming them if I commit suicide. Why should it be legal to treat your body with drugs, alcohol, self-harming etc. which leads to much expense and misery to society, but illegal to end your life if there is nothing worthwhile left?

26

betcoch,

Livingston 11/02/2007 13:16:23

It seems the UK only allows terminally ill and suffering animals to die with dignity i.e be put to sleep.

27

Saltire,

Thailand 11/02/2007 13:41:49

#6 No more to say. A message to us all

Thank you

28

Paul S.,

Mauricetown, NJ, USA 11/02/2007 13:44:17

#30
Amen.

What a bizzarre view of ourselves we have when we treat our pets better than we treat ourselves. I'm not suggesting that we should stop treating them well Far from it, what with our four cats and a dog! But that we should value ourselves at the same level, raise our own condition. It is a sign of how little we value life that we do not value its end.

29

David Robert,

Richmond 11/02/2007 14:28:16

I have and practise religious beliefs but if I was terminally ill and just had a "life" to look forward to of pain and just deteriorating life quality, I would want to be put down. After all, if a family pet is suffering from cancer we regard it as an act of love to free it from pain. I'm not sure where the religious tenets about human life being so sacred come from. Anyway how do the religious authorities know that we do not receive a command from God that it now our time to go to His world. I know all the arguments about Hitler etc. but there are ways round getting rid of granny for the unscrupulous, and there always will be. My late mother used to say about us all being here to help one another. I wish more people think like that although I agree with her. That to me includes helping me leave this world if it becomes necessary. One thing that intrigues me is that many of those who cite religious beliefs are against assisted suicide, but those without religiouse beliefs are in favour of it. Very strange when you consider the religious belief in life after death but non believers think there is nothing after death so you would expect the believers to joyfully go on to another place but the non believers would want to put it off as long as possible. I WANT A PAIN FREE DIGNIFIED ENDING FOR MYSELF.

30

AD,

11/02/2007 14:35:47

If you're religious and your religion says don't do it then don't but keep your nose out of everybody else's life. Why oh why does the church have to stick it's nose into everybody else's business. I don't stick my nose into the church's business - why would I want to?? I'm with #20 Scaramouche.

People should have the right to chose.

I thought the government would appreciate this. Think how much money the NHS would save if they didn't have to keep people alive that have come to the end and want to go.

31

media4,

Ottawa, Canada 11/02/2007 14:47:22

#14 MaryG....You misdraw the spectrum of human rights with your suggestion that the next step from such cases of assisted suicide is mass murder by governments. The right to end one's life, if terminally ill, is a step towards greater individual freedoms. Hitler and his crowd were at the opposite end of the spectrum...total government control over the fate of the population. Governments may intervene with a set of mutually-agreeable guidelines that the terminally ill must follow, suchas psychological counselling, a "cooling off" period, and proper facilities. But the terminally-ills' right to end their own lives is totally opposite to the exterminations planned and performed by the Nazis and others of that ilk.

32

David Robert,

Richmond 11/02/2007 14:59:29

I agree with Horrible Cankers #35. I remember many years ago a person saying the Church says that animals have no souls. At the time I was too young to think quickly and say that as Man is only a species of animal, although luckily for us more or less at the top of the food chain, it follows from the comment that we to can have no soul. Anyway why would God want to welcome me into His Kingdom but exclude my pet cats.

33

matthew in davao,

philippines 11/02/2007 15:13:18

i am an r.n. worked in oncology in glasgow for a wee while. o.k. there is pain for terminal cancer patients but as i recall we did not stint on giving morphine, bromptons cocktails etc. i dont think patients in the u.k. suffer needlessly. as i recall, we always gave as much and as often as needed, possibly my memory is not perfect. i went to the u.s. and worked there for 25 years. now there patients suffer. mr god doctor rules and he/she is not going to leave themselves open to litigation by ordering "too much" analgesia. bromptons dont exist, in my experience. my recollection of scottish treatment is that we gave mega doses, which in reality kills the patient. which when you see a human being suffer is really a blessing. i also would say that the caring, in scotland is inherent in the treatment. i dont think i have phrased this too well but let me say, i would rather be terminal in scotland than elsewhere.

