INSIDE THIS ISSUE

P2

P4

P5 P6 P7

• From near and far: news from around the world

P3 • 39th AGM report

continued • Changes at Your-

LastRight.com • Message from the

Executive Manager

• EXIT International, DWDV and the legal challenge

• New office staff • New email?

• The slippery slope fallacy; or the camel’s nose

• Who overturned the ROTTI Act?

• Share your story • Volunteer editor • Membership • New members very

welcome

• New committee

member profiles

39th AGM Report

T he 2012 AGM was held at the Mel-bourne Unitarian Church on 10 No-

vember, 2012. The keynote address was given by Dr Bob Brown and below is a summary of his well-received address.

“Life from our birth should be acted upon and controlled by our own actions. As birth is part of the universal cycle of life so death is just as important and essential part of that cycle of renewal.”

“Our life needs to be satisfying and rewarding and this includes overcoming our squeamishness about death. It means putting the time and manner of one’s death back in the hands of the individual whose life is theirs to lead and properly conclude.”

Dr Brown pointed out that “every politician in every electorate in Australia represents an electorate where a clear majority of Australians support the individual’s right to die with dignity. Yet politicians act in thrall to the fear of the minority opinion, led primarily by religious groups and in particular the Catholic Church and Cardinal George

Pell." Currently entrenched religious opposition to adoption of VE laws amounts to a dictate that others may not have a dignified death of their choosing. But since the repeal of the 1996 NT legislation through the actions of the Federal Parliament, Dr Brown noted that opposition is crumbling. The current regard for the Catholic Church and its handling of paedophile claims has lost them moral authority when pontificating

on moral matters, including defending their anti-VE stance.

Consequently, now is a particularly opportune time to demand of our political representatives to change the law in line with the wishes of the vast majority. At least 80%, of Australians who consistently support a change in the law. DWDV members should resolve to be up-front about actively presenting their beliefs to their elected representatives, regardless of party affiliation. Firm and respectful organised personal letter writing, demanding to meet with their parliamentary representatives, repeated by even 1,000 individuals, will be the most effective change agent to ameliorate their fear of now significantly weakened, if entrenched, opposition.

Dr Brown cited the massive response in 2011 and again recently, that struck fear into the politicians to respond to ethical and cruelty concerns of the live animal export trade, and that swiftly lead to action and a ban period. He opined that we are, if anything a little more reticent about speaking about the cruelties visited upon

SUMMER 2013 | NUMBER 161

P8 • Dear diary—meetings and work-shops

• Donations • Movie fundraiser

Dr Bob Brown, Keynote speaker and Lesley Vick, DWDV President.

Stop Press

A s we go to press we are pleased to report that the long-awaited

consultation paper inviting Tasmani-ans to have their say to the proposed Tasmanian Voluntary Assisted Dying Legislation has been released. The paper puts forward a model for vol-untary assisted dying and is de-signed to inform public debate, and seek feedback, ahead of the drafting of a joint Private Members Bill later this year.

Dying with Dignity Tasmania (DWDTas) President, Margaret Sing, commended the Tasmanian Premier, Lara Giddings and Nick McKim, Leader of the Greens and said, “As for all legislation, parliamentarians need to base their decisions on sound evidence and carefully reasoned arguments, as well as on community views. We know how strongly people feel on this issue on both sides of the debate.”

Ms Sing reinforced the importance of using up-to-date, reliable and complete information throughout the consultation process by stating “we respect the right of everyone to their beliefs and values and to express their views on this important issue, but with this right comes a responsibility to check claims so we don't mislead parliamentarians.”

DWDTas will be holding publicly advertised information sessions on the proposed legislation during the consultation process. View the consultation paper at;

http://www.premier.tas.gov.au/featured_releases/voluntary_assisted_dying

Continued on page 3…...

