- Right to Life Conference Held July 9, 2005, (Notes taken by Mary Walsh) -
July 12th 2005
RIGHT TO LIFE CONFERENCE NOTES
HELD: SATURDAY JULY 9TH 2005, TRINITY COLLEGE MELBOURNE UNIVERSITY
Program started 10 am
Mrs Margaret Tighe: President of the Right to Life Inc Organisation
RTL Campaign started in 1969.
Dr Mathew Piercy: An Anesthetist, in St Vincent’s Hospital in Melbourne, wrote an Article in the Age March 23 supporting the Right to Life for Terri Schiavo. Dr Piercy, I feel, does not believe a patient has the ultimate right to choice and would not honour their Advance Directives. He is a Catholic and as such appears to have decided his moral views take preference over those of the patient. He has been asked to consider his career options at the Hospital, and promotion will not necessarily come his way as a result of his stance in publicizing his POV. He stands by them regardless of what the outcome will be. He has another interview this week to discuss his position at the Hospital. And we were asked to pray hard this week to ensure a successful outcome for the Doctor. It would appear that the Archbishop of Melbourne is seeking to intervene in Dr Piercy’s disciplinary action by his Professor. At this point the Meeting was reminded that the R T L organisation is a non religious body. And as such, whatever your belief may be, please pray for the doctor.
My thoughts: While I understand his dilemma based on his religious faith I am very concerned with the idea promoted at the Conference regarding intervention by the Archbishop of Melbourne. Saying, in effect, that all staff engaged in Catholic Hospitals will be supported by the Church in defiance of the State Health Initiatives, the Medical Treatment Act 1988 of giving people the honour of dignifying their last wishes, (for example Do Not Resuscitate.)
I wondered about this at four levels:
1 How does a seriously ill person know, in advance what the religious belief of a Medical Carer may be?. Religiously Moral Beliefs that could leave a patient left “living” in a permanently vegetative state as a direct result of the actions of the “Carer”.
2 Given that Public Hospitals are funded by State taxes, (currently Victoria is seen as a Secular State), how can a servant of the hospital be permitted to override Government Directions stated in the Medical Treatment Act 1988 which put patient’s needs above all other considerations?
3 At what point does a person’s religious belief become more important than a patient’s wellbeing. Given the diversity of cultures within the Australian community, how does one overcome this, should Dr Piercy be permitted to continue to impose his moral views over another? Not in the patient’s interests, but his own religious (not medical) considerations!
4
Should the State operate separate hospitals now, so that patients entering a hospital on admission can be assured that their wellbeing in the only consideration. Care of the body, rather than the soul being the priority of the Health Provider.
@@@@@@@@@@
Mr Burke Balch: An American Right to Life Campaigner who worked very hard to retain the “life” of Terri Schiavo. He, like Dr Piercy believes that “life” must be maintained at any and all costs. Mr Balch would be a formidable opponent in any debate, extremely articulate and persuasive. He was very impressed with the Australian’s casual attitude of addressing Senators by their first name. It would never happen in American Politics. (Give it time and Australia will follow)
The fact the R T L had an American flown out to address the Conference was interesting, I surmised he was going to train up Senators to ensure the Religious Right POV was paramount in Government, such as had been undertaken in America by himself and like minded individuals in TS’s case. He was disappointed that the majority of Americans agreed with the TS outcome.
He quoted American Law as it stands now, giving examples of Voluntary, Non Voluntary and In Voluntary Euthanasia. Eg Medical Treatment, Food & Fluid and Direct Killing (“which Philip Nitschke does”) But when Mr Balch went on to elaborate on the definitions individually he did not repeat his comments about PN. He gave detailed case studies in which RTL had fought for and their outcomes eg (please overlook spelling errors of names)
Medical Treatment Voluntary Euthanasia Common Law – Assault by forcing a person
Medical Treatment Non Voluntary 1976 New Jersey: Carolyn Quinlan
Medical Treatment In Voluntary 1991 Minnesota: Wanglie (Weaned from respirator, brain damaged, husband fought to keep alive but Doctors overrode his wishes)
Food & Fluids VE 1986 Bouvia (still alive, changed her mind)
NV 1986 Brophy
IV 1992 Virginia State (forgotten details)
Direct Killing VE skimmed this one, after initial opening comment
NV Ninth Circuit 1996 – Assisted suicide Ok (lost myself here) I don’t understand American system.
IV Freedom to Die – Book by Humphrey 1988 tells us that “Economical Reality will ensure voluntary euthanasia will occur. People will have a “Duty to die” and will be encouraged to do so.