34

Jockyw,

11/02/2007 15:19:40

Great shame that in your dying days you have to travel abroad & pay additional monies. Very sad ending when you are terminally ill.

35

dct,

strathmartine 11/02/2007 15:27:02

isn't it pathetic how the catholics who spent centuries torturing people to death, now with government laws prohibiting that, they try to torture us in other ways?
Perhaps our most basic right is to choose the manner and time of our own death. Religions in general are only hurting themselves by attempting to interfere with this right.
In my book, Dr. Christian Barnard, the surgeon who performed the first heart-transplant said it best:
"sometimes, the best treatment is death." - Alan

36

Dutch-Indo: Ernie,

11/02/2007 15:30:32

I could not have said it any better than this: ...No, what a religion or society fears is self-determination. That's what it boils down to. Fear of individualism and the right to self-determination. That's why they build congregations and proselytize. ... BRAVO #20. It takes a lot of courage to speak up for individual rights. Only the Renaissance could have put that idea into fruition. It's a bloody shame that the Church and other meddlers continue to have so much influence in our lives.

37

betcoch,

Livingston 11/02/2007 15:53:09

Keeping terminally ill people in great pain alive is not prolonging "life" - it's prolonging the agony, it's prolonging dying. When there is no appreciable quality of life, that life is not worth living anymore. The essential thing here is that we should have the choice to end an unbearable existance. Those who have religious convictions can make their choice not to end it. That way everyone's happy. My mother was very religious. She lived till she was 82, but her last two years were full of pain and suffering. She prayed every day that God would "take her". Finally, she died in her sleep. I was relieved that her suffering had ended.

38

Travis C,

Staunton Virginia 11/02/2007 15:54:19

A week or so ago Barbaro the Kentucky Derby winner was put down and it seemed that the whole country made a fuss about how it was a hard but noble choice to do it, but it was for the best. I think it is quite ironic that with all the animal rights people in the world that was allowed, since no one knows exaclty what Barbaro's opinion on the matter was! We will put a horse or dog or cat out of it's misery, but we will condem people who make the same choice for themselves and it is none of our business. I believe our Dr. Kervorkian is in jail now for letting people make their OWN choice. That is wrong. If we can feel sorry about a horse which we can't even talk to, why can't we feel compasion and let a person do what they WANT to and we know it for certain.
TKS

39

media4,

Ottawa, Canada 11/02/2007 16:10:19

#42,....an interesting theory that removes the religious part of the equation and concentrates on the scientific. But if "the evidence that death is the end of suffering is as unprovable as its opposite," then how can you argue that "to try and escape suffering by suicide is as foolish as trying to get rid of a long nose by moving to Australia." If you truly believe that there's no proof either way then, as a believer in the strictly scientific approach, you shouldn't be able to judge one way or the other ;)

40

quarrybanksurfer,

Perthshire 11/02/2007 16:20:06

I was sickened to read this, that a person is fit enough to travel to another country cannot be at the end of their life. It is so sad that she felt that she needed to end her life. It is thankful that this cannot be done in Britain. As it comes to mind of the 1930s Germany, it started with terminating the lifes of those not deemed to have a life and were did it end up. Many people get depressed with life, granny is to much of a nuisance, were do you stop when this has become part of everyday life.

41

Martha,

11/02/2007 16:30:38

It all depends on whether you are a Jew, a Christian, or not. According to the Judeo-Christian tradition, God gives life and it is His to take. There is also such a thing as redemptive suffering, according to the same tradition. If you are a practicing Christian or Jew, then you cannot be in favor of suicide, which in both religions has long been held to be proof of mental defect or disease, and therefore not sinful in itself.

And, the contributor who talked about the "thin edge of the wedge" is exactly right. Already, every hospital in the USA asks families, when the patient is unconscious or otherwise incapable, what are their wishes-- to give or withhold aggressive treatment. A family member MUST sign a "Do Not Resuscitate" (DNR) order or the patient will be given ever possible measure to sustain life.

Abortion is already a kind of euthanasia, with a parent deciding that the unborn child shall or shall not continue living. We've had the disgusting, appalling Terry Schiavo case, where the poor afflicted woman was starved to death by a monster of an ex-husband. There are constant stories of old people in The Netherlands being consigned to what is essentially murder by younger family members who do not want to be bothered by them, or want their property. It doesn't take long before anybody with a defect, or the wrong gender, or the ugly and unlovable, or this or that religion or ethnicity, will be likewise thought of as unworthy of life.

