Why NZ First are right and the Euthanasia law needs to be a public referendum 

8
261

The Euthanasia Bill is being discussed tonight in Parliament.

I am a firm believer that this needs to be a public referendum.

I believe that because the Politicians are looking to reverse one of the most important civil rights leashes we have to demand public health tries to keep us alive no matter what.

By allowing assisted suicide, we open an enormous door that can’t be closed and the entire public need to not only have a say on that, but the decision must be one we agree on because once the media pick up on stories of euthanasia coercion we all need to be responsible and not yell that it’s the politicians fault.

The politicians would be stupid not to make it a public referendum specifically so they can’t be blamed once those coercion fears start playing out in the media.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Of course the MPs can go it alone, make the decision themselves and have their name held up with every coercion story that comes out.

You are talking about a Dr’s oath to keep a human alive, that is such a fundamental change the people must have say in it.

 

8 COMMENTS

  1. I want the euthanasia debate to be decided bya referendum too, but for different reasons. If this issue is decided by the people, as it should, it will result in a win for pro-euthanasia by the length of a street (For>70-80% at a guess).

  2. Just the thin end of the wedge when this comes through. 10 people euthanased in mental hospitals in the first year of it being legalised in the Netherlands, now they are up to 30+ Look out if you are disabled, are getting old and can be persuaded this is right for you, if you don’t fit in etc. These sorts of laws never stop at this point they will be prised open and who will be next, all of you who are regarded as a ‘burden’ on society.

    • Australia and New Zealand would never seek to introduce the model adopted in The Netherlands. Have a look at the success of the Canadian Legislation, the Oregon Legislation, the Switzerland Legislation, Victoria, Australian Legislation and, hopefully, soon, Western Australia. There are 102 safeguards in the WA proposed Bill, 68 in Victoria. Victoria’s new legislation is now demonstrating the difficulty for those at the end of life actually accessing it. Assisted Dying is there for those who are dying. It’s not about being disabled or old. Read the proposed Bills. NZ’s proposed model is limited to the terminally ill with 6 months to live, so even those with other dreadful diseases like MS, MND wouldn’t be eligible until their last 6 months and by that stage the writing really is on the wall.

  3. 72% support according to Colmar Brunton Poll..
    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/strong-support-legalising-euthanasia-in-1-news-colmar-brunton-poll-mps-set-thrash-details

    It should be by referendum. I think our “peers” think that the voting public are thick and not as clever as them.
    If this doesn’t go ahead whats the betting if the Marijuana poll votes for legalization it will be decided by our “peers” to make it nonbinding and dump it or modify it into something useless.
    After all they are bordering on an attack on democracy in the current debate. Let us have our say!

  4. A referendum will give the illusion of democracy but will it be a quality decision? Lots of people making decisions based on soundbites they heard from influencers?
    Both the euthanasia and cannabis reform are issues for Citizen Assemblies that are comprised of unelected randomly appointed representatives of the community who can spend the time and energy to get to grips with the nuances of both decisions. They are both far too complex to be left to simple votes.

  5. As someone living with terminal metastatic breast cancer, as someone who is an active lobbyist for euthanasia, and as someone who cared for two parents through horrific end of life deaths, bring it on. Stop scaremongering. How we die – after a diagnosis of a terminal illness – is one of the most personal human rights issues of our time. This is about a compassionate choice for those who are dying – I’ll repeat that – those who are dying. It’s not about bumping granny off, it’s not about doing away with yourself, it’s about avoiding the horrific deaths outlined by coronial inquests when people can’t handle the pain anymore and take matters into their own hands. Talk to experienced palliative care nurses who see this on the frontline. One of many, shared horrific stories about end of life patients for whom the best palliative care cannot assist. Her end of life pain was so bad (cancer, including metastases to the bones) that she threw herself off the balcony of the palliative care facility and killed herself. This is about the right of an individual. It’s worked in Canada for the last 3 years, it’s worked in Oregon and Switzerland for decades. Hippocratic Oath “Do No Harm” – so we can administer chemotherapy and other chemical cocktails with horrendous side-effects but we can’t give a drink that puts the person who is dying to sleep, peacefully and quickly. Hippocratic Oath – “Heal” – you can’t “heal” terminal cancer and other incurable diseases. Assisted Dying is not about ending life, it’s about ending suffering.

Comments are closed.