My thoughts: A couple of points made from the floor brought about these responses from Mr Balch, which I personally found quite disturbing.
There has been a change in the power base of the American Federal Government resulting in an ability to look at methods to over ride the State of Oregon laws. The R T L lobbyists hope that by restricting the terms under which the drugs may be prescribed, will inhibit its use for suicide.
There will be renewed pressure to revamp both the voluntary euthanasia and abortion laws.
Also we were informed there is a “Will to Live” Website (which will be very helpful to most living souls as most do not have a “Will to Die”)
Asked about news from Holland, Mr Balch responded with “the news is worse”. He mentioned a word that sounded like the “Gronakin” Law, of which I have no knowledge (least of all, spelling it!)…(since advised, it is known as the Groningen protocol that covers the mercy killing of newborn who are incurably sick and are suffering severely). He spoke of the Non Voluntary law which inevitably will lead to the “Slippery Slope” where people will be killed against their will….not always conscious, or aware of their surroundings. That financial rationalism will prevail to ensure the elderly and infirm are dispatched……”Aimless Eaters” was a term used both from the floor and by Mr Balch but I had never previously heard this expression used in relation to a living being.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
THE SENATORS:
In my notes I failed to keep a very strict track of which Senator said what, but Senator Abetz’s minder kept a tape of the speech he made, so for the official record it can be verified, who said what. Mine were notes and are acknowledged to be incomplete and subject to interpretations.
Senator Barnaby Joyce of Queensland and Senator Eric Abetz, both gave allegiance to their religious responsibilities first and foremost and will work tirelessly to achieve a satisfactory outcome for the R T L Platform. They both felt very comfortable being among true friends and believers of their particular point of view.
Senator Joyce reminded the meeting that among their opponents were good people who needed to be respected for their point of view, even though theirs was the wrong one. (I gritted my teeth and remained silent).
Senator Abetz of Tasmania was Chairman of the Tasmanian Euthanasia Debate, March 1997 and was ably assisted by help from Senator Harradine, both in that and in the preparation of the Suicide Related Materials Bill 2005 which had passed through Parliament with the help of the Labor Party and with no help at all from the Democrats and the Greens.
Interesting tactics were explained:-,
It was all in the way you persuade people to relate a potential life threatening situation to themselves he told us. Talk them through the process of bringing it back to themselves, slowly, kindly …not by “force”….make them always think about themselves…How would you personally feel about this particular situation should it be happening to you?….
Whatever the debate, pick the issue and investigate how decisions were arrived at originally. You must be able to demonstrate a difference to justify why change is necessary. Never attempt to bring into Parliament a proposition that can’t win!. Place yourself in a good position to make a difference.
I overheard the comment that “Bracks doesn’t want to know what an issue (RTL) is about” Bearing in mind discussions were also in progress about abortion, (“which is the immediate importance now to RTL having won the VE debate with the Suicide Bill”) and also the IVF.
Apparently there is to be a forum consisting of a number of people of concern to RTL which includes Julian Gardner – (App Feb. 2000) Public Advocate, Professor Julian Burnside (?) of Monash University, who also holds a Chair at Oxford (for heaven’s sake!) (There will be no consensus I fear in that Forum, because the Senator is not flexible (not able to be, because of his religious restraints). The tone of Sen. Abetz was that of absolute devotion to his moral convictions).
Senator Abetz told the Conference in order to ensure success for the R T L Campaign he suggests that we all write to Prime Minister John Howard, supporting a Private Member’s Bill, and that we insist Voting Time and Debating Time is given. Make sure that your requests are followed up and that correspondence be sent by registered mail and the response is registered back to you. Insist!
Contact your Local Member, find out their Position to R T L, tease through your arguments with them, persuade and ensure you get a Commitment from your Member that they will support your POV. Don’t settle for less than a Commitment!.
Senators will not introduce a Bill unless they are assured they can win. 51% in both Houses will ensure Victory! So be proactive.
Further comments by Senator Abetz included:
Senator Greig was described as the “Godless Left” (no Christian Charity shown there) and had he said some of the things outside the Parliamentary Privilege protection, Greig could well have found himself subject to Victorian Vilification Laws. (I think this was said in relation to the Religious Right have commandeered the debate on the Suicide Related Materials Bill 2005)
The “How to Kill Yourself” websites quoted by Sen. Greig as 7 million, included many sites on “how not to do it” also, as Sen. Abetz took the time to sit and surf the Internet himself. (I wondered if he found www.yourchoiceindying.com).
He told Conference that Animal Care Websites had Exit Ads with Links back to Exit in some cases.