Be careful before you criticise religion for insisting and maintaining that life is sacred. You won't be young and strong forever. Do you really want somebody else to decide that you should die? And, as for laughing and joking when facing euthanasia, the writer who said "she wasn't in any pain or she wouldn't have been laughing and joking" was 100 percent correct. People in the last stages of terminal cancer are in acute pain if they are conscious; or they are deeply

42

Martha,

11/02/2007 16:40:45

Travis: humans have observed for eons that animals are not capable of making truly rational choices about much of anything. These same creatures are also not capable of understanding that there is every possibility of another level of existence after death. The sense of the spiritual is one of the great differences between humans and all other creatures.

Barbaro was put down because the vets could not end his suffering, and it was more merciful to kill him. An adult human being has every chance at writing an Advance Medical Directive, wherein he/she explicitly states that aggressive measures are to be given or withheld. These directives, also known as "Living Wills" are legal documents and must be followed by responsible family members and physicians. At least, that is the case in the USA.

I don't think you will find many parents on this planet who would not do anything and everything necessary to sustain the life of a desperately sick child, even though the child might suffer temporarily from the treatment. But, those same two parents would have a family pet put down who was pronounced incurable by a vet. That is the difference. We hold human life to be separate and different than other animal life, to which we are stewards-- whereas, human life is given by God and must NEVER be taken lightly.

Otherwise, we are as the animals themselves, who abandon the sick and deformed, leaving them to die horrible deaths. In fact, we are much worse than the beasts, since we have the awful power of deciding for somebody else that he/she will live or die, as is expedient for us, as in the case of abortion and euthanasia of the elderly and/or chronically infirm. It is that power that MUST be reigned in by religious and secular authority, or we are all no better than Nazis and muslim fanatics, who took and take it upon themselves to label people as "undesirables" or "infidels" and therefore "untermensch" whose

43

JG,

Fife 11/02/2007 16:45:43

#47 Martha
The woman in this article chose to die in a dignified way at a time of her choice. No-one ended her life - she decided it was better to not be a burden and didn't want to prolong her agony. It is fine to be sanctimonious and righteous (and I would agree that this course of action has to be scrutinised very carefully - we certainly don't want people disposed of because the family can't be bothered or want the money) but until you have personal experience of such things, you are in no position to preach. Of course if you don't agree with suicide then you should never do it.

44

Laurette,

San Diego, California 11/02/2007 16:46:18

My dad died in my house from lung cancer in 1981 If I could have helped end his last few days sooner and spared him from the agonizing pain he suffered, I would have done so.
#9 - of course opiates would mask the pain. If you're unconscious - you don't hurt!!

45

aussiemike,

maryland, USA (formarly Perth, Australia) 11/02/2007 16:51:18

I have just finished watching a film about this very topic - 'Mademoiselle and the Doctor'.
I recommend it to all. It is a most moving film about one's right to life AND death in whatever way one wishes.
Dr. Philip Nitschke, an Australian 'Right To Dignified Death' protaganist, is a pioneer in this field.
Who do we think we are deciding when another person should or should not die? Surely we have the right to make our own decision?
I for one would make that same choice about my own death were I in the same position as this lady, and as Dr John Elliott, an Australian doctor, made on Jan 27, 2007, at the same Swiss facility.

46

Martha,

11/02/2007 16:55:59

JG: you are incorrect when you think I do not have personal experience of such things. And, being religious is not the same thing as being sanctimonious. Look it up in the dictionary.

I do not agree with euthanasia. It is like abortion at the other end of life. Some people want to end their lives, and they do-- but we judge them as being insane at the time.

There is little dignity about death no matter how it comes, JG. If you had experience with it, you'd know that already. Death is not easy for most people, just as birth is not easy. But both birth and death must be undergone by us mortals, and there is the hope that death is another form of birth, into eternal life.

I know for a fact, having been at both my mother's and father's deathbeds until they passed away, that death is very mysterious and that we do not know all that we think we know about it. There is also the possibility that something is gained by suffering. If you have a purely material view of life, then you can argue this until you are black in the face. Anybody with an ounce of feeling and awareness can't help but be awestruck by death, and the sense that something is continuing.

