GESTIÓN EN SALUD PÚBLICA: Western Australia set to debate euthanasia

domingo, 26 de agosto de 2018

Western Australia set to debate euthanasia

Western Australia set to debate euthanasia

Bioedge

Western Australia set to debate euthanasia

by Xavier Symons | 25 Aug 2018 | 1 comment

A joint select committee for the parliament of Western Australia has published a report recommending that the state government introduce a bill to legalise “assisted dying”.

The report was authored by seven politicians from across the political spectrum and reviews the provision and regulation of end of life care in Australia and abroad, as well as summarising contributions made during an extended period of public consultation. The report contains a recommendation that they government sponsor a bill to legalise “voluntary assisted dying” for patients who are:

...experiencing grievous and irremediable suffering related to an advanced and progressive terminal, chronic or neurodegenerative condition that cannot be alleviated in a manner acceptable to that person, where death is a reasonably foreseeable outcome of the condition.

Interestingly, this is much broader than current Victorian law which only allows euthanasia and assisted suicide for patients with a terminal illness.
The report asserts that “there are many life‐limiting conditions that cause profound suffering that cannot be completely palliated”, and that “current lawful options available to people experiencing grievous and irremediable suffering at end of life are inadequate”.

Yet the document tabled in parliament also contains a minority report by Liberal MP Nick Goiran, describing the recommendations of the report as a “recipe for elder abuse”. Goiran argues that overseas experience, and experience from the short-lived Northern Territory euthanasia regime, indicates that “the risks of legalising assisted suicide (however described or defined) are too great as the consequences are final”.

The government of Western Australia has accepted the report, and says it will consider drafting legislation. Premier Mark McGowan is personally in favour of euthanasia and assisted suicide, though he noted that he was just “one vote out of many”.

Sunday, August 26, 2018

The Norwegian bioethicist Ole Martin Moen has published an unusual but intriguing article in the journal Bioethics. He analyses the arguments in the half-mad manifesto of the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski. For those whose memories don’t stretch back that far, Kaczynski was a brilliant mathematician who became obsessed with the decay of American society. He retired to a backwoods cabin and worked as a serial postal bomber whose handiwork killed three people and maimed 23 between 1978 and 1995. The New York Times published his 35,000-word manifesto in 1995 which eventually led to his capture.

Moen says that Kaczynski’s concerns should be taken seriously and refuted philosophically, even if he is a terrorist. “Although philosophers can only play a modest role in fighting terrorism, it is striking that, today, the most obvious line of response to one’s adversaries—to listen carefully, to show that one has understood their position, and to explain why one believes they are mistaken—is hardly even attempted as a means to discourage terrorists.”

His words can usefully be applied to many other areas of public discourse today, not just dialogues with ideologically-motivated terrorists. It’s very seldom that opposing sides listen carefully to each other. In the Middle Ages, academic battles took the form of “disputation and debate”. Stating the other side’s argument in the strongest possible form was an essential part of the process – before demolishing it, of course. We need a bit more of this fairness, even for madmen like Kaczynski.