TV channel to broadcast assisted suicide

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,213
Reaction score
22
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A British TV channel was scheduled to air a controversial documentary Wednesday night showing a terminally ill man committing assisted suicide.


Craig Ewert dictates a letter to his children before leaving for his assisted suicide in Switzerland.

The film follows retired university professor Craig Ewert during the last four days of his life in 2006, when he visited a Swiss clinic with his wife, Mary, in order to die.

The 59-year-old suffered from motor neurone disease (MND), which deprived him of the use of his arms and legs and caused him to be on a ventilator, Mary Ewert told The Independent.

MND destroys the body's motor nerves, eventually resulting in paralysis. Most sufferers die within five years of diagnosis although scientist Stephen Hawking has survived with the disease for more than 40 years.

"Right to Die: The Suicide Tourist" shows Ewert lying in a rented Zurich apartment, where an employee of the clinic prepares a lethal dose of drugs for Ewert to drink. As the camera rolls, and with his wife by his side, Craig Ewert then closes his eyes and dies.

Mary Ewert said her husband wanted his death to be filmed in order to show that a terminal illness does not have to result in a painful death.

"For Craig, my husband, allowing the cameras to film his last moments in Zurich was about facing the end of life honestly," she told The Independent. Watch more about the case »

"He was keen to have it shown because when death is hidden and private, people don't face their fears about it. They don't acknowledge that it is going to happen, they don't reflect on it, they don't want to face it. That's the taboo." What's your view? Click here to comment

Ewert was an American who lived in North Yorkshire, England with his wife. In a clip on the Web site of British satellite channel Sky Real Lives, which planned to air the documentary, he dictates an e-mail to his son and daughter in America.

"I truly expect that death is the end, that there is no everlasting soul, no afterlife," Ewert says. "This is a journey that we all must make at some time. I would hope that this is not a cause of major distress to those who love me and I expect that my dear sweet wife will have the greatest loss, as we have been together for 37 years in the deepest intimacy." Read explainer about assisted suicide


The production company behind the film says it explores the difficult choices made by patients and families of those who commit assisted suicide.

"'The Suicide Tourist will take the audience on a journey they could only have imagined, and will not forget," Point Grey Pictures says on its Web site.

Oscar-winning Canadian filmmaker John Zaritsky made the documentary with the family's permission and gained rare access to the Dignitas clinic in Zurich, where Ewert died.

Mary Ewert told The Independent that she was "very happy" with how the film turned out.

Opponents of assisted suicide said, however, the film was cheap voyeurism.

"I think it's reducing somebody's death to a kind of reality show, a peep show. I think it's very cheap," said Phyllis Bowman, executive director of Right to Life.

Bowman said she feared the film would encourage the idea of assisted suicide. That was echoed by Care Not Killing, an alliance of human rights, disability rights, and health care groups.

"The disproportionate media coverage given to a very small handful of persistent people, desperate to end their lives, creates the false impression that there is a growing demand for assisted dying," Care Not Killing said in a statement on its Web site.

The group said more attention should be paid to palliative care for dying people, rather than assisted dying.


It is against the law in the United Kingdom to help someone commit suicide, and it can bring a prison sentence of as long as 14 years. Recent court cases have sought clarity on the law, however, saying it does not specify at what point assistance begins.

Swiss law says only that helping someone commit suicide must not be for personal gain

TV channel to broadcast assisted suicide - CNN.com
 
After working with dying people in last five years, I have come to see how assisted suicide can be the best option for many - it does not work for all - but I believe that each person should have a choice. Many have to live with pain everyday - why must one suffer continually when quality of life is already over for that person.

The question is if someone helps them, how do one measure whether it was for personal gain or not? What defines personal gain exactly?
 
After working with dying people in last five years, I have come to see how assisted suicide can be the best option for many - it does not work for all - but I believe that each person should have a choice. Many have to live with pain everyday - why must one suffer continually when quality of life is already over for that person.

The question is if someone helps them, how do one measure whether it was for personal gain or not? What defines personal gain exactly?

Good question. I would assume that it refers to financial gain and the like. One of the reasons that the Death with Dignity acts in the U.S., and PAS everywhere, restricts the assistance. The patient must be able to take the drugs by their own hand.
 
In this instance the medical assistant made the death cocktail, and he requested it just as he would have requested a drink of water.

