ACT OF HUMANITY.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 2 November 1927, Page 9

ACT OF HUMANITY.

DEATH OF INCURABLES. DOCTORS’ OPINIONS. When a person is .so far weakened by disease that there is no hope of his recovery, and he has nothing left to live for, -should not the law’ allow’ of such a person being put out of his misery:-’ Christchurch doctors who were asked this question were unanimously of the opinion that in such circumstances the giving of death was an act of humanity. AY he ther a measure allowing This" would meet with the approval of the public, however, was a different question. It was thought, too, that there would be a danger of abuse, even with the most careful safeguards. At present, of course, a doctor is hound to maintain life to the last possible moment, no matter what the particular circumstances of the case. “I am sure all medical men are thoroughly in -sympathy with the feeling that suffering should he- ended in absolutely incurable eases where disease is combined with deformity, with excessive pain, or with offensive symptoms,” said the first doctor ajiproached by a reporter. He thought that most human beings in normal health felt- that if their life could he of no further use to them it should' he terminated, but the same people, when in an advanced state of disease, clung to life- and talked of getting better. DEFERRED HOPE. He knew’ of cases in which people both breathed and fed through tube-s, and had no possible- hope of recovery, but still wished to live. They lived in a state of deferred hope,, their attitude changing with the disease. in answer to a question as to whether some people did not wish, and even request that they might be relieved from their agony by death, the doctor said there were such cases, hut as when a person committed -suicide when he knew 7 that he must eventually die, this occurred generally when •the news came as a shock, and when hope had no time to- grow on the invalid. He himself had attended three doctors who were dying of cancer, and had wondered why, considering the distressing circumstances, they did not avail themselves of the means of dissolution that they had at hand. It seemed that in mortal diseases a .state of mind appeared when disabilities were accepted, the thought of which to a person in normal health would seem unbearable. UNINTELLIGENT BOARDS. He disliked the suggestion of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle that a hoard should decide on the cases in which death would bo preferable to life. “I hate hoards,” -said the doctor. “Their acts are always unintelligent. I don’t think that it would be possible in a democratic State to get a measure- allowing this. When vivisection meets with isuc-h bitter opposition, and such unreasoning arguments, in spite of its wonderful results, what would be said of a thing like this, against which many more powerful arguments might lie- brought?” “Such an arrangement, properly conflicted with a full measure of responsibility. would be a sound and useful measure,” said another doctor. It would have to be safeguarded with the utmost care, but the thought _ ahoard of three doctors and a- Justice of the Peace would make it- -safe. He considered that- even in- the ease- of adults it should not he considered necessary to ask the patient’s permission, unless this had been specially requested. A person would he much happier if he did not have- to make the decision and knew nothing of it, and might, when it- came to the point, lack the moral courage to put life behind him. <