Marshall Perron of the Northern Territory acknowledges rational suicide exists.
The Bill will not prevent suicide, but seeks to limit it by taking away access to information.
The Conference was told there are 2200 suicides in Australia each year, while throughout the world it is estimated the figure to be 1 million people.
In answer to a question from the floor: The response was, As a “Right to Free Speech”, restrictions were lifted to enable suicide material to be allowed to be kept in the house, the question being asked in relation to books.
I was unable to further clarify, whether this also included downloads from the Internet prior to the Law being in force. (The woman telling me of God’s love on Flinders Street Station some weeks before when demonstrating against the impending Suicide Legislation was in the audience and she would have recognised my distinctive voice, and would need to “save” me again.)
The Senator found Dr Nitschke arrogant and dogmatic in his views (like the Senator wasn’t - at the Conference?) and PN pushes his POV as if it is the only one! He commented that the Senators from the opposing view point had PN as their best show piece for losing the argument. (It was very hard for me to remember things at this point, because I was so angry with his peacock display of power games in Senate matters). A POV based on a religious belief is apparently more worthwhile, regardless of the legality of it, for the rest of us.
He did clarify that the telephone, fax, internet and emails were the total of the Bill ensuring modern technology was fully covered in bringing people to heel. Even if the Bill doesn’t work in fact, hopefully it will discourage people from trying it anyhow. The comment came from somewhere, that sometimes, people needed to be protected from themselves.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Melissa Frost (and her daughter) was flown down from Sydney to address the Conference. She is a nurse, I believe currently working in an Anxiety and Depression Clinic. Her father, Raymond, at the age of seventy committed suicide, sometime after the birthday celebration and six weeks later when the body was discovered (?). She believes Exit is involved.
She is furious with "Mr" Nitschke who does not deserve the title of Doctor (hear, hear rousing the audience), and her father’s involvement with Exit.
Her father being a retired engineer kept meticulous records and from these she was able to trace her father’s step back to three years previously when he had read of Exit in the Bulletin Magazine and contacted Mr Nitschke. No Internet facility was used to contact Exit. Dad didn’t have a computer….
He was not the type to commit “suicide” having always told her there was a solution to every problem. The police thought originally that suicide was the cause of death but the smell. The flies, “blood on the walls”?, were extremely distressing to the family members although they were kept away initially from the scene. They (the family) originally thought it could only be murder.
Melissa told us that her father’s head had burst or exploded in a plastic bag and his face was unrecognizable. Because of this, dental records were required for identification purposes.
We were told he was a Catholic by birth and would suffer in Purgatory for all eternity for what he had done. (Purgatory, is for those souls who are still in need of purification before they see God)
Melissa holds Philip Nitschke responsible, repeating again, he did not deserve the title of Doctor, was not an experienced Doctor in that he hadn’t served in a “treatment” area of medicine, for years, and New Zealand could have him…..Without Exit, her father would still be alive, she was sure.
Melissa said that she holds documentary evidence that "Mr" Nitschke had asked her father to write submissions, on two or three occasions to politicians on his behalf (much like the R T L members write to their Senators???) Because he kept such meticulous records she feels quite comfortable with PN’s part (guilt) in her father’s death.
At no point was there an acknowledgment that suicide under the current law, must be undertaken alone, and that it was not PN’s “fault” that it took perhaps six weeks for the family to find his decomposing body. As bad, and distressing as it must have been, Dad made his own choices.. Melissa had been very busy in the period leading up to Christmas (October 14, 2004 was the date the body was discovered from recollection, or was that the party date, six weeks before?)
She told us of an email from PN, that was “guarded” in its wording to her, saying that, had her father died by the peaceful pill she may be less distressed by her father’s death. There was some mention of Counseling as a result of suicide, and again from memory, I think it was Melissa saying that she thought Exit should ensure that relatives’ needs were being addressed as a result of suicides arising out of Exit’s actions in supporting the concept of it. Police had also suffered trauma.
Melissa Frost also said she’d been told that there were 3000 members of Exit over 70 years of age (and there’s me!, a baby at 63)
She herself had needed a lot of time off work, as had the attending policemen who had never witnessed such a violet suicide in their lives. Her daughter had ceased to be “herself” as Grandfather was much loved by her (can’t remember daughter’s name, but she spoke from the floor to say, he’d never mentioned suicide to her and that the family had no idea of his state of mind.)