In fact, my mother's face became illuminated just before she died, as if there was some kind of light inside. It was a staggering experience and I still don't know what to make of it. But I was very much aware that it was not the end, but a beginning of something else, something incomprehensible. And, there are so many "near death" experiences on record, that you really do have to learn a little humility and admit that we humans don't know very much at all about either life OR death. And therefore, we should tread very carefully with these matters.

47

Martha,

11/02/2007 16:58:46

Aussiemike: everyone in any democracy DOES have the right to make decisions about his/her own death.

You create a Living Will and state that in the event of a terminal illness, that every measure to alleviate suffering should be taken, but that no measures to prolong life be given. You make sure that family members understand your wishes. And it will happen that way.

48

Dennis D,

The Other Side of the Pond 11/02/2007 16:59:17

#9 Tell a friend or close family memeber that the opiates work when they have to be given so much that they are unconcious for the last days of thier lives as well as writher in pain and agony because the dose needed to stop the pain will kill them, so the Doctor cannot give it to them.

49

Dennis D,

The Other Side of the Pond 11/02/2007 17:05:43

#52 Martha The difference between euthanasia and abortionrtion is the person with the life being terminated makes the decision. This decision is because they want to die with as much dignity as possible. It is their life, they have the right to choose how to end it just as they had the right to choose how they lived it.

50

rmdmd,

California 11/02/2007 17:07:41

There is something criminal here - that is the law that forces someone near the end of life to travel to a foreign country to accomplish their wish for a peaceful dying. Those who are facing terminal illness do not have a choice between life and death but they do wish a choice in the manner, location and time of that death. It takes great determination and, most of all, great courage to achieve the goal that this woman wished. If she had legally been permitted to have medication prescribed by Dr. Wilson she might well have enjoyed extra time with her family but she had to travel to receive that drug so her life was actually shortened by the law.
I am proud to call Dr. Libby Wilson a friend and a colleague and admire her for the courage she displayed in supporting this patient in finding a way to have some control at the end of life.

51

JG,

Fife 11/02/2007 17:19:10

#52 Martha
I do not have to look "sanctimonious" up in the dictionary - I know EXACTLY what it means - that's why I used it.

The woman in the article travelled to Switzerland by choice. She obviously felt that by dying in that way she has retained her dignity. If your interpretation of "dignity" is different then that is fine - never take the same course of action she did.

My grandmother died when she was 59 - apparently she looked (facially) better than she had for some time before her death. It was because she was no longer in pain and she looked at peace.

52

Margaret Walker,

Whangarei New Zealand 11/02/2007 18:09:08

It is sad that you have to be rich enough to be able to go abroad to end your life with dignity - there are many who would appreciate the opportunity and yet have to, because of lack of funds, to suffer on. It is a sick world where people who are suffering greatly are forced to stay alive.

53

jim lad,

the capital 11/02/2007 18:13:24

#47 Martha.your argument only stands up if you have been brainwashed into believing the hocus pocus about A god in the first place.I have no problems with believers,my problem is with the religious nuts who believe that their teachings are the only true teachings and so only your GOD can decide on death.All religions scare me they are without doubt based on fright and peoples emotions.do as we tell you or something evil will happen to you.I prefer my simpler way of going about life,doing no harm to anyone treating all with respect and at my end it will be my decision not a fantasy being.Thats my belief,how many of you religious people are prepared to respect that.

54

US Cavalry,

Virginia, USA 11/02/2007 18:16:32

Our streets are running ramped with killers as are our highways. With only a token force to prevent a few killing. Abortion clinic everywhere. But we put a man who assisted individuals who were in pain to end their suffering in jail. But yet it is against the law for death by choice. So you either transport to a country who does allow it or stick a shotgun into your mouth. Thousands are dying in Iraq each week. Where is the sanity in all this. I guess we are just too civilized.

55

Reagan1964,

Texas, USA 11/02/2007 18:22:47

As a professor, this is an issue I address in lecture to my students when discussing right-to-life and end-of-life issues. As a Christian, I understand the 'eternal' ramifications of taking one's own life; however, I also believe that God gave us intelligence and the ability to use it, i.e. HE gave us the right to choose our own path.

