Extreme arguments against euthanasia

There must be quite a few people who prefer new Zealand didn’t legalise euthanasia on reasonable and logical grounds – I have some concerns, but think that giving people a choice over better ways of ending their lives outweighs the risks.

But some of the opposition has been fairly extreme.

SIMON O’CONNOR (National—Tāmaki):

Members of the House, this bill is about killing in two ways. The first is called euthanasia. It’s where the doctor takes an injection, usually something like phenobarbital, and injects it into you—only after they’ve sedated you, of course; couldn’t have the inconvenience of twitching. The other is physician-assisted suicide, where, again, they give you a massive dose of drugs. You take that yourself at your own choosing—and hope that the kids don’t find it in the medical cabinet at the time.

This bill combines both of them. That’s almost unheard of in any other jurisdiction around the world. This bill before us tonight is the worst example of euthanasia in the world.

Hon MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore):

This bill will enable more people to predate on the vulnerable, with far too few—negligible, even—protections and safeguards.

We’ve consulted widely with medical and legal experts and believe that the Seymour bill and version is so fatally flawed that it couldn’t even be fully rewritten to prevent vulnerable people from being predated on.

The answer is not to coerce and to kill, as this bill dictates; it is to continue to invest in world-class palliative care, and that’s what we have in this country.

We have very good palliative care, but it doesn’t prevent suffering. I have seen that up close when my mother died in a hospice.

But the aim of the bill is not “to coerce and to kill”.

Those are two National MPs.

From the other side of the political spectrum some similar but more extreme views from Martyn Bradbury: Why I do not welcome euthanasia in New Zealand

When I look at the horror our mental health system, prison system & welfare systems have become for the most vulnerable via chronic underfunding & indifferent staff – I fear how euthanasia will mutate in that cruel environment.

The way we treat the mentally ill, suicide victims, prisoners, the elderly and the poor with such contempt makes me believe that state sanctioned euthanasia will quickly become a means for pushing the poor to end their lives sooner.

It should surprise no one that it is ACT who is driving this movement. Euthanasia fits perfectly well within the far rights belief of individualism above all and the efficiency of the market to eradicate cost.

Simon O’Connor is more conservative and right wing than David Seymour and ACT.

The loop holes available in this legislation means it is only a matter of time before someone is pushing to expand their definition for cost cutting measures.

Vague fear-mongering long before we know what protections will be in the legislation..

It has happened before, in the 1990s the National Government were caught putting together health boards whose target was to deny health services to anyone who was deemed too costly to continue medical care for.

The National Party were actively and secretly looking for ways to disqualify the sick and vulnerable from state health care. If they were prepared to do it when euthanasia was illegal in the 1990s, imagine how quickly they will begin to pressure hospitals to start euthanasia as a cost cutting measure if it becomes legal?

National Party MPs, including leader Bill English, are amongst the strongest opponents of the bill now before Parliament, so this is a ridiculous and poorly informed political attack.

We know how poorly Corrections look after the welfare of prisoners. We know how badly CYFs looks after children in their care. We know how damaging Housing NZ, WINZ and the Ministry of Development treat beneficiaries.

So what would stop Government agencies applying the same disregard for the poor and sick if euthanasia is passed?

Decency. Common sense. Law.

Apart from Seymour it’s the left of Parliament that strongly supports the End of Life Choice Bill, plus the younger more centrist National MPs.

This is typical confused nonsense from Bradbury.


  1. Trevors_elbow

     /  December 15, 2017

    Bomber is an idiot promulgating horrible rubbish on this topic. He should talk to Maryan Street to understand what side of politics has been championing this cause for quite sometime.

    Its not a political issue its a belief issue. And Bomber doesnt get it as his mind is tuned to just attack National and ACT…what a fool

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  December 15, 2017

      Is Bomber Martyn Bradbury ?

      If he is, he is either incredibly ignorant or a total bullshitter.

  2. Alan Wilkinson

     /  December 15, 2017

    Conservatives demand the death penalty for attempted suicide, oppose euthanasia.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  December 16, 2017

      Suicide hasn’t been a crime for many, many years. There’s no chance of that law being revived.

  3. Zedd

     /  December 15, 2017

    what can you expect from those MPs who seem to take the extreme right view on everything; esp. M Barry, who needs to realise that her view is only one of many.. just because she lives a life of privilege, does not somehow give her bragging rights over every issue she has a warped, north shore opinion on !

