Family
2 Oct 2008
Take Me Out the Back and Shoot Me
The defeat of a euthanasia bill in the Victorian Parliament leaves people caring for terminally ill patients feeling as useless as tits on a bull, writes Helen Smith
Death by nursing home. That's how one letter writer to The Age described the alternative for people after the Medical Treatment (Physician Assisted Dying) Bill 2008 was rejected by the Victorian Parliament this month. Not being able to speak, read or write, walk or sit up, feed yourself, wipe your bum. I know what I would prefer.So did my mother. She died last year in a Victorian nursing home. She was 75. It was 10 years since she had been diagnosed with Alzheimer's.
When we were growing up, Mum worked at a large nursing home in Geelong. She'd come home and say "Don't ever put me in one of those places; just take me out the back and shoot me." That's why I cried and cried when Mum was diagnosed. I had an inkling of what her life would be become — and that we couldn't do a damn thing about it. I knew she would be slowly stripped of dignity, her brain would waste away and she wouldn't recognise any of us. I didn't know that my father would one day have to search the dam when Mum went missing or that he would stand there on that day, suddenly much older, crying.
The day before Mum died, my family gathered around her nursing home bed as people were wheeled in from other units for the afternoon's scheduled activities. My young nieces rolled around the floor with the enormous dog that makes regular visits. People loved it — kids and a dog — a bit of what their lives were like before the home.
One of my nieces played the upright piano and there was a fair bit of toe-tapping in the wheelchairs. My sister-in-law, who works in a nursing home herself, and my youngest niece did a song and dance routine. Smiles all around and some joined in the singing. We watched and took turns to go and hold Mum's hand.
Then the God-botherers arrived. Earnest piano and guitar playing. Hymns. The mood changed. The smiles were gone and we all went back into Mum's room.
My mother was a tall fit woman who loved a laugh. Two of her favourite expressions will always stay with me: "More arse than class" and "Useless as tits on a bull".
We felt like those tits as we gathered around her bed. She was wracked with fever and her skinny body was clammy. She couldn't tell us where the pain was. She hadn't spoken for a long while. An occasional word only: a "thank you" to Dad as he patiently fed her, a "nice" when we asked her if she liked the food — vitamised so that she didn't choke. What she could do was howl and you knew it was Mum making that unearthly sound when you opened the door to the nursing home.
This is what Denise Cooper-Clarke, adjunct lecturer in Ethics at Ridley College and the Bible College of Victoria has to say about such times:
"Being present with those suffering and dying is a more costly but much more precious gift than acquiescing in their request for their life to be ended. We refuse to kill people when they are suffering, not because we value or care for them less than dogs, but because we value and care for them so much more."
Useless as tits on a bull. It was no "precious gift" seeing Mum suffer, knowing that she didn't want to be there. The Physician Assisted Dying Bill dealt with terminally ill people who could make their wishes known. My Mum made her wishes known years ago but the Bill would not have been able to help her once Alzheimer's had raged through her brain. But she needed something, and we needed something. Short of taking her out the back and shooting her, there was nothing we could do.
She died choking on her own saliva as the ravages of Alzheimer's took her through its final stage. My sister, a highly-qualified nurse, was unable to use a suction device to ease Mum's discomfort as there wasn't one at the nursing home. It was deemed "palliative care". We were stunned — it didn't make sense.
Lightning hit the ground in the cemetery when we buried Mum. Thunder boomed overhead, muffling the words of the priest. People from the city hid under the trees; the locals stood in the open. Fifty millimetres of rain fell in 20 minutes.
"Let the defeat of this dreadful bill send a clear message to euthanasia advocates throughout Australia that the debate is over and euthanasia legislation should be left to rest in peace," said Rob Ward, the Victorian director of the Australian Christian Lobby.
I'd like to think that the storm at Mum's burial was a clearer message.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Newsvine
Facebook
Kwoff
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
My mother watched my grandmother go through the same thing. She never got over it and feared it was her eventual fate as well.