Only we as individuals know our limitations when it comes to intractable pain and suffering. No physician, family member, or government can make that personal decision for us. Had I known Ms. Rivers-Bulkeley, I would have supported her decision; it was hers to make, and hers alone. I would not want the government interfering in such a decision of mine, and I would not interfere in such a decision made by anyone I know, not a family member, a friend, no one, as it is THEIR choice and I have no right to intervene.

I hope I am never in a position to make that final choice, but if I am, I can assure you I would elect euthanasia over months of suffering that would still result in my death. If there is true compassion in the world, let it function freely in allowing each of us to make our own choice.

56

Wisnaeme,

Sent to Coventry. 11/02/2007 18:35:35

Without comment.

The dying persons bill of rights.

I have the right to be treated as a living being until I die.

I have the right to be cared for by those who can maintain a sense of hopefulness, how ever changing this may be.

I have the right to express my feelings and my emotions about my approaching death in my own way.

I have the right to expect continuing medical and nursing attention even though "cure" goals must be changed to "comfort" goals.

I have the right not to die alone.

I have the right to have my questions answered honestly.

I have the right to be free from pain.

I have the right not to be deceived.

I have the right to have help from and for my family in accepting my death.

I have the right to die in peace and dignity.

I have the right to retain my individuality and not be judged for my my decisions, which may be contrary to the beliefs of others.

I have the right to discuss and enlarge my religious and spiritual experiences, regardless of what they may mean to others.

I have the right to be cared for by caring, sensitive, knowledgeable people who will attempt to understand my needs and will be able to to gain some satisfaction in helping me face my death.

I have the right to expect that the sanctity of the human body will be respected after death.


This was created in a workshop on the terminally ill patient and the helping person and was published in the American Journal of Nursing,Vol 75 January 1975.

57

media4,

Ottawa, Canada 11/02/2007 18:48:25

#52 Martha....I regret you felt it necessary to define those who commit suicide as insane. Nothing could be farther from the truth. These are people who feel there's no other alternative before them...that hardly qualifies as insane. Society rightly decides that intervention is necessary in these cases to help these people understand that there are alternatives, that whatever problems they face can likely be solved. But to equate them with a terminally-ill person who's in full possession of her faculties and makes an informed decision to end her life early is incorrect. As well, your logic about death itself confounds itself. If we don't know anything about what happens beyond death, then who are we to question the decision by this woman, and others like her, who decide to bring on an event that will occur to us all? If "something is continuing," then surely it is continuing for her now, no matter the form of her death. By the way, you might be interested in the Stedman's medical dictionary's definition of euthanasia as "the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.' Check the latter half of that definition. In this day and age, almost anyone can be kept alive with the use of machines. My father died after a series of increasingly frequent strokes. Could he have been kept alive? Probably. Would he have wanted to continue living in a partially or fully-vegetative state? Definitely not. So he, too, by definition, was euthanised....he just didn't have the luxury of choosing the exact place and time.

58

Stushie,

Glasgow 11/02/2007 19:07:10

No one caused her to go to Switzerland - she could have taken a bottle of paracetemols and swallowed them down at her local pub. You all are making this woman out ot be a saint. She did what she did and that's the end of it and her.

59

"Scotty",

11/02/2007 20:10:28

No. 47 - - You should be very careful before you pass judgement on anyone other than yourself. I am alone with no dependants, loving or otherwise and am petrified of anything close to what this dear lady had to endure. IT IS NOT RIGHT THAT A PERSON HAS TO BE DRIVEN FROM THEIR FAMILY, HOME AND COUNTRY. ****** IT IS NOT RIGHT. God bless this lady and her husband; because God does still love and accept her.

60

Catharine,

11/02/2007 20:43:54

Dying with dignity is the bottom line - or it should be. An articulate, intelligent woman made the decision not to allow herself to become a burden to an elderly husband, not to go through the pain and agony of chemo and radiation, possible surgeries and the indignities that these treatments could necessitate. Dignity is what this woman had to go to Switzerland to find - how sad is that, what an unkind society we are that forces people like Mrs. Rivers-Bulkeley into such a situation, and all for some midaevel belief system of self-righteous piety. Blessings on her family and friends.

61

Larkie lass,

Arizona 11/02/2007 21:19:48

I had opiates for pain last year, let me tell you I'd rather have the pain than the itch and out of it feeling. Seems the bloody cancer didn't go away after all, I will fight tooth and nail till they tell me we're done and then I will take death my own way. I will not bloody suffer for anyone's right to life beliefs. And I am Roman Catholic.

62

Larkie lass,

Arizona 11/02/2007 21:33:11

friends son killed himself last year, seems school was hard, he was quite short and people made fun. To me that was a permanent solution to a temp problem, He would perhaps grow some more, but basically would move out of high school and learn to love himself . but ending a terminal illness is different.

63

Randy Reggie,

Cryin over my darlin Droopy Cock 11/02/2007 21:46:20

72....Larkie Lass you keep fighting, you obviously have a fighting spirit and are a positive person...treat yourself kindly and I wish you all the very best for your recovery.

64

Randy Reggie,

Cryin over my darlin Droopy Cock 11/02/2007 21:50:10

Ps..sorry about the name that was meant for another comment on another article!

65

1234567CalScot,

CA 11/02/2007 22:31:48

Saintly Martha, who claims that ending Terri Schiavo's life was wicked, is clearly a religious nut--one of those who put Terri's husband through a nightmare of court cases., and who denied Terri the right to go to God when He called her. No, they thwarted God's wishes by using man-made mechanical means to keep her body functioning, all so that they could publicly "beat upon their breast" and claim their righteousness. I refer Martha to the Bible to read what Jesus thought of that sort of public, self-serving display.

Martha, do get the facts straight. When Terri was finally allowed to meet her Maker, an autopsy was performed on her earthly remains. The autopsy dramatically showed that her brain had long been no more than mush. Clearly, she lacked sentience. Yet the religious right claimed that every and any autonomous twitch of her body was a sign of "life." As for the 'right to life' twits--I do so agree--I have a right to life--my OWN life, one not controlled by you or your bigoted opinions.

66

Dianna,

Toronto, Canada 11/02/2007 22:55:30

What a very courageous woman. So sad that she had to leave her elderly husband, family and friends. It would have been far kinder if she had been able to arrange her death in the privacy of her home with family present. Euthanasia should not be a right denied us when there is no hope and a painful entry into the final stages is inevitable. We are more considerate of our pets when death is approaching.

67

Paulc37,

USA 11/02/2007 23:19:11

Euthanasia necessarily leads to everyone having as their inalianable rights, the right to die at any time at any place.

Even children throwing their first fit.

A slippery slope to eternity

Abortion was for rape and Incest only. Now, forty Million rape and incests per year??????????

68

The Wizard,

OZ 11/02/2007 23:23:53

Much has been written about 'suicide'
I do not believe that being in a position to end one's life in a painless, dignified manner is 'suicide'
Someone mentioned having witnessed two deaths by people jumping from buildings. That is completely out of place in this forum. Nobody is suggesting we leap or have our loved ones heaved off a building.
I do not agree with prolonging the life of a person who is terminal and suffering and has stated clearly that they wish to go at a time and in a manner of their choosing.
If those of a religous persuasion can't handle that then let them do it their way but keep out of other peoples business. To me, religion is an opiate for those who cannot bear the thought that when you are deid, you are deid and thats the end of it.

69

Meggers,

Madison, Connecticut, USA 12/02/2007 01:10:52

The "right to die" is a most personal decision and should be considered at all costs. My mom lived to age 96 (born in Scotland) and at, or towards her end, she begged her physician to "let me go, please". I fully believe, in my heart, he obliged, as she was gone one day later after a visit from him. If he "helped" her, I applaud him. My mom was a strong woman had all her "smarts", but knew her time had come and was certainly will to end her life. We should all have this chance, if possible.

70

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 01:24:57

#25 Justy.

Hey Jusy we like your name .

Our cat is called Justy.

Obviously you are not a cat.

Cheers GC

71

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 01:58:36

#58 rulesbutnotrulers.
This is the first time in my short life I have read something that is logical and makes sense to my moderate level of intelect.
I don't believe in Faiths or associated Dietys or any religions.

I believe in energy that cannot be created or destroyed according to all known laws of physics .