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  December 15, 2017

      She also seems to think that predators predate…they don’t. Well, they can, but predating has nothing to do with being a predator.

  4. NOEL

     /  December 15, 2017

    Shouldn’t the proper title be the Assisted Sucide Bill?

  5. PartisanZ

     /  December 15, 2017

    Me repeat myself … ‘Christendom’, of which our politics, economy and society is a very strong reflection – including medical and pharmaceutical ethics – is not going to relinquish its ‘monopoly’ on death and immortality without one hell of a shit-fight …

    “And how petty, how wretched, is life made by the hope of immortality! It … undermines life, deprives it of everything which makes it worth living … presumptuous, senselessly exaggerating our own importance … unworthy and immoral?

    Life only gains its inestimable value by the limits set on it … and it is not beyond our powers to give it shape” (Frank Warner)

    That’s what I see End of Life Choice as … our power to give it shape … under highly specific and highly controlled conditions …

    These ‘anti’ extremists are therefore scaremongers of the worst possible kind IMHO.

  6. Kitty Catkin

     /  December 15, 2017

    These people are ignoring the word ‘choice’.

    I would have to say that the ‘inconvenience of twitching’ is just silly, and anyone who puts any harmful medicine where a small child can get at it is extremely irresponsible.

    This does not mean that I am in favour of involuntary euthanasia. I could not have actually killed my husband, although I had to accept that there was no point in further treatment.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 15, 2017

      Just as well involuntary euthanasia – commonly known as homicide or murder – ain’t on the table, isn’t it Miss Kitty?

    • NOEL

       /  December 16, 2017

      As I suggested before the title is inappropriate. Recently I had to give the Vet authority to
      euthanise the dog. No way of determining if that was what the dog wanted.

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 16, 2017

        Could this be because the dog isn’t a sentient, sovereign HUMAN BEING capable of communicating their condition, sensations, circumstances, feelings, wants and needs to the Vet (Doctor)?

        And, even if they were, the dog isn’t capable of self-administering medication prescribed by the Vet (Doctor), based on a diagnosis carefully verified by specialists under specific, tightly controlled and audited circumstances, viz terminal illness, no chance of recovery, debilitating suffering …

        You do realize, don’t you, that you’re not going to able to go along to a doctor and say, “Look Doc, Aunty Madge is past it, I think its time we have her put down” …?

      • Blazer

         /  December 16, 2017

        I do hope it was…your dog.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  December 16, 2017

        When I have done that for a pet, I had to assume that as the animal would have died soon anyway and it would have been a painful time leading up to a painful death that the poor wee beast would have chosen it if he could have. I have done this twice with pets, reasoning that keeping them alive was a cruel option-especially as they don’t have the options that we have to compensate for illness and can’t really take painkillers.

  7. patupaiarehe

     /  December 15, 2017

    We know how poorly Corrections look after the welfare of prisoners. We know how badly CYFs looks after children in their care. We know how damaging Housing NZ, WINZ and the Ministry of Development treat beneficiaries.
    So what would stop Government agencies applying the same disregard for the poor and sick if euthanasia is passed?

    Well pardon me Bill, for pointing out what is blaringly obvious to anyone who has half a brain, but hasn’t your party been in charge of those Govt departments for the past 9 years?

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 15, 2017

      Good point patupaiarehe. They’re clutching at straws.

      Also, since End-of-Life-Choice is an issue of personal sovereignty, none of those government departments will ever be involved anyway!

      As far as I can tell from other jurisdictions, it’ll be a matter between you and your doctor and one or two specialists.

      And your release from intolerable suffering will be yours to share with whomever you please …

    • patupaiarehe

       /  December 15, 2017

      Yet they still wonder why over a million Kiwi’s ‘can’t be arsed’ voting. I make a point of turning up to the ‘polling booth’, but I completely understand why others don’t. Just look at the results of our last election. We now have a very ‘mouthy’ opposition, who are allegedly fond of making this country better for everyone. Asking a million pointless questions about nothing, is all the proof I need, of how out of touch with reality they are.
      Fuck the lot of them! Life goes on in the real world. No matter who is supposedly in charge, I will still be able to pay my mortgage, & feed my kids. But I really feel for those who don’t get paid over twice the minimum wage. I don’t struggle to pay my bills, but I don’t have much ‘change’ left, a day after payday. TBH, I don’t understand how anyone can support themself, let alone others, on $15.75/hr…

  1. Extreme arguments against euthanasia — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition