Morning:
2°c
Brown speaks out against assisted suicide
Anna Davis10 Dec 2008
GORDON Brown today dramatically rejected assisted suicide.
The Prime Minister stepped into the debate over Sky TV screening tonight the death of Craig Ewert in a Swiss euthanasia clinic.
He also made clear that media watchdogs would examine whether the programme breached broadcasting rules.
Asked whether he thought the documentary was in the public interest or "distasteful voyeurism", Mr Brown said: "I believe that it's necessary to ensure that there is never a case in this country where a sick or elderly person feels under pressure to agree to an assisted death, or somehow feels it is the expected thing to do.
"That's why I have always opposed legislation for assisted deaths."
Turning to whether the programme should be broadcast, the Prime Minister said: "It's very important that these issues are dealt with sensitively and without sensationalism. I hope broadcasters will remember that they have a wider duty to the general public."
Ofcom has already received a handful of complaints but only launches inquiries post-broadcast.
Mr Brown, who lost a baby daughter, Jennifer Jane, in 2002, stressed the difficulties faced by families with dying loved ones. At Prime Minister's Questions, he said: "At the heart of any single individual case are families and people in very difficult circumstances. None of us would want to go through that."
He added that he believed such issues were a "matter of conscience".
Mr Brown's comments came as the wife of Mr Ewert defended the move to show his death on television. Mary Ewert, 59, was with her husband during his assisted suicide.
Mrs Ewert said: "I am not surprised one bit by the criticism - some of which is very vitriolic. People don't want to think about death or look at someone dying because it makes them think about their own death."
But she added: "The film is a wonderful tribute to my husband. I have absolutely no regrets about agreeing to leave the camera rolling as Craig died. It's what we both wanted."
Mr Ewert, 59, who suffered from incurable motor neurone disease, paid Swiss euthanasia group Dignitas £3,000 to arrange his death.
In the documentary he is seen turning off his ventilator with his mouth and drinking a lethal dose of drugs through a straw. He dies 45 minutes later with his wife of 37 years by his side.
Anti-euthanasia groups have condemned the broadcast. Dominica Roberts of the Pro-Life Alliance said: "It is both sad and dangerous to show this kind of thing on the television."
Dr Peter Saunders, director of the campaign group Care Not Killing, said the show was a "cynical attempt to boost television ratings".
But the film's director John Zaritsky said: "It would be less than honest if we were to do a film about the process of assisted suicide and not actually be able to see the whole of the act."
Barbara Gibbon, head of Sky Real Lives, which is showing the film, said it was a "remarkable piece of grippingly emotive television".
Senior Labour backbench MP David Winnick said: "We are all going to die at some stage and I see no reason why viewers ... shouldn't see it happen."
Teacher Mr Ewert, of Harrogate, was diagnosed with motor neurone disease in June 2006 and died months later on 26 September. The condition progressed rapidly and he was left wheelchair-bound and needing a ventilator to breathe.
Reader views (32)
GORDON Brown today dramatically rejected assisted suicide.
UNQUOTE
Well, Gordon would, wouldn't he.
Every day, I am increasingly more aware that the fundamental Right to Freedom for the British People is being systematically removed from us - by - GORDON BROWN - the Man who Always Knows Better.
- Tess Nash, HELSTON, CORNWALL, 11/12/2008 06:56
Report abuse
I find it incomprehensible that anyone could deny a dying person the right to choose the time of deathe and location for their demise,as oppsed to months of agonising pain and misery ,which is shared by their loved ones.In all countries it is the influence of the religious right that blocks the passing of a Voluntary Euthanasia bill in parliament.As the rligious right movement is in the minority ,one wonders why ploiticians are so terrified of their influence.Polls everywhere have sown a marked majority in favour of V.E. but the pollies continue to avoid taking action.When will commonsense prevail. Mick Gillespie
- Mick Gillespie, Gold Coast Queensland AustraliaI find it incomprehensibnle, 11/12/2008 03:57
Report abuse
I was created by a biochemical act. I live through a myriad of biochemical acts. I will die by a biochemical act, be it natural, or man-made.
The religious nuts are condemning us. Perhaps it should be us condemning all of them, and their claptrap. I mean, if there really is a big man watching us, he has a twisted sense of humour, given a lot of the things so-called "civilised" man has done to each other. Where was he to either stop it, or give a point of view? Enough said.
- Jock, London, 11/12/2008 01:50
Report abuse
With Crash Gordon "in charge" I'm afraid the option of assisted suicide is remaining a popular one.
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London, 10/12/2008 18:58
Report abuse
following on from Nigel's comment I would suggest that there is a disability discrimination occurring here. An able bodied person of sound mind is allowed to commit suicide, the current law means that a physically disabled person of sound mind is not allowed that right - doesn't the Discrimation Act prevent such discrimination?
- Andy, London, 10/12/2008 17:04
Report abuse
Given that the UK Government will not allow a relative to be with someone in this country while they take their own life without facing charges then sadly so many have to go to Dignitas at a huge cost emotionally and financially.
If someone has the mental capacity to want to end their life because of their physical suffering we have no right to stop them (and should offer help if they do not have the physical capability to do themselves). As always people in this country treat their animals better than they do human beings.
If you don't agree with assisted suicide you don't have to do it but, equally you have no right to stop someone who is suffering at a level you do not understand.
- Andy, London, 10/12/2008 16:20
Report abuse
Brown really should not be entering into any discussions on this programme, regardless of what his personal thoughts are. He's in charge of the country, not other peoples lives. For people who have terminal illnesses, its their choice what they do with their lives, no-one elses.
- Louise, Essex, 10/12/2008 15:38
Report abuse
I sincerely hope never to be in the position where I might rationally decide that suicide is prefereable to living. I cannot imagine what it is like to be in that position. Why do people who are not in that position think that they have any right to judge whatever decision is taken by a person who is incurably suffering, with respect to his own life?
Likewise, any able-bodied person is able to make arrangements for his own suicide. Paralysis or extreme frailty can take that away from a person. Why should it be a crime to restore to a person that which his illness has taken away -- even if he then uses what you give him, to take his own life? To me it seems more of a crime to force a person to endure what he regards as torture, by witholding the means to end it.
- Nigel, London, 10/12/2008 15:37
Report abuse
Rara, UK.
When your body is ravaged with disease and you are in constant agony with every breath that you take, you may have a vastly different opinion.
The gentleman had absolutley no further quality of life and would have to be fed through a tube in his stomach and could not speak or move! He ended his life with dignity and was extremly brave in doing so!
Perhaps when you have lived and experienced life outside of your little cocoon, you will have more understanding and less of such a narrow viewpoint!
- Ryan, London, 10/12/2008 15:37
Report abuse
I shall watch the programme tonight and can only extend my deepest sympathy to the family..... this brave decision was taken inside an obviously loving relationship by a person of sound mind who not only has the right to live but also the right to die in a dignified and painless way to relieve his suffering. We have no right to condemn this Man, his Family or his decision, and agree or not we are now carrying out his dying wish and talking about this delicate subject.
- Joanne Moohan, Maidstone, Kent, 10/12/2008 15:02
Report abuse
I can understand the view that life is a gift and not to be ended lightly. Every human has a right to life- but a part of life is death. If there is hope that we can make them better or if they wish to keep on going for whatever reason they wish for, that is fine. But if there is no chance of a cure and all the illness will do is make them worse. If they wish to end their live in a way that they feel gives them dignity and peace, why do we reject that and make them carry on with the suffering and the pain?
It is heartbreaking to watch someone you love and care for die but it is even worse watching that person and knowing that that person is suffering unbelivable pain and being helpless. We all have choices in life, maybe it is time we let the person who has to live with the the illness have the right to make that choice.
- Ellie, Birmingham, 10/12/2008 15:00
Report abuse
How somone destroy the value of human being. human being live is not as simple as animal live.Being in live and death is a gift from god and only god has the right to do so. Such things realy make human beings Hoppless.P/s donot encourage such actions.
