Should we have choice at the end of life?

It is widely accepted that if we have a pet dying of cancer and in extreme pain, then we automatically think the human thing to do would be to put that pet down. We do not want any animal to suffer a prolonged painful death.

But our treatment of fellow-humans is much more complicated and -- some would say -- less merciful. We must acknowledge the palliative activities of hospices while observing that not all terminally-ill patients are successfully treated.

It seems likely that when the private member’s End-Of-Life Choice Bill created by the MP Maryan Street eventually gets drawn from the ballot, it will be passed into law – popular sentiment being what it is.

The guest this week In Conversation with Noel Cheer on Face Television is Yvonne Shaw, Media and Political Relations Manager for the organisation “End-Of-Life Choice”, also known as “Voluntary Euthanasia Society of New Zealand”.

"In Conversation with Noel Cheer", Face Television, Monday March 25th at 7:00pm, repeated on Tuesday March 26th at 12 noon.

Face Television, the home of public broadcasting, is found on Sky Television Channel 089 and can also be received in the Auckland region on UHF Channels 41, 42 and 52. It is also live-streamed on www.ecasttv.co.nz. The website www.facetv.co.nz carries programme schedules. Some recent episodes of In Conversation can be viewed at www.youtube.com/user/NoelCheer

"In Conversation with Noel Cheer" receives funding from New Zealand on Air. This has enabled us to introduce viewers to over 250 New Zealanders on Air (as well as visitors to New Zealand) during more than six years of unbroken weekly broadcasting.

ENDS

© Scoop Media

Public Address Link:
A (Sweary) Analysis Of Urgency Abuse And
The Consititution

Keith Ng: You’re looking at the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) for the Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill. Basically, the courts said that the Government had to pay family members who looked after people with disabilities (because not doing so was discriminatory), so the Government passed this law to say: “Yeah nah.”

The RIS isn’t just redacted for the public – it was redacted for MPs. *Parliament* voted on this, with all the relevant facts blacked out.

Sure, it’s understandable, right? If you’re passing a law that’s really dodgy, you don’t want advice from civil servants saying “uh, this is pretty illegal” to be public. But actually, that’s not really a problem here, because in the same piece of legislation, THEY SAID THEY CAN’T BE TAKEN TO COURT. More>>