RIGHT TO DIE

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 12750, 4 January 1936, Page 9

RIGHT TO DIE

DOCTORS AND SUFFERERS. rifOULK.Vi WITH MAW ANCLES. tile law of .England over give doctors ihe right in hasten tlie emi of pei-'otis suffering from disoas°- which must inevitably lead to death;* asks the Xo\vs-( hronicle.

Mr Justice Goddard, summing tip in the ease, of Miss Muriel Welsdon. ilie “O-year-old typist, who, at tile Old Bailey, London, was acquitted of tin.- charge of murdering her mother, a patient, in a mental hospital, by administering mediaal to her. said : •'.Many people in this court. may tltin k that, some day it might, bo well to provide by law that- the passing of a. pel son aifliotod with ait incurable disease, either in ininrl or body, might bo expedited. But assuredly, if ’ j t . ever were to become law, that, hot could bo given only tinder the most, rigorous safeguards and not. left, to the uncontrolled discretion of a relative.”

-Most medical men are sympathetic to t ln' point of view that inevitable death ought not- to he allowed to be agonisingly slow, hut they feel strongly that the responsibility oT giving final release would be far 100 great for personal acceptance, even if legally permissible.

Sii Bruce Bruee-Porlor, the eminent physician, contributing to a number of opinions, said: -‘From time to time eases must arise in which euthanasia is definitely indicated. Jn such eases there' should lie some system under which the afflicted person might-—provided he was mentally fit to do so—make application to his doctor to he assisted to a gentle'end. “The medical man should then bn in a position lo place this application before sonic soil of Mat tilory body perhaps a small council consisting of a medical expert, a medical jurist, a law officer, and, possible, a legal representative of the patient's family. “If. after thorough consideration of flic ease, this statutory body agreed that euthanasia was necessary, they would empower the doctor to carry on! the process, granting a certificate to enable him to do so.”

Sir Bruce hold that it would he. very necessary that any request for euthanasia should nine only from Ihn afflicted person.

Only from the Patient. “There are few of us who have not at some lime or olher experienced great mental distress resulting frotr Ibe knowledge that, a friend or rela* lion was enduring agonv, nnd flint death must eventually ensue,” he said.

“On these occasions if would seem almost obvious that, to expedite the termination of the suffering would bo the most humane course. But. no medical man would take on himself the responsibility of bringing death to n patient. Apart from moral points against euthanasia, there are other reasons he must take into consideration. “In the final singes of any painful illness which is likelv to prove fatal the patient is, as a rule. 'Unconscious; and the doctor must be certain- that, there is no possible chance of recovery. “Every medical man can remember eases in his own experience where for some reason unknown a disease lias become arrested in its course, and eventual recovery has ensiled.” A Harley Ptreet. physician said: “Doctors, even with the law behind thorn, would find it difficult, to bring about, euthanasia with an easy mind. Any doctor deserving of the. name looks on life as a sacred thing, and regards himself as having a mission to save it. “Ho feels th if no case, no matter how desperate its character may he, is absolutely hopeless; always he. sees a ray of- hope—and many a time he has been proved right.”