- Zerihun Assefa, Addiss abeba,Ethiopia, 10/12/2008 13:20
Report abuse
The ultimate act of LOVE- letting your loved one go as you do not want them to suffer anymore
- Chris Rodricks, croydon surrey, 10/12/2008 13:10
Report abuse
Rara I find your comments quite disturbing. My father is 53 years old, cannot feed himself, confined to a chair, cannot speak, cannot laugh, cannot hold his grandson, has no motor skills and is incontinent. yeah what a gift from god his life is! I wish he could have said before he got so ill what he would have wanted. He now may potentially have another 10 years of this. Pro life = pro pain and suffering if you ask me!
- Jo, Kent, 10/12/2008 13:02
Report abuse
- Rara, UK
Do you equally condemn Muslim suicide bombers?
Religion is a personal matter, far too many of these 'holier than tho' religious bods who seem to know what is best for everyone else.
If you do not want to commit suicide, then don't. It is that simple. Cognitive individuals can make their own minds up.
- Frank, Home Counties, England, 10/12/2008 10:34
Report abuse
WHY should she have to defend what she's done. its a decision between a husband and wife. it doesn't concern anyone else................
- Jonny, London, 10/12/2008 09:37
Report abuse
I have seen the programme ( it was broadcast last week on an Australian channel) and it is a sympathetic and very dignified piece of work. There is nothing shocking or unsavoury and no one will be upset or shocked by it. What it does do is show why people of sound mind should be allowed to make their own decisions and end their lives in a self respecting manner with no pain.
- Brian Lavelle, Singapore, 10/12/2008 09:27
Report abuse
Matters of conscience are private and, sometimes, decisions concerning controversial moral issues will bring the individuals concerned into conflict with the law.
The question of whether people should be allowed to end their own lives will continue without resolution as it involves very different and strongly held moral positions.
The issue is whether a film recording an assisted death is necessary for the debate to be held and the motivation of those involved in producing it.
It is difficult to avoid the thought that Sky has done this to boost audience figures as much as to inform the debate about euthanasia.
It is a great shame that the Ewert family has been persuaded to co-operate with something that, whatever the humbug spouted by Barbara Gibbon, is little more than a circus which does little credit to any of the parties involved.
- Simon, london, 10/12/2008 09:25
Report abuse
There is nothing wring is viewing a man taking his own life, maybe it would encourage the more terminally ill that there is a way out and in a diginified way. I wonder how many prolife people would consider this if they were faced with a life conditioning illness.
Television is there to educate people and inform them of what choices exist and therefore I applaud the showing of this programme.
- Raminder Bhalla, Northolt, 10/12/2008 09:21
Report abuse
If the report that he wished his euthanasia to be shown to raise awareness is true then good luck to him. Some people simply don't know where the off switch on the telly is.
- Len, Perth, Australia, 10/12/2008 06:38
Report abuse
The point is not whether this man should've euthanized himself vs dying naturally, but rather the message it sends by putting it on television. Suicide should be a private (friends/family) and serious matter handled responsibly and discretely, not broadcast around like the latest trend.
Death is a serious matter, not a "everybody's doing it" lifestyle choice.
There may be nobility in this one example, but everyone should be wary of the impending scenario where people are coerced into suicide by society/doctors.
- Andrew Rezen, Washington, DC USA, 10/12/2008 06:36
Report abuse
How sad for the family, how brave to let it be made public. Painful. It is time people discussed it. That was the point. Just because we can keep someone alive via machines, with zero quality of life doesn't mean we should. Look at the Sunny Van Bulow case this week. Decades in a coma. For what?
- Ann Marie Wood, florida, usa., 10/12/2008 04:37
Report abuse
I condemn anyone who takes their life in their hands, I believe this is a gift from God. Are we afraid of the suffering and have we given up hope on medical science, they say there was a treatment for all but it seemss science has failed us... but nonetheles, true love is where your family are there for you in whatever ssituation you are. In his case, I feel he was afraid of letting his family feel he is a burden to them, like many other Dignitas suiciders he thought the same. I strongly oppose SKY broadcasting such disturbing scenes, what are we imbibing the minds of our young ones, take your life in your own hands when it gets out of control. It is not about respecting someone is taking their life, if that is the case why are we encouraging a healthy well being in this country?It is a part of life seeing such sadistic case, this reminds of another recent case, the American guy Abraham Biggs who committed suicide online as people watched him live on webcam, this young guy took his last breath, yet he was not physically impaired or did not face any physical constraints, be it psychological issues, is that good enough for one to end their life, where did counselling, CBT and all go? What is going on here, it is a world gone mad, it is a manic that is becoming more of a fashion trend. I condemn those people who even take the lives of others by getting paid for it, Dignitas you should be ashamed for even being established and even encouraging people to take the most coward step.