Spurred by depression she committed suicide while she still could. My grandmother out-lived her in not so blissful ignorance.
Anybody who wants to stand on a bible and say euthanasia is wrong , should spend 12 months working in a nursing home with mainly high care patients , not the nice cosy places where the oldies can walk and talk . This is the situation smaller nursing homes face , because there is a little more funding available. There is no precious gifts in these places just incredible trauma.
At the very least we need to sort out the laws regarding palliative care , as anyone who has watched a dear friend drift away on a morphine drip would appreciate.
What exactly are we sayinghere ? That people should have the right to take their own lives ? That’s called suicide. Or that we, you and I, should have the right to take someone else’s life, because they can’t do it themselves ? No, that’s murder, or at least manslaughter. How would an independent person, say a magistrate, know the difference ? Because the person involved has given written approval ? In that case, if they could sign a document, then why don’t they take their own lives instead of putting it onto someone else ?
Sorry, folks, the case for euthanasia is so full of holes that a mass murderer could drive a truck through it. By all means, help a person to suicide if they want to, to pull the trigger or take the pills or whatever, but that would be suicide, not euthanasia. Doing it for them would not be suicide and it would not be euthanasia, it would be murder or manslaughter. You can’t have it both ways, to take someone else’s life when they are unable to indicate that that is what they want. If someone can physically indicate that they want to die, then they, not anybody else, should have the responsibility for taking that final step.
And how come the argument always seems to drift to Alzheimer’s patients - precisely the people who CANNOT indicate that they want to die, by reason of non compus mentis ? Sure it’s distressing to watch, but that gives nobody justification for taking someone’s life, other than one’s own.
Joe
Grigia
Oh very neat Joe - ever been in the position? There are many people who are compos mentis and able to indicate that they want to die, but too weak to do it all by themselves, and even more of us who would love to be able to leave instructions that we be afforded the dignity of euthanasia in circumstances where we are unable to commit suicide.
Personally I intend to kill myself if a nursing home is the only alternative. But what if I am severely injured in a car crash or otherwise debilitated, eg by alzheimers? Any instructions I leave will be useless as current legislation stands and the family and I will have to go through similar suffering to that described in the article. All because a minority of Holy Joes are opposed to euthanasia - though often strangely silent on issues like the massive air raids that started the war in Iraq, a clear case of people not being able to indicate that they don’t want to die.
Too many people go down the route that GraemeF’s mother took, committing suicide before they need to, because they fear they won’t be allowed and assisted to die if they get to the point where they’re too weak or too ill to kill themselves.
Oregon has legislation that provides terminally ill people with the ability to to through a process of medical assessment. If accepted, they are eligible to register to be supplied with drugs that will kill them. When last I read about it, it seemed that around 10 percent of those who registered actually applied for and used the drugs - it was enough to know there was a way out if it all got too much to bear.
Hi Grigia,
Actually I’m not a Holy Joe, I’m an atheist Joe, and I believe that we have one and only one life and when it ends, it ends, so it is very precious. My point was simply that how would an independent person, a copper, a judge, a shocked relative, know whether or not a person wanted to die, or someone else with something to gain wanted them dead ? The way to tell the difference would ideally be something in writing, but my subsidiary point is that if someone can sign a bit of paper, then they can take their own polls.
And yes I have been in this position and recently. I’ll say it again: if a person is able to indicate that they wish to end their own life, then they do so, they alone, not anyone else. If someone else believes that a dying person shouldn’t suffer, and should be helped to pass away, that is not their decision to make, no matter how much they love them. To take another’s life is not our decision to make. The life of any person is so precious, their loved ones want so much for them to stay with them as long as possible, as long as pain can be diminished, yet of course there is stress and anghuish in watching a loved one slowly slip away. But to take their life is their decision alone, not yours or mine or anybody else’s. I’m all in favour of suicide, but never murder.
Joe
Sorry, election on the brain - ‘pills’, not ‘polls’.