Page 2 | DWDV Update Summer 2013

ers had profound and unalterable suffer-ing, but it was not essentially physical suffering as most people understand it. This was intense psychological and exis-tential suffering – suffering in the mind, not the body. Yet such suffering is equal-ly as important in other more common requests for assistance to die. There is an excessive focus on physical pain in the debate. It is true that pain can be reason-ably well palliated in most circumstanc-es. It is far from the most important rea-son for requests for assistance (it may be one of a number of reasons), yet the de-bate constantly focuses on pain. This story focuses the mind on the true mean-ing of suffering, the relief of which is the fundamental reason for considering any request for assistance in dying. This event makes clear that it is suffering, not the stage of an illness (terminal or other-wise) which is the fundamental princi-ple. These brothers’ suffering will be potentially worse precisely because they are not terminally ill. It would continue for years rather than a few weeks or months. The totality of their suffering is potentially far greater because they are not terminally ill. To confine assistance in dying to terminally ill persons is to commit many people to years of pro-found suffering. This situation is an in-teresting variant to that of Tony Nicklin-son, an Englishman with a “locked-in state” after a brain-stem stroke. Tony’s uncommon form of stroke left him com-pletely paralysed except for the ability to breathe and move his eyes. He could communicate only letter by letter to a companion by moving his eyes. The Bel-gian twins were not locked-in physically – they were not paralysed – but once blind, they would be locked-in psycho-logically by being unable to communi-cate in any way.

Update on Canada CANADA—Canada has become an ex-citing place for right to die law reform proponents. In 2012 a challenge was mounted through the Supreme Court of British Columbia to the law preventing medical assistance in suicide. Gloria Taylor, suffering from motor neurone disease, argued that the law discrimi-nated against her because she could not end her own life (not illegal) without assistance (currently illegal). Justice Smith found that the law, and current medical practice, already recognises the validity of various end-of-life practices, and she also found that practice in other countries which allow assisted suicide do not result in harm to ‘vulnerable members of society’. She found that the prohibition against assistance violated aspects of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and gave the Fed-eral Parliament 12 months to review the Criminal Code. In late 2011, the Royal Society of Canada issued a report by six Canadian and international experts rec-ommending change to the law, and im-proved provision of palliative care. Update on Massachusetts USA—Last year we reported that 2012 was the year of decision for USA State of Massachusetts. We can now report that, disappointingly there has been a narrow defeat of the ballot initiative to introduce an assisted dying law like the ones in Oregon and Washington State. (In the US, voters who collect enough signatures can suggest a proposal for the law to be voted on at election time. If a simple majority approve, the legis-lature must pass the law) The Boston Globe reported on 7 November 2012 on boston.com that 51 percent of voters had opposed the measure, compared with 49 percent in favor. A narrow de-feat indeed! The ballot question has been the subject of an intense political battle. A Boston Globe poll in September 2012 showed voters over-whelmingly supported the measure but support steadily eroded as a diverse group of opponents, including religious leaders, anti-abortion activists, and conservatives made a last minute attack by airing their message in aggressive

From near

& far

television advertisements and at church services. The Boston Globe also high-lighted in their article that other efforts to legalize physician-assisted suicide in New England have failed. For example, in 2000, a ballot initiative in Maine lost also by a close margin and legislative efforts to pass a similar bill in Vermont and New Hampshire, have been defeat-ed in recent years.

Remarkable Belgian Euthanasia Event Belgium—There has been intense dis-cussion recently over the voluntary eu-thanasia in Belgium of 45-year-old twins who were not terminally ill, nor was there any report of uncontrolled pain. They were not quitters. They had been born totally deaf, had learned to communicate using their own sign lan-guage, and had worked together as cob-blers. They lived together and had no communication with anyone except themselves and their family. Now they were losing their sight due to a congeni-tal and untreatable form of glaucoma. Consider their situation for a moment. Without sight they could not communi-cate. Their soundless world was now also to become a dark world. They would be unable to look after them-selves and would have to enter an insti-tution. Effectively they would be in soli-tary confinement in a ‘prison’ for the rest of their lives –but for what crime? The thought of it is horrifying – would anyone willingly change places with them? There was, of course, the usual response from opponents – fear. A pro-fessor of medical ethics at the Catholic University of Louvain expressed fear over the wider implications for the wel-fare of disabled people, saying ‘In a so-ciety as wealthy as ours, we must find another, caring way to deal with human frailty”. He had no suggestions as to how to help these brothers. The only alternative to their choice was to lock them up, throw away the key and forget about them. Although an incredibly rare combination of circumstances, this event is worth discussing because it illustrates certain fundamental but often misunderstood principles. These broth-