My thoughts: I wouldn’t discuss my suicide intention with a child (14?) either, but the fact that the mother, Melissa is a qualified Anxiety and Depression Clinic Nurse, and didn’t pick up the signs, I feel, is a concern. In three years she observed nothing that prepared her for her father's final action. If, in fact the father was so very happy and relaxed with the 70th celebrations when she saw him six weeks before being notified of his death, evidence would suggest he was not suffering with “depression”. That much maligned word, that is used to describe people's feelings when they decide life is not worth living at any cost.
Mr Burke Balch, our American Speaker from earlier in the morning, asked from the floor of the Conference whether Melissa had considered suing Philip Nitschke. (“How American” to think of suing as a solution!) She replied that she had, but not yet, because of her own precarious emotional state. But yes, she did think she would. A couple of other people then joined in with the idea. I recall the grounds for legal action, mentioned were pain and distress caused to the family arising out of her father’s suicide. I wondered then, whether the R T L people, together with financial assistance from the American Branch of the equivalent, would fund any legal action undertaken by Melissa Frost in order to have a realistic forum to discredit Exit and PN. Mr Balch sounded quite excited at the idea of “suing” Philip Nitschke, and I would loved to have asked who would fund such an action?
Melissa tells us that Exit still advertises the Bag on the Internet at $50 each and that "Mr" Nitschke (“I refuse to give him the title, Doctor”) is still registered in the Northern Territory Medical Board because she had checked it out three weeks ago.
At some stage about this time the word “cult” was mentioned in terms of Exit, initially by Melissa softly but then expanded on from the floor. “Dare I use the word “cult”? In a sort of giggly voice, I felt, not really appropriate to the subject of her father’s demise.
There was general agreement with Melissa that it would be a very good thing if Mr Nitschke were to shift to New Zealand. - and a woman from the floor spoke of “cults” in which she likened Exit Members, agreeing with Melissa and saying she’d read a book “She Said Yes” which tells us that death is the way to go (sure is, the only way we’ll all go!) and that “death is cool”…
I think Ms Tighe got a little nervous at the linking of Exit to this young woman’s interpretation defining cultism.
My thoughts: I was offended by this interpretation of my membership of Exit as if belonging to a “Cult” was somehow demeaning, until I read the definition of the word in the Macquarie dictionary where I learnt it actually means: an intense almost religious devotion to a person or thing, among other meanings.
So I had to acknowledge that, as the R T L members have their devotion to a “thing”, that is the Right to Life belief, I too have a devotion to a “thing” that is a Right to a Good Death belief.
Does this, then make both sides of the debate, a "cult"?
It is called freedom of choice. Something, like Choice, that the R T L membership doesn’t want us to have. The fact that the majority of people they seek to inflict their views on are non Christian, just doesn’t compute with them. Arrogance was the word that immediately sprung to mind.
By the tone of the meeting it was implied that Members of Exit were as members of a cult and this belief was voiced in a discriminatory manner, until Margaret Tighe cautioned the audience to tread carefully in that assumption.
My Thoughts: It was my feeling that Melissa’s demeanor during her story was that she was aware of an attentive audience. She did not appear unduly distressed but played on her words for affect, rather than a genuinely grieving daughter. I felt she hadn’t spent a lot of time with her father, in the lead up to his death. I felt that her role at the R T L meeting was an opportunity for her to display her anger at her father’s suicide rather than the fact that he had died. As a suicide, he was damned in the eyes of his church (?), and, of course, purgatory would be forever for her father’s soul. (???)
I cannot know her level of Catholicism beliefs but I thought the “ugliness” of the suicide method and the fact it was so long before he was found, was perhaps compounding “her perceived sense of guilt” in “not missing him” sooner. Six weeks is a long, long time, not to have had contact with a seventy year old parent, living alone in the Blue Mountains. It was her sibling that alerted her to a potential death, not any action by herself on behalf of her father. Of course, once Raymond was missed, everyone was concerned for him.
I was not aware of any tears while at the lectern (sitting, perhaps 8 feet away) in the telling of this painfully graphic story of “as if his head had exploded in a plastic bag.” I know grief manifests itself in many ways but Melissa did not present herself as “grieving” but rather as “getting even” with Exit and "Mr" Nitschke. She was not standing rigidly but lounged against the podium, as a support most of the time she told us her story, referring to notes.