Joe
Grigia
Holy or unholy, you’ve fudged the issue of people who are mentally sound and want to die, but are unable to kill themselves unaided, Joe. It’s not as easy as signing a piece of paper - pills alone may merely damage you further, and even gathering together everything you need to ensure that you will succeed in suiciding can be a problem if your mobility is compromised. There are of course pills that will kill you neatly, but they aren’t available in Australia.
Christ almighty, my point was precisely how do you distinguish ‘euthaniasia’ from murder ?!? Don’t talk about suicide as euthaniasia because it isn’t and we all know it. We are talking about killing somone else who can’t do it for themselves, and what is the clear line between ‘euthanasia’ and murder ? Where is it, Grgia ?
Joe
Grigia
No Joe, I’m talking about, for example, someone hooking a rational but debilitated me up at my request to the Nitschke machine that was briefly legal in the NT and leaving me to press the button, or even just buying me your mythical bottle of pills when asked. Right now, those are criminal acts.
I’m also keen to be able to leave clear, documented instructions which hospitals etc were required to follow in the event that I were severely impaired eg by a bad accident/stroke/heart attack and unable to kill myself, to the effect that I be made as comfortable as possible and allowed to die. Both would be carrying out my wishes, neither would be murder.
Grigia,
Seems like a bit of fudging there, dear: and what if someone can’t ‘press the button’ - a nice friend does it for them, so full of compassion are they ? Yes, it is still a criminal act to kill somebody else, however you twist and turn on that one, and thank Christ that it is.
And you surely know damn well that leaving written instructions is one thing, while being ‘made as comfortable as possible and allowed to die’ is quite a different matter.
Joe
GraemeF - I am so sorry about your mother. It must have been a terrible time for you.
Thanks to others for their comments. Joe, you are right. It is still illegal to kill someone. You say you are an atheist yet you thank Christ that it is so. That is the point of my article. The law needs to change for people in my mother’s situation and religion should have nothing to do with it.
Helen
Hi HSmedley,
Usually, invoking the name of Christ is a fairly crude way of emphasising what one wants to say, a means of expression often employed by atheists. Okay, I’ll try to find a less ‘religious’ way to express one’s attitudes. Fuck knows what might satisfy you. But I’ll say it again, then:
"Thankfully, it is still a criminal act to kill somebody else."
So how should the law be changed, as you suggest ? Suicide is more or less allowed these days, since a successful attempt would render any penalty somewhat redundant. ‘Pressing the button’ for someone else who can’t do it themselves, and presumably when that other person can’t sign a document or otherwise indicate that they want to die, is still murder, or manslaughter, no matter how compassionate.
Bottom line is surely how to set up a legal situation whereby, let’s say, a nursing home can’t exterminate its inmates at will, where beneficiaries can’t knock off their benefactors, where old people aren’t simply done away with because they are nuisances, or shit themselves, or need constant care. These can never be excuses for killing old and unwanted people. The decision to die is theirs alone, not yours or mine.
Joe
I don’t think you have read my article Joe and I am sorry to have got into this discussion with you. You make few rational statements and you’re language is inflammatory and offensive. I suspect you do this on purpose. I just wish you hadn’t used my mother’s situation; one that is still quite painful to myself and my family.
I’m sorry, HSmedley, I didn’t use your mother’s situation in any conscious way, as far as I can tell - how could I if I have no knowledge of it ? But which of my statements are irrational or non-rational ? Where have I use inflammatory or offensive language ? I disagreed with you, which in today’s world is tantamount to asking to be burned at the stake, I know, but I will still put a point of view, just as you are entitled to. And no, I won’t call for you to be burned at the stake if you disagree wit hme, so can we agree on that much ?
Oh I see, HSmedley is Helen smith ? Now how the f*ck is anybody supposed to know that ? Or are only mind-readers allowed to comment ?
Oh, I get it, using words like fuck is offensive. Okay, I apologise for using the word fuck. I won’t do it again. Now can we get back to the discussion, without ad hominems ?