So to read your post that another person thinks likewise about energy and connect it to life and death in human life was refreshing.

In my 20's , I was fortunate to escape from the cancerous clutches of religion that I was born into.

Later I realized all things dead or alive relate to energy which lives on and on into infinity long after death of the human body.

My dead body if buried will be devoured by the worms. decompose through bacteria ..etc , passing on the energy to live and die to other things.

Later to be devoured and so the energy cycle repeats and goes on to infinity.

In cremation the same energy cycle apply consuming my body in fire, continues the cyle of energy.

As a child I watched the bones of my ancestors dug up to make room for a new coffin. Skulls, bones earth all mixed up.
To me that was natural, but today that senario is illegal !!!!! Why ?

That energy from the decay of my ancestors bodies went on to support new life , growing grass, eaten by sheep and on and on.

As for the lady Elisabeth Rivers Bulkeley she had every right to have her life terminated, given her physical and mental condition, in my opinion.

Lighten up people no one will leave our planet alive.

So eat drink and be merry and have lots of great women. for sooner than you think, you will cease breathing for ever.

GC

72

Alphonzo,

Southland, USA 12/02/2007 02:04:47

As a Christian, I believe God weighs everything we do and every decision we make. I also believe He gave each of us free will to make the best decisions we can, and I believe any decision or action I take in dealing with my own life *must be between me and God*. Like most other things it is none of the government's business.

Suicide is a crime, and the penalty is death. For most of us it would be a permanent solution to a temporary problem but in the case of this woman and others like her, the problem was not temporary. Her decision to end her life is between her and her God, which is as it should be. I neither condemn nor applaud her decision; I'd like to think that if I were in that situation I'd hang in there as long as there was any good I could do anyone. I would also like to think that the decision was entirely my own, as far as God would permit.

Governments are very bad at minding their own business but in this matter for them to do otherwise is inexcusable. So...

Dear Governments: If you can't take our pain away, let us deal with it any way we choose. And when our cosmic clocks are finally, painfully running down, if you can't die for us, get the hell out of the way and let us do our dyin' in peace!

73

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 02:07:33

#77 1234567 Calscot

Clearly you are not familiar with the rantings of Martha, they are cast in rock

And mostly shallow in content or just a mixture of copy/paste and plagiarism.

Say Hi to the Queen for me, !!!!

GC

74

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 02:54:48

#63 Wisnaeme

The dying persons bill of rights

Hey man,
I presume (a dangerous thing) that the person who pened the above bill of rights, understood
"that the sanctity of the human body will be respected after death" would/will never happen.

Because either fire (cremation) or devouring by worms (ground burial decay) destroy the corpse.

Watcha tink man ??

GC

75

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 03:04:04

#48 Martha


Hey Martha,
I was begining to give you the "benefit of the doubt".
But having read your #48 post....forget it.

Martha, just keep on ranting with your half facts and your half truths.
Its amuseing, and nearly as good as reading the BEANO and the DANDY when I was a youngster.

Have a nice day

Try to stay away from your Tequila bottle, there's a good girl !!!

GC

76

William L,

Magalia, CA, USA 12/02/2007 03:16:55

#43 said it best, "Keeping the terminally ill alive is not prolonging life." For me, life is making a contribution, however slight, and I would just as soon "shuffle off this mortal coil" as stay in the realization that I was taking, not contributing. But to many of the preceding commentators I must ask:

Is not the delaying of clinical death as sinful as accelerating it?

77

William L,

Magalia, CA, USA 12/02/2007 03:39:44

#73, very perceptive. Maybe the good professor uses a different translation of the decalogue than mine where in the Twentieth Chapter of the Second Book of Moses, commonly called "Exodus," at the Thirtenth Verse are found the words, "Thou shalt not kill." There are no qualifiers as to who, what, under what circumstance, merely those four words (the same number in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek if you're interested). So you are right on -- the professor invents theology.

78

Robt M Blood,

Everett, WA USofA 12/02/2007 03:41:10

‘Tis a slippery slope, I tell ye.
Whose idea is it t’murder the unborn [abortion] and the elderly [euthanasia], and preserve the lives of the convicted wicked??
Whose indeed!