Update on France France— Recently elected President Francois Hollande commissioned a re-port on French law in relation to assis-tance in dying from a panel chaired by Didier Sicard, the former head of France’s national ethics committee. The government said it would act on the re-port by bringing a bill before Parliament by June 2013. The report indicated that assisted suicide might be appropriate in cases of incurable illness. Public support for such legal change is as high in France as in most Western democracies. Alt-hough France is nominally a Catholic country, polls have shown that only 9% of the population believe what their Catholic priest says.

DWDV Update Summer 2013 | Page 3

our own suffering and terminal situation, than the welfare of animals. This humane right to choose a good death in a manner and time of our own choosing, when we know it’s right, needs more of a voice from all of us, who will all one day die.

In conclusion, Dr Brown said in his experience, euthanasia is an issue increasingly being asked about and he can sense that a change, when pushed for, will be much quicker than we all currently think.

After a short break and an opportunity to have a cuppa and an informal chat, the formal proceedings took place. DWDV’s new President Lesley Vick presented her report and advised members that the committee has appointed Carolynne van der Cingel as DWDV’s Executive Manager. Carolynne’s new re-sponsibilities have necessitated some rearrangements in the office and the engagement of additional assistance. DWDV’s solid financial position was presented by the Treasurer, Mike Tinsley in his report.

The committee members were elected for 2013. They are:

President: Lesley Vick Vice-President: Rodney Syme Treasurer: Mike Tinsley Secretary: Mark Newstead General committee: Penny Casey, John Hont, Judith Hoy, Lucinda Lodge, Rowena Moore, Dorothy Reading, Janine Truter.

Please see page seven for further information about some of our new committee members.

DWDV members can call the office on 9877 7677 if they would like a copy of the AGM report sent to them. Thank you to the volunteers who assisted on the day. We greatly ap-preciate your valuable time and ef-fort in helping make the AGM a great success.

39th AGM Report continued...

Changes to YourLastRight.com

Y our Last Right.com is a national body representing Aus-tralian Dying With Dignity/Voluntary Euthanasia Socie-

ties whose principal aim is law reform. It came into being after a national meeting in Adelaide in 2009. The aim was to create a unified body with common objectives and a vehicle to ap-proach the Clem Jones Trust with funding proposals to facili-tate law reform. Largely due to the work of Neil Francis, then CEO of DWDV, it was established and launched in October 2010, at the Melbourne meeting of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies. The assistance of Marshall Perron and DWDV’s Max Sutherland was instrumental in persuading the Clem Jones Trustees to provide funding.

Neil Francis became Chairman and CEO of YLR. Much valu-able work was done in setting up the YLR website, research, presentations, papers, and argument. Funding was provided to Tasmania and South Australia. Unfortunately, after 12 months, the DWDQ Director resigned, followed by the WAVES Direc-tor, and WAVES itself as a member. In August 2012, YLR sent a legal letter to Philip Nitschke following his Exitorial question-

ing the distribution of the Clem Jones Trust funds. This letter was sent despite the opposition of DWDV, DWDNSW and DWDTas. Unfortunately this led to internal dissent within YLR, and the resignation of the DWDTas and DWDNSW directors followed, together with the resignation of DWDNSW as a mem-ber.

This lack of harmony and cooperation within YLR did not go unnoticed by the Clem Jones Trustees, who decided not to provide further funding beyond November 2012. This led to the resignation of Neil Francis as CEO and Chair of YLR from 1/2/13.

