I stand opposed to the End of Life Choice Bill

Fakalofa Atu,

I stand opposed to the End of Life Choice Bill.

The bill that has been proposed threatens to further destabilise the meaning of life within our society, that most precious and societally basic?idea that?being alive is a gift and honour, and the inherent value that brings to self and the community.

We live in a society where we have traditionally fought, often with the blood of our people, to save and uphold the value of life, in order that the very right to exist is upheld.

And we now find ourselves experiencing an assault on the very preciousness of life, in the form of a law designed to increase the marketing of suicide.

My mentor and some?members of my family have left us due to that vicious global disease that is cancer; my mum, strong and known as a ‘bully to the bullies’ also left, not quite 60, boxing day just gone, and I was the one to hold her hand, be that shoulder for the times of vulnerability, to spend nights with…and we spoke about euthanasia sometimes.

In times of health she was always adamant that she would choose it, but as the times of sickness closed in, she would become glowing when her grandchildren, the lights of her life, would visit and be noisy, annoying and loud…and the importance of her staying on for her children, her grandchildren and herself, let alone the transference?of hope, love and compassion between all of us, meant that euthanasia was not able to steal that from all of us. She left us on the night that her last grandchild came to say goodbye…literally as she was surrounded by us loving her…and euthanasia would have robbed all of us of those most beautiful of times.

My issues with this bill are as follows:

New Zealand has traditionally held to?the idea of life being important; we lessened the importance when we allowed our unborn to be killed off due to inconvenience, and if we allow suicide to be taxpayer funded and healthcare-operated, then we continue down towards the idea that?life is a productivity-based allowance, valid for life?only if useful to the state or if one can be bothered to support the life. This is a very dark territory for any society, both for that vulnerable life and the longevity of the society.

Over the last couple of decades, I have spoken with rangatahi who temporarily desired to commit suicide; those who support euthanasia cannot support measures to lower our horrific suicide rate, because there is no real difference between a young person choosing to hang by a rope, and a sick?person choosing to die by a redefined health system. The only difference between both suicides is that the latter suicide is funded by the taxpayer and redefined health system.

Our elderly already suffer rising rates of elder abuse, both here and around the world – the encouraging of suicide has already occurred and will rise – it is cheaper for any socialist-style economy to kill off those members who are no longer productive, due to the nature of such economics

The idea of the slippery slope has already been shown to be accurate:?first it was adults with terminal illnesses to die, then those with chronic conditions, then children, mentally ill and depressed, and?now if one feels that they have “completed life”, there is a push to progress towards even that; a study a few years ago showed that 32% of euthanasia cases were without consent or request, and some of the stories coming out are very Orwellian – Iceland’s vaunted claim of eliminating Down syndrome is actually eugenics 101.

Another study?shows that the majority of committing?suicide with assistance is about the feelings of being a burden, loneliness and related depression, NOT pain, which means the narrative around pain is either a lie or ignorant thought

This bill gives the state an even?further power?into the very meaning of life, family, and society…by demeaning us and promoting state thought.”

Ok, blessings to you and family!