Joe
Venise Alstergren
HSMedley: I am so sorry for what your mother and you went through. For human beings to have to go though a process where they come to hate the very life they one gloried in is solely due to the god-botherers and the Catholic Church.
I can’t re-write my who rant again. I can only wish that the system of shoving our terminally ill oldies into concentration camps is redoubled, and again redoubled again then squared to be tailor-made to fit the evil leaders of the Catholic Church and sundry little copy-cat religionists. We who indulge in facile semantics in order to justify the years of torture, starvation, medical research (how else can doctors know how to treat old people unless we experiment on them first?)and deliberate privation, have our self-declared right to make the ending of your lives as barbarous a proceedure as we can devise. From buggery to bed-time we’ve got you covered.
Inverted commas to go before the ‘W’ and finish with the last letter ‘d’.
Is a really sad story Helen and it must have been extremely frustrating and discouraging thing to live through. It is beyond cruel to let people suffer a prolonged and painful death, and it is ironic that society considers it beyond cruel to let an animal suffer in the same way. The problem is that we put animals down for all sorts of reasons so that logic doesn’t seem to apply. It isn’t fair to blame the lack of progress on the Catholics because the issue is more complex than that and the potential for abuse is huge.
Helen and Graeme F, I’m sorry for your troubles, both of you. I find both of your experiences (well, all three) absolutely horrible. Joe/rmg1859, Venise et al, I’m Catholic, but more catholic than Catholic. Religion shouldn’t come into it, indeed. In fact, in many cases, religion is more of a curse than a blessing.
When it comes to euthanasia, it should be up to the individual as to what course they should take, and who is anyone else to condemn them? As far as I’m concerned, so long as someone is corpus mentis when thay sign an euthanasia consent form, then they should be able to exercise that option if they so desire. It may not be my own preferred course of action, but if someone wants to go down that path, they certainly won’t face my wrath.
I find it more courageous than cowardly, to be honest, and also find it hard to fathom why others should condemn a person for doing what, in all fairness, will only harm the person partaking in that action (at least in a physical sense - they should, of course, warn their family and friends of their intentions beforehand).
Thanks Banville and Patman for your comments. I guess the Catholic church and hypocrisy was foremost in my mind when I wrote about Mum as the priest who conducted her funeral service was recently found guilty of child sex offences.
And I agree Banville that the issue is complex. Hugely complex. I don’t know when, if we had the choice, we would have used a form of legal euthanasia for Mum. Would it have been after her last visit home? When her muttering would get louder and louder and we would take it in turns to walk her around the garden to ease her distress. She finally settled that day and she sat in the kitchen and laughed with us. Not knowing what we were laughing at but enjoying a brief moment that we knew wouldn’t happen again.
A considered, much debated form of legislation is needed with clear guidelines. Ones that help both the person making their wishes known and their family and friends. As Patman says, all should know beforehand what the person has decided. And medicos also need clear guidelines so that they are not compromised.
Any discussions should include nursing home staff. These people do unspeakable things for our family and friends. Paid very low wages they, in many cases, are the only ones left to care for the demented elderly. And they do it with love and care.
Helen Smith
I find the majority of people oppose Bill’s like this until their circumstances change.
Remember Jim Cameron (father of former Howard Govt MP Ross Cameron)? Back in the 80’s when they were introducing the organ transplant program in NSW, Jim opposed the Bill based on his religious beliefs, playing god etc. Bill was passed regardless.
Guess who was the first parliamentarian to have a heart transplant? Jim Cameron, aged 55.
That last quote by Rob Ward of the Australian Christian Lobby is typical. I’ve spent enough time visiting nursing homes and hospitals to know the ones that espouse all this pious, do-gooding aren’t always the ones turning up every day to assist and support their loved ones with debilitating health.
Thanks Helen Smith for your courage and humanity.
You’re right on the money, Ringo. You’re very welcome, Helen, and may I add two words to Ringo’s words about your courage and humanity - your humility. (And, you are also right on the money when it comes to those working in nursing homes/hospices. My sister is one such employee.) Do keep contributing, Helen, and good luck.