The only reason I feel that assisted suicide should be made legal is if all other treatments have failed, the person no longer has a quality of life that is equivalent to their pre-disease state, and they suffer in the terminal stages of their illness. The essentially means that if the person is on their deathbed and they know there is no recovery in the future, then let them end their own suffering and pass on into another life. Of course, you dont need a medical doctor to make you a death cocktail for you to drink. There are a number of items around your house that can kill you just as quickly and painlessly when mixed right. You could always ask your spouse to make the cocktail for you, set it on your night stand, say a final good-night, and leave the room. It would be entirely up to the terminally ill to drink it or not. If they do, then its suicide, if they don't then the next morning just pour it down the drain.

We can euthanize our cats, dogs, and animals when we fee they are suffering too much and there is little hope left. We aren't allowed to have that same compassion for each other especially when the terminally ill makes it known that they wish to die sooner rather than later.
 
Of course, you dont need a medical doctor to make you a death cocktail for you to drink. There are a number of items around your house that can kill you just as quickly and painlessly when mixed right. You could always ask your spouse to make the cocktail for you, set it on your night stand, say a final good-night, and leave the room. It would be entirely up to the terminally ill to drink it or not. If they do, then its suicide, if they don't then the next morning just pour it down the drain.

We can euthanize our cats, dogs, and animals when we fee they are suffering too much and there is little hope left. We aren't allowed to have that same compassion for each other especially when the terminally ill makes it known that they wish to die sooner rather than later.

:gpost: Dixie, you just said the words for me.

I would not leave the room, I would stay & hold their hands and make sure they know they are not alone. It has to be such a scary time.

If we are able to do euthanasia for animals, how come we are not able to provide such service for those really suffering at the very end at their lives?
 
:gpost: Dixie, you just said the words for me.

I would not leave the room, I would stay & hold their hands and make sure they know they are not alone. It has to be such a scary time.

If we are able to do euthanasia for animals, how come we are not able to provide such service for those really suffering at the very end at their lives?

I couldn't agree with the both of you more. I do think if one chooses to watch this documentary, if it is available to them, that they would come away with a whole new perspective on the topic.
 
It should be available BUT, it should be very strictly regulated, and only available to the worst cases. I dunno....I just feel kinda uncomfortable with the slippary slope in this case. Yes, I'm all that for people who are clearly obviously terminally ill.....but, what would prevent a couple who is devastated at the fact that their baby is disabled from "mercy killing" them?
 
It should be available BUT, it should be very strictly regulated, and only available to the worst cases. I dunno....I just feel kinda uncomfortable with the slippary slope in this case. Yes, I'm all that for people who are clearly obviously terminally ill.....but, what would prevent a couple who is devastated at the fact that their baby is disabled from "mercy killing" them?

What prevents that now? The same thing would prevent it under PAS. PAS is very strictly regulated. A disabled baby cannot request PAS, and cannot take the drugs causing death by their own hand.
 
We sure show more mercy to animals than humans! I am not saying that animals are not important but it seems like we do not trust humans to make their own choices if they decide to opt for assisted suicide - I am not referring to these who are already in coma or life support systems -but these people with sound minds and judgments - they should be allowed to decide.

After helping many die, I certainly would want to have a choice of assisted suicide myself as I have personally seen & felt anguish, pain and suffering - helped someone through her last three days on earth two weeks ago and it was very emotional.

A family member told me many years ago about his witnessing the suffering of his parents both suffering & dying from Alzheimers and its consquences. He promised himself that when he gets diagnosed with Alzheimers, he will take his own life. Sure enough he did a few years later. That is not something I would encourage anyone to do but it should become legal so it would not be so tarnished with society judgment.
 
Agreed, Gemma. I watched my own father die of cancer. He had told me early on,when it was discovered that he was indeed terminal,that he would stand it as long as he could, but if he reached a point where he could not stand it anymore, he would ask me to help him by telling him what a fatal dose of his painkillers and sedatives would be. I agreed that, should it reach that point, I would comply with his wishes. Thank God it didn't get there, and he died before the suffering became more than he could bear. However, he had lived his life with dignity, and, as his daughter, I refused to take that dignity from him in death.
 
I believe we should be able to request such instances of death whenever we want. It should be something included in people's wills also just in case they're not able to speak for themselves.
 
We can euthanize our cats, dogs, and animals when we fee they are suffering too much and there is little hope left. We aren't allowed to have that same compassion for each other especially when the terminally ill makes it known that they wish to die sooner rather than later.

I've had experience with a number of terminally ill animals since I take in rescues and some of them come to me ill so what can you do?

I would hate to have the same system operating for humans. I feel sometimes that some people, some vets can be a little TOO trigger happy for words. Like I had a pet with hind leg paralises and was advised to have her Euthanised. I refused to do so as I felt that Darktan still had a resonably good quality of life.

