[ad_1]
OPINION: In the run-up to the elections, I feel compelled to add my perspective on the upcoming referendum on euthanasia. I have been working in general medicine for about 30 years and one case that I remember in particular helped shape my thoughts on how I will vote.
A few years ago, I was asked to make a home visit for a problem related to a patient’s terminal illness. To protect the identity of this patient, I will refer to him as ‘Jack’. He was actually my partner’s patient, but as a practicing GP with my partner, it was up to me to take care of his patients when he was on leave.
During the visit, Jack asked me to help him end his life instead of continuing to suffer from his degenerative condition.
While he was clearly scared, he was lucid, fully aware of what he was asking of me, and presented his case in a logical and compelling way.
123RF
General practitioner Erich Kusel says there is a terminal patient he will never forget. (File photo).
READ MORE:
* Euthanasia referendum: What is assisted death?
* Euthanasia referendum: views on the end-of-life vote
* Euthanasia referendum: an oncologist’s perspective
* Euthanasia referendum: ‘The proposed law is not hermetic’
He had been diagnosed a few years earlier but, in recent times, he had deteriorated considerably and was becoming more and more dependent. As I learned later, he had made the same request to his regular GP on several occasions: he wanted medical help to end his life before his disability became extreme. She had a good understanding of her condition. He knew what his likely mode of death would be and this clearly filled him with an understandable degree of fear of how things would be for him in the end.
Of course, I couldn’t comply. After my house call, I never saw Jack again. My partner had done his best. Jack had full medical and community support. However, despite his physical limitations, he died alone after committing suicide a few weeks later.
To this day I think Jack was very disappointed, not only by me, but by the medical community in general. His terrible suicidal action is clear and silent proof of his failure to bring a human end to a patient who had so seriously asked for help. I think Jack should have had the option of assisted death.
Had he had that option, he could have lived his final months with a calm mind and faced his end in the presence and with the support of family and friends.
I think many doctors share my views. I have doctors in my own family who agree with me. They, among others, acknowledge the tragic consequences that stem from the lack of a human law to fill the gap that is missing in current end-of-life options.
I have studied the Law of Choice at the End of Life and find the eligibility criteria to be clear and straightforward. I can think of cases of patients who would have met the criteria, although most did not. In my opinion, the required process is detailed and rigorous.
I acknowledge my discomfort in making my opinion public. However, if this helps other doctors to reconsider the harm done to their patients and their whanau / family when doctors are required by law to turn a blind eye to terminal suffering, then any personal discomfort is more than worth it. I feel like I owe it to Jack to speak up.
Dr. Erich Kusel MbChb (Otago), Dip Obs, FRNZCGP is a physician currently working in the Wellington region.