For a while the future of YLR hung in the balance, with a danger that it would wind up. However the Board, with en-couragement from the Clem Jones Trust, has decided to contin-ue operating without a CEO, with Rodney Syme as Chairman. It is hoped that continued funding from the Trust will be possi-ble for well constructed requests for funding of support for law reform, as is imminent in Tasmania and South Australia.

Message from the Executive Manager

H appy New Year to you all and I hope you had an enjoya-ble festive season. In our recent email to members we

highlighted that the DWDV year has begun with our four new additional committee members (read about them on page sev-en), and fresh and renewed energies for ideas, plans and strate-gies aimed at achieving law reform and the reality of personal choice at the end of life. There are many changes underway within our organisation that will help prepare us for the chal-lenges ahead as we move towards a state election in 2014.

You may have noticed that our website is not functioning properly and this is because we are currently redeveloping it. It is still operational, but many of the pages have been removed or links to specialist information are not functional at present. You can still download forms or find out and book for work-shop/meeting dates. We hope to launch a new website in the coming months. Another big change is that the DWDV office is

moving! We have been in our current office for approximately seven years and whilst it is a central location in the leafy suburb of Blackburn, it has become too small for our needs. Our new, bigger office is located in Mitcham, a little further out, but close to public transport and has no stairs! Those of you who have visited the Blackburn office will understand how happy we are to be on the ground floor. The mail and phone will be redi-rected in the short-term and we will advise new contact details soon.

As you can see many changes are happening. How can you help? Write to your local politician and tell them about the community consultation process occurring in Tasmania and ask them to deal decisively with this matter, in our state, as your nominated representative. Carolynne van der Cingel

Page 4 | DWDV Update Summer 2013

P hilip Nitschke, in his August Exito-rial, questioned the distribution of

funds from the Clem Jones Trust for the purpose of VE law reform. He wrote “The pursuit of money should not di-vide and conquer the movement but it is. And that leads to another question, should the executives and administra-tors of the movement – those funded by Clem Jones – pull in annual salaries in the hundreds of thousands of dollars? Is that how Clem Jones envisaged his lega-cy? Paying pigs at the trough? I would have thought the recent controversy of the Health Services Union (East Branch) was a warning to all who work for social change on the dangers of squandering dollars tagged for social good on person-al payments and perks.”

This statement is clearly insulting and inflammatory, and was considered to be defamatory on legal advice ob-tained by YLR CEO Neil Francis. The DWDV Director to YLR (together with the Director from DWDNSW and DWDTas) advised strongly against send-ing a legal letter to Philip Nitschke.

However such a letter was sent, specifi-cally naming these directors without their permission, under the heading ‘executives and directors’ (none of them are executives and they receive no remu-neration as Directors).

Dr Nitschke’s next Exitorial (Sept-Nov) under the heading CLEM JONES MISSING MILLIONS stated that he had received “a legal letter from lawyers act-ing for the President of Dying With Dig-nity Victoria and the World Federation of Right to Die Societies, Mr Neil Fran-cis.” This statement was not correct – Neil Francis was acting as CEO and Chair of Your Last Right.com, and acting against the advice of the DWDV director and another member of the DWDV com-mittee with legal background. Some DWDV members, who were also Exit members, were very concerned when they read this Exitorial, which implied that DWDV was responsible for the legal letter.

To protect the reputation of DWDV, and in attempt to obtain a correction, I sent an urgent email (after consultation

with DWDV President Lesley Vick) to DWDV members with the correct infor-mation. In that email I stated that “the legal letter was wholly the initiative and action of the CEO and Chair of YLR.com. Unfortunately this implied that he had acted alone, whereas the opinions of Board members and others had been sought. When confronted I offered a public apology and a correction but this was declined. I was then threatened with legal action for defamation.