I have Euthanised animals that DID need it but I don't want people to get trigger happy like they do with animals so I would't be for Euthanasia. The only concessions I'd make is for people who are actually Dying and in pain. They can be given high levels of morphine that will kill them eventually, but the aim would be to eleviate suffering. I certainly wouldn't approve of removing feeding tubes or ventilators etc...

I don't like the sound of that programme. That man should not have been killed. He should have got councilling and rehabilitation instead. I'm glad assisted suicide is not permitted in Britain. I hope it stays that way.
 
It should be available BUT, it should be very strictly regulated, and only available to the worst cases. I dunno....I just feel kinda uncomfortable with the slippary slope in this case. Yes, I'm all that for people who are clearly obviously terminally ill.....but, what would prevent a couple who is devastated at the fact that their baby is disabled from "mercy killing" them?

Good point.
 
Interesting thread. From what I have seen personally, death is not pretty and often undignified. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch it on the screen, but that is just me.
 
Just a few weeks ago before my mom's death. She sign a legal paper that she does not want DNR *do not rescuited* *cpr* So she wanted to end her life if she goes back on the breathing machine. She was so sick of going thru that and I can understand that but that wasnt pain enough for her to suffer as I see it but she wanted to end her life.
 
Again this comes down to quality vs. quantity.

Do we deserve a better life or a longer life? I believe as humans, we should be allowed to make that choice. We know the moment between just having a bad day and really knowing when the time has come to pass away from this world.

Not everyone is going to get a doctor assisted suicide, but it should be made legal for those who are in the final stages of a terminal illness and their quality of life has gon down in the sense that they are bedridden, on a ventilator, or are heavily dependent upon heavy painkillers (IE - massive doses of morphine) just to live pain-free and in left in dreamlike state of mind and unaware of their surroundings. Not to mention however that morphine is addictive.

If you don't want a doctor assisted suicide, don't get one, but the option should be there for those who choose to end their own suffering and pass-on.
 
Again this comes down to quality vs. quantity.

Do we deserve a better life or a longer life? I believe as humans, we should be allowed to make that choice. We know the moment between just having a bad day and really knowing when the time has come to pass away from this world.

Not everyone is going to get a doctor assisted suicide, but it should be made legal for those who are in the final stages of a terminal illness and their quality of life has gon down in the sense that they are bedridden, on a ventilator, or are heavily dependent upon heavy painkillers (IE - massive doses of morphine) just to live pain-free and in left in dreamlike state of mind and unaware of their surroundings. Not to mention however that morphine is addictive.

If you don't want a doctor assisted suicide, don't get one, but the option should be there for those who choose to end their own suffering and pass-on.

:gpost:
 
Do we deserve a better life or a longer life? I believe as humans, we should be allowed to make that choice. We know the moment between just having a bad day and really knowing when the time has come to pass away from this world.

Unfortunately this isn't always the case. The severely disabled are not free from depression. I've gone through phases when I really wanted to kill myself.

I am now glad that I didn't do it because life is definately worth living.

This is a very real danger of legalizing assistive suicide. Why I am not for it.
 
Unfortunately this isn't always the case. The severely disabled are not free from depression. I've gone through phases when I really wanted to kill myself. I am not glad that I didn't do it because life is definately worth living. So I am very GLAD that a 'choice' of that kind was never offered to me.

This is a very real danger of legalizing assistive suicide. Why I am not for it.

No it isn't. The individual must have a terminal illness in order to qualify for PAS. They must also have 6 months or less to live. One cannot be granted PAS just because they are suicidal.
 
Again this comes down to quality vs. quantity.

Do we deserve a better life or a longer life? I believe as humans, we should be allowed to make that choice. We know the moment between just having a bad day and really knowing when the time has come to pass away from this world.

Not everyone is going to get a doctor assisted suicide, but it should be made legal for those who are in the final stages of a terminal illness and their quality of life has gon down in the sense that they are bedridden, on a ventilator, or are heavily dependent upon heavy painkillers (IE - massive doses of morphine) just to live pain-free and in left in dreamlike state of mind and unaware of their surroundings. Not to mention however that morphine is addictive.

If you don't want a doctor assisted suicide, don't get one, but the option should be there for those who choose to end their own suffering and pass-on.


It was :gpost:. I'm just not sure i like the idea of televising someone's death. I know it was to raise public awareness and I'm fine with that aspect of it, but the idea of watching someone die in front of me just gives me the willies.
 
Back
Top