- Rara, UK, 09/12/2008 23:52
Report abuse
Alan in London, this is not "entertainment." This is reality. This man killed himself. And you found this entertaining. I think it is morbid not only what he did, but that people like you watched this and found it 'entertainment." You ave a serious problem if you consider murder entertainment. Lord forefid!
- Denise, Louisville, USA, 09/12/2008 21:03
Report abuse
The religious people who think they know it all have no jurisdiction over this.
When Jesus was hanging on the cross he could have saved himself. That is what the religious people believe anyhow.
If you can save yourself then you will, Yes?
So...... his not saving himself amounts to suicide.
Therefore allow terminally ill people to end their lives pain free and with dignity when they choose.
Religious people get over it. Mike x x x
- Mike, Chesterfield, Sheffield UK, 09/12/2008 19:18
Report abuse
I don't see the problem with this. Why is it that I can (if I so choose) watch "entertainment" on my TV, or at my local cinema, of people being shot, tortured and mutilated, but I can't watch a real life case of a man who decides of his own volition to die peacfully and with dignity? As ever, it is those with a religious/ irrational axe to grind who make all the noise.
- Alan, London, 09/12/2008 17:42
Report abuse
I live in Switzerland and as a British subject I have the right to be Euthanized here if I feel that I suffer with cancer etc. I have informed my family already and they agree to carry out my wishes.
I know the catholic Church will condemn my action but as it is my life I have the right to end it.
- Jaberwokie3, switzerland, 09/12/2008 17:38
Report abuse
Wehn will the human race stop judging others in their decision to live or not. It's not your body, it belongs to the human who happens to live in it. It is another exaple of organized religion and the extreme people who inhabit that world dictating to humans how they should or not live their lives. They want to regulate everything in our lives, from this to what we do in the bedroom. It is a personal decision, and should be respected. Sad as it is, it is part of life - ACCEPT IT!
- Bigdnyc, NYC, USA, 09/12/2008 16:49
Report abuse
Good for him. It must have taken great courage for him and his wife to do this. It is just so absurd and just plain wrong that Britons have to go far from home in order to do what they want - all because of a bunch of bigots who do not represent any kind of majority. Pro Life? What an erroneous term - anti freedom, more like, or maybe Pro suffering.
- Liz, London,UK, 09/12/2008 16:40
Report abuse
I think if someone is terminally ill then they have the right to decide when to terminate their own lives. I think this practice should know be brought forward so anyone who is living like this can opt out, I for one would not hesitate to take advantage.
- Stephend, London, England, 09/12/2008 16:27
Report abuse
People don't have to watch this programme if they don't agree with this choice but we have to be drawn into the debate that if someone, like Mr Ewert who knows he is going to die such an awful death and who makes the decision with his famuily that rather than suffer and watch their suffering that he would like to end the pain quicker and let his family remeber him as he was - we have to allow him that choice. Pro life campaigners are all well and good when they are campaigning for a life that doesnt cause suffering to the person whose life it is, and their family. They are a brave family and I hope that this has allowed them now to all be at peace. Third parties have no right to tell someone that they should livge through something like this, especially given that they dont know the man, his famuily and the pain he has been going through.
- Nick, London, 09/12/2008 16:15
Report abuse
I am not sure this should be a public display but I am sure that the Supreme Creator, who gave us a conscience and a mind that can make decisions putting us above all other forms of life, did that for a purpose. I wouldnt want to see my children around my bed if I had an incurable disease and I wouldnt want to end my days drugged out of my mind to kill the pain, just to 'live' for a few months more. When there is no quality of life or any hope of recovery, then elected death is a basic human right.
- Colin Bond, London, 09/12/2008 16:08
Report abuse