Subsequently a number of DWDV members have corresponded with Phil-ip, and his latest Exitorial (February) contains the statement, under the head-ing CLEM JONES MISSING MILLIONS, “according to Dr Rodney Syme, Mr Francis did not have the endorsement of the DWDV committee.” Philip was refer-ring to the legal letter sent by YLR. Thank you, Philip. I consider the matter closed. Rodney Syme

EXIT International, DWDV and the legal challenge

New email?

M ore and more peo-ple are connecting

to the Internet, whether for research, on-line shopping, entertainment or to exchange emails with family members and friends. If you have set up an email address, but as yet have not advised DWDV, we would love to hear from you. There are two key advantages if we can communicate with you by email: 1. We can let you know of events and initiatives in a more timely manner, such as relevant press articles, special film screenings or theatre events; 2. We can distribute newsletters, subscription notices and receipts easier, quicker and cheaper by email, sav-ing the Society money and staff and volunteer effort.

Please send an email to dwdv@dwdv.org.au to let

us know your email address or if you have changed your email address recently and would like to contin-

ue receiving information from us.

To die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly. Death of one's own free choice, death at the proper time, with a clear head and with joyfulness, consummated in the midst of children and witnesses: so that an actual leave-taking

is possible while he who is leaving is still there. Friedrich Nietzsche, Expeditions of an Untimely Man

New office staff

I n the last edition of the newsletter we

introduced you to Louise who works in the DWDV office part-time. Due to the in-creasing workload in the office, we have also hired Natalie. Natalie usually works every Thurs-day and additional days when required.

Natalie writes, “Hi, my name is Natalie King. I work in the DWDV office as an ad-ministration assistant, on a casual basis. I have returned to the work-force after taking a break to raise my children, who are now both in primary school. Previously, I worked at the National Gallery of Victo-ria for a decade, mainly in the Finance Department. I have found working in the busy DWDV office to be very interesting and reward-ing, and look forward to continuing to work with the dedicated team to ensure that everyone has the right to choose to die with dignity.”

We are very fortunate to have such a hard-working team in the office.

Above: Natalie, our part-time office assistant

DWDV Update Summer 2013 | Page 5

T he slippery slope argument is used by opponents of dying with dignity. They often argue that ‘if we allow assisted

suicide for the legally competent, terminally ill person, it’s a slippery slope to state-sanctioned murder of the disabled and elderly and Nazis take over the world’.

A slippery slope argument is one where a small first step leads to a chain of apparently related and inevitable events, culminating in some significant effect. To make the argument valid, a person must show that A leads to B, B leads to C, C leads to D and so on, until one finally claims that A leads to Z. It must show a chain of logical probability at each step, before the relevant conclusion can be drawn.

In England, the slippery slope argument is also amusingly called the "camel's nose”: once a camel has managed to place its nose within a tent, the rest of the camel will inevitably fol-low. ‘A shared characteristic of these arguments is that they are used to oppose some type of change in the status quo’.

The key point to remember is the likelihood of the events occurring along the way in a slippery slope argument. To use the example that voluntary euthanasia is a slippery (unstoppable) slope from this to a Nazi Holocaust, the as-sumption should start with us living in a Nazi dictatorship heavily influenced by eugenics and anti-Semitism where 45% of doctors belong to the Nazi party. Does this exist in Australia now? Is it very probable that this will develop in Australia in the near future? Is it in fact not very probable? It’s not very likely, then, that the rest of the camel – the Holocaust – will follow. Slippery slope lobbyists are rarely called on to justify each step of their argument, nor explain why their argument is inevitable whilst other possible outcomes – such as successful voluntary euthanasia laws around the world – are not.

There are several objections to the slippery slope argument: 1. The slippery slope assumes we cannot make reasoned

decisions for ourselves in the future – that making one decision now makes us automatons for the future.

2. If the slippery slope end is so dreadful, why does the initial decision seem to make sense?

3. The slippery slope argument assumes that we can only decide now for all time and that our views will not change in the future.

