Exit International's Argument Against Euthanasia

Words: 1026
Pages: 5

Good Evening I’m Dr. Izzy Hanson and thank you for inviting me to speak at Exit International’s inaugural Conference here in Melbourne.

I want to start my address this evening by asking you all, who are interested medical practitioners, to imagine this scenario.

Imagine yourself as an 87 year old. You are married to the person you’ve loved for 62 years with whom you’ve raised three children. You know you are nearing the end of your life and can look back at everything you’ve accomplished, the adventures you’ve had, and the fun times you’ve spent with loved ones. Now imagine looking towards your future. You know that you are already suffering some physical deterioration and this will only increase with time. As will the pain that goes with
…show more content…
What would you do if your dog were terminally ill, if it was in pain and no longer able to stand up or urinate on his own? Obviously if your pet was in this position the humane thing to do would be to let it die peacefully and make the decision for your pet to end its suffering. How is it that legally we have the right to make this decision for our pets but not for our loved ones or ourselves? Surely it’s obvious that forcing someone against their will to die slowly and in intolerable pain rather than allowing them to die quickly and peacefully is cruel and inhumane. In a recent poll conducted by Melbourne University 86% of the Australian public agree that those suffering an appalling and agonizing terminal illness should be allowed by law to have the medical help to end their lives …show more content…
However, according to the nurses who tend those suffering at first hand, the law must change and must change soon. In reality the solution is simple. Firstly, a psychiatric test must be conducted before any decisions can be made. At least three medial practitioners should be involved in this process. Secondly, patients must be suffering from a terminal illness or be over the age 85 and have legal consent from their immediate family. Unlike the Netherlands, Australia will not extend euthanasia to include children and the mentally ill – this becomes a very grey area indeed as to who is consenting to what. We must all, as responsible and caring medical practitioners whose aim to prevent suffering take this message out to the media and to the public in order to change what is an inhumane, iniquitous and immoral