Strange Mercy
The Herald carries a fairly level-headed article (from the Independent) on the differing verdicts in the case of two separate “mercy killings” in the UK. I say level-headed because it actually does explore the reasoning behind the difference in verdict and vaguely explore the problems associated with strong mandatory sentences. One woman killed her 31 year old daughter who was suffering from MS since age 14 years. She was found to be not guilty of murder and guilty of assisted suicide, which carries a much lighter sentence. The other woman killed her 21 year old son who was severely brain-damaged but not, I stress, in a persistent vegetative state. She was found guilty of murder. The difference chiefly boiled down to the fact that the daughter was mentally capable and had pleaded with her mother to help her commit suicide. The son was not mentally competent to make that decision, so his mother acted unilaterally.
I have no issues with the second verdict but the British law allows only maximum sentencing for murder. As this lady is hardly likely to be a danger to others and there are substantial mitigating circumstance that will be ignored, the sentence will be wildly inappropriate. This is precisely why I am not in favour of strong mandatory sentencing for murder and attempted murder now that the defense of provocation is to go. Without the possibility of reducing a sentence in mitigation, we will end up with hideous travesties of justice, such as beaten women jailed for life for the murder of their abusive husbands. I prefer a good range of sentencing but a strong hand (independent of politics) upon the judges to limit the kind of wet bus ticket sentences we have seen recently.
The person requesting assisted suicide is highly likely to be depressed and therefore in need of treatment, not death.
”The first verdict troubles me greatly. I have enormous sympathy for this lady and for her daughter. Multiple Sclerosis is a truly awful disease that causes progressive debilitation, weakness and chronic pain in the patient. But, as I have argued in a number of recent posts on Euthanasia, the person requesting assisted suicide is highly likely to be depressed and therefore in need of treatment, not death. The idea of assisted suicide should then be anathema to any doctor who follows hippocratic ethics. It is also highly unlikely that a parent could have the skill set to exclude a depressive illness and retain sufficient composure to make a reasoned clinical judgement on the issue. I most certainly could not do it. I therefore think the idea of “assisted suicide” is made plausible in the legal system, and in the eyes of the public, only because they do not understand the complexities of the situation. We maintain a myth of “mercy” killing, purely because we do not see the alternatives that may, in fact, make life bearable and even sweet for a patient again. Granted, these alternatives may not actually exist. But they need to be sought for in a reasoned and considered manner, not in the despair of a particularly bad day.
I am acutely conscious that sometimes my colleagues and I are singularly useless in assisting suffering patients to seek other solutions besides death. This does not make murder right. Nor does it mean that “mercy killing” or ”assisted suicide” is somehow one step down from murder. By all means let us show mercy to those who resort to murder for reasons that are both understandable and non-malignant. But let us not dress it up as anything less than the “killing of another person , not for the purpose of self defense” – murder in anyone’s book. To do anything else is to devalue life.
Related posts:
- Spew TV Just when you thought that TV could not get more...
- Euthanasia (Part 1) Euthanasia is a topic not unlike abortion, in that it...
- Starving to Death I might have known that the case of Margaret Page,...
- Death With Dignity “One of the messages is that we don’t all die...
- Sensing Murder The Herald reports a 17 year old boy (who has...
Jan 27 10 10:55 am
The Dominion Post (Wednesday January 27), republishing an article from The Times, says that in the first case you refer to the daughter was suffering from ME (myalgic encephalopathy), not MS. In the light of this, would you revise your comments at all?
Jan 27 10 12:41 pm
“the daughter was suffering from ME (myalgic encephalopathy), not MS. In the light of this, would you revise your comments at all?”
It wouldn’t change my mind.
Whether MS or ME the consent is the same. Whether MS or ME the degree of incapacitation is the driving force behind the decision to end life.
From my pov, whether MS or ME, the decision to end life is a poor one, but understandable.
JC
Jan 27 10 2:13 pm
Hmm ME makes it even worse really. ME has a huge emotional component and not much organic basis as a diagnosis, although that may certainkly change. Its certainly a real diagnosis to the sufferers, we need to know much more about it IMO.
I agree with the MacDoctor really. What is and isnt quality of life can and does vary from day to day. Helping people through the bad days often brings back the quality to the life. When that happens most people seek every possible day they can get.
Depression should be treated not done away with
Jan 27 10 4:25 pm
Off topic but on topic.
I think sometimes about why I frequent blogs. Am I just selecting blogs that agree with my preconceived notions, am I frequenting an echo chamber. A litmus test for me in thinking about this today was whether I ever change my opinions based on blogs I read.
Your blog came to mind, and the topic of this post. You’ve posted a number of times on euthanasia, consistently posting against, but also putting a very well-reasoned argument. It would be fair to say that before reading these posts, I was generally in favour of euthanasia on the muddy logic that it’s their body and life, and they should be allowed to do what they like with it.
Your insightful writing has led me to question that, particularly in the areas of societal pressure and depression. Once we accept that people may not be making an objective decision, it makes sense to place limits.
So, can I say thanks for your writing. I enjoy it.
Jan 27 10 7:31 pm
Many thanks for your kind words
Jan 27 10 7:38 pm
Projectman and JC:
I misread the article. Frankly, when I saw your comments, I could not believe that this woman had not been found guilty of murder. I think my brain simply read MS instead of ME because a not guilty verdict only makes any sense at all if this is MS. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) is not a pleasant thing to have at all, but it pales in comparison to severe MS. It is also almost universally coupled with depression. Finding this lady not guilty of murder virtually declares open season for the “assisted suicide” of simple clinical depression.
I’m horrified.
Jan 27 10 9:09 pm
Maybe someone in the National Party should say if a parent who cares for a severely mentally and physically handicapped adult child for years and is denied help which the HRC found they should have should be charged if the snap under the stess?
Jan 27 10 9:26 pm
“Without the possibility of reducing a sentence in mitigation, we will end up with hideous travesties of justice, such as beaten women jailed for life for the murder of their abusive husbands.”
You mean women who claim they were beaten when their true motive was jealousy. Were you in NZ when Gaye Oakes murdered her partner and claimed BWS? She came back from Oz and resumed living with and murdered him when she found out that he was thinking of going back to his ex wife? A few dykes from the local woman’s refuge helped her bury the body is her backyard but were never charged.
She is not the only woman who has murdered out of jealousy. It is easy to make allegations when the victim is dead.