Slippery slope arguments rely on future acceptance of argu-ments not yet made. They propose that accepting the first step inevitably leads to accepting the next step. It assumes that a majority of our society, and in particular, our traditionally con-servative lawmakers, will leap helplessly down this slippery slope. This is rather insulting to our MPs!

Legal analysis shows that there are ways of stopping slip-pery slopes: by clear, effective rules (laws). Ironically, where the law is vague or inconsistently applied, as is currently the case with dying with dignity, there is a slippery slope by judge-made law. Remember: those who oppose voluntary euthana-sia have an absolutist point of view. It’s not productive to en-gage with someone who won’t debate. What we need to do is engage those who may listen to absolutist arguments but want to make a good, well-informed decisions – our public figures and politicians.

Thanks to M.J. Rizzo and D.G. Whitman, ‘The camel’s nose is in the tent’, UCLA Law Review, Vol 51, No. 2, Dec 2003

The slippery slope fallacy, or the camel’s nose

W hy did the Federal Parliament overturn the Northern Territory’s Rights of the Terminally Ill (ROTTI) Act in

1997 when repeated polling showed it had the support of 75% of the population? Mark Humphries decided to investigate this for his PhD at Deakin University.

Mark analysed all the public submissions to the ROTTI Act and the subsequent parliamentary debates, as well as reviewing the debate over euthanasia since 1945. It won’t astonish our DWDV members that he found that religious groups, primarily the Catholic church, were the main opponents of voluntary eu-thanasia, together with disability organisations and medical bodies. However, Mark identified that religion and the sanctity-of-life were downplayed by these groups. Instead, the domi-nant argument put forward was the ‘slippery slope’ argument, with Nazi Germany being the usual example given. In this ar-gument, the Nazis eugenics program began with forced sterili-sations, progressed to involuntary euthanasia and then the mass murder of the Holocaust. Introducing voluntary euthana-sia laws would send us down the same path.

Mark saw that the advantage of the slippery slope argument for religious groups was that it was superficially secular and harder to dismiss than the marginalised religions of today. However, it led to inconsistencies in opponents’

arguments, and Mark found that ‘many opponents appear unwilling to divulge the ideology that underpins their position’. The absolute sanctity-of-life position and unwavering rejection of euthanasia meant that debate – ‘a process of reasoning aimed at demonstrating the truth or falsehood of something’ – was impossible. This effectively obstructed law reform.

Mark concluded that the truth of slippery slope arguments was incidental to opponents – the primary purpose was ‘to hide a religious proscription that will not countenance euthanasia under any circumstances’. As a warning to us of the usual, forthcoming opposition to law reform, we should heed Mark’s work. Although organized religion now operates ‘at the periphery of debate, it remains disproportionately influential’. Further, ‘conservative institutions, be they the medical profession or government at large, are predisposed to align with organised religion to oppose the empowerment of individuals in the area of death and dying.’

Mark’s thesis was passed by international experts and he was awarded his PhD for this thesis ‘Understanding euthanasia debate : the Northern Territory experience in historical context’ from Deakin in 2010.

Who overturned the ROTTI Act?

Page 6 | DWDV Update Summer 2013

Share your story

T his is the story of the experiences that have fuelled my belief in our democratic right to Freedom of Choice and to

be able to choose an assisted death when WE say “Enough is enough.” It has been the experience of losing more than 30 of my friends and family members who have died from hideous diseases which has spurred me on. The youngest was only 21 and newly married when she died from a brain tumour and the eldest, a dearly loved and loving Aunt died aged 96 from Alzheimer’s disease after enduring 6 long years in a nursing home having her bottom wiped and being spoon fed mush. The really horrible thing about Alzheimer’s Disease is the mo-ments of lucidity which offer the impossible hope to families that their loved one may be recovering.

I was only 36 when I lost my young husband, father to our 3 children, to a sudden and unexpected death. Our grief was terrible and our children constantly asked “Why did our Dad-dy die?” Yet as the years passed all of our memories of him, have been the cause of much love and laughter and the won-derful years