Ms Frost spoke well, did not break down emotionally, and she often smiled at the audience, engaging them. Perhaps she is in fact, severely distressed. (Daughter has left home since grandfather’s death). Ms Frost was frequently distracted by traffic going in and out the door of the Conference. (Which I personally felt was quite rude, while she was speaking. Was it indicative of people’s disinterest in her story? Or was it the Senator’s movements?, Even Ms Tighe and colleague, was shushed during the talk, by a member in the gallery,) I did not look at Melissa again when she returned to her seat, for the second time.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Back to the General Business of R T L:
Also discussed was the film, Mademoiselle and the Doctor. The fact that the film was funded by the Australia Film angered Margaret Tighe to such an extent she has lodged a complaint against the funding of such a film. (My Thoughts: Hitler, too, thought censorship was a very good idea, ensuring his radical views, were the only ones worthy of consideration)
We were also advised by Ms Tighe that PN must have read about the impending address by Melissa at the Conference from the R T L website and she understood that PN had asked to be interviewed by the Sun Herald to respond to any claims Melissa might make.
Ms Tighe also said she was responsible for the title of Doctor Death being given to Philip Nitschke by the Media, but that unfortunately the title had been lost to “that” Queensland, Doctor Jayant Patel (She sounded quite disappointed at the prospect).
Also a hot item on the R T L Agenda will be cutting funding for abortions from the Medicare Rebate. Pregnancy Counselling Australia is a 24 hour service provided by trained R T L volunteers and this creates huge telephone costs.
My thoughts: I recognised the address, Clarke St., Abbotsford, as the ex Good Shepherd Convent, where I spent two of the most miserable years of my childhood, and in fact, my life. I could have wished I had been aborted, rather than seek assistance from any organisation attached to that community.
I wondered about young girls ringing desperately for advice. If they had any concept that they were only going to get one sort of advice. Have your baby, whether or not it ends up in an institution, foster homes, whatever, unloved and unwanted, is beside the point...as long as you give birth, your duty is done! And don't have sex before marriage! control your urges...God Loves You, Come back to God, All is forgiven.....
Again, there would never be an option of Choice for these women, because by virtue of their moral beliefs the volunteers on the phone could only support the Right to Life, regardless of the mental and physical anguish of the pregnant woman seeking support. Is this organisation funded from the public purse in any capacity? With Right to Life volunteers in the front line of telephone enquiries, what line of "Pregnancy Counseling" is involved? Could the advice given be more harmful to the woman, than if the counseling was conducted by a non religious group of volunteers. Much as I fear for myself being in the hands of a medical carer who does not respect my wishes over their religious beliefs, so too could a pregnant woman be confused because not all the options were readily explained to her. Counseling, is about weighing up the options in an impartial manner and arriving at a satisfactory decision for all concerned, not just an unborn child. Are women who ring this Helpline fully informed about the involvement of the Right to Life movement before they commence their enquiry?
I left the Conference at lunch time failing to stay on to hear from speakers on topics ranging from
Dr Peter McCullagh
“We know what is best for you, the plight of the person with limited capacity to communicate”.
Paul Copeland “Caring for Tim – A Life Worth Living”
Dr Ted Watt: “What Wrong with I.V.F?”
Dr John James: “Premature births following abortion – latest research”
Final notes:
I spoke to no one else during the Conference.
My record of the day’s events are not recorded strictly in the order they may have occurred, but the contents as detailed are my understanding of what was being conveyed to a general audience. They are my feelings about interpretations of each person's intentions on the day.
There were perhaps 60 people in attendance in the half day I attended
Photos were taken of all speakers by a priest sitting next to me for part of the meeting.
I have no idea whether the whole meeting was taped or not, but Senator Abetz’s speech was, having seen the recorder placed in front of him.
There was a board displayed, apparently listing Senators, those favorably disposed to the R T L Campaign had big red ticks against their names while others had red spots. The board was flat up against the table displaying all the literature of the R T L including a mock baby in the womb and related abortion information. There were a lot of red ticks. (Lots of “Commitments”?)
There was one security guard on the front gate and two at the back gate, in front of the building in which the Conference was held. There were no “demonstrators”.
I have no doubt about the devotion of the R T L Members. Choice and genuine debate is just not possible given their entrenched belief that their opinions are “gods work”. The Doctor and the Senators, demonstrated the rest of Society’s opinion is there to be manipulated, until they get the response they believe is their religiously moral crusade.
Margaret Tighe paled into insignificance, on the day, because her work is already done. When I considered how VE meetings are conducted, I came to the realization that we are as lambs to the slaughter. While NSW VE got a bit of a roasting, Victoria’s society never rated a mention. VESV doesn’t count? But Exit counts!
The religious fervor with which the Senators spoke left me in no doubt about their agenda to ensure an ultra right conservatism. They are committed servants of religion and their devotion to morality, palpable. Secularism in Government is no longer.
The feeling of relief to step outside at 1 pm into the fresh cold rainy day that is Melbourne was a breath of fresh air.
The rain was so very cleansing!
If you cannot see the menu, click here for an alternate menu