79

1234567CalScot,

CA 12/02/2007 05:15:29

Oh my, GalacticCannibal,
Indeed I am unfamiliar with Martha's ranting, but not, alas, that of her kindred spirits. I hope you were not the only one to notice my 'tongue in cheek' comments. May god (note: no capitalization!) save us from her twisted interpretation of the already biased rewriting of ancient scriptures (stories) by King James' and his men; their goal was to impose the will of the Crown, and the controlling rich, on an ignorant and superstitious populace. They succeeded remarkably well.
As for me, I have already, while compus mentis, written my wishes regarding my mode of death should I be in a tragic, vegetative, or imminently dying state. Simply put: DNR. This will, I hope, spare my family the horrendous decision of whether or not to pull the plug. I hope, too, that it will keep at bay the busy-body sanctimonious religious manipulators of America's fundamentalist right wing.

80

Sondra,

USA 12/02/2007 06:34:42

I've read the comments made on this subject. I have had two husbands who died of cancer, both Christian men. They fought gallantly to live, but did not fight death. One said, "If I had to get cancer to finally know and feel the presence of God, then so be it." His attitude and countenance changed drastically as he traveled his 4-year journey. As he let go of the facades he used to cope with life the real person began to emerge. He died at home in my arms and at peace with himself and with his God and with tremendous dignity, the way HE chose to die. The same for my first husband, again of cancer - who chose not to have deterioriating cancer treatment when there was no cure. I honored that wish. Again, as with husband #2, he was eager to live, but when he realized that he wasn't going to, he did not fight death. And, again, this man's outlook and attitude about life changed drastically - there was a sense of peace and calm about him, an acceptance that all set in God's hands, but ever insightful into his own issues of life. There was time to interact with our children, to make amends for hurts that heretofore had been unresolved. There was time for forgiveness and healing. I feel blessed to have been a part of these two marvelous men and their journey of life, and in their journey of death. Sadness, yes, at times, but privileged also at seeing the transformation in their countenance. I see these comments and having also lost a son in a car accident - poof, just gone instantly - and now walking a long journey with an ailing mother who desires to live passionately but is suffering physically, but is not suffering emotionally because she has a strong faith in her God who seems to sustain her with such tenderness. Lessons in life? I think so. Death is a personal journey - when it is done, it is done; and for those who seek a life hereafter, then for them it has to be as they believe. For those who think death is the last journey and it's o

81

Sondra,

USA 12/02/2007 06:40:55

(continuation of #95) The old addage, "Unless you've walked a mile in my moccasins . . ." I know I have presented "the other side of the coin" by taking this approach, but for me and for the journey of my loved ones, there WAS tremendous dignity, no complaints, no fear, and very little pain - for nearly six years with one mate, absolutely no pain, yet cancer of the throat and spread to the lymph. Horrible? Yes. But still very little pain. Refused even methadone. Got by with ibuprofen. Perhaps peace has something to do with it. Enough said. I enjoy your input. -s-

82

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 12/02/2007 16:45:30

#95 Sondra.
I wish all our HS graduates were able to write, spell and compose English as well as you. Sadly a hugh majority cannot spell and can barely read.

The feelings I see in your post, I experienced in my teens and very early 20's. When I look back to that time, my state of mind was controlled by my christian religious beliefs, and the anticipated life hereafter with god etc,,

I would have died for my beliefs then . But not now.

My state of mind then was no better or worse than the young men and women in the middle east who blow themselves up and go to paradise. All in the name of god .

Thankfully I managed to escape the cancerous cluthes of religion and diety control.

To day I relish ever moment of my existence and my embedded energy. And when my body stops breathing my energy will just transfer to another new set of conditions. to continue the energy cycle that cannot be destroyed. I enjoy all nature and its energy.

My only wish is, that as a child my parents and my environment had not conditioned my mind to think and believe in DOG (god) and eternal life and heaven and hell. But that was all they knew.

Religion is nothing more than crowd control. extremely dangerous .
Energy cannot be created or destroyed and I exist because of energy.


Have a nice day
GC
GC


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Do you support Margo MacDonald’s call to change the law on assisted suicide?
No, it’s not our job to decide who lives or dies
Yes, as long as its rigorously policed
Yes, terminally ill people should have that option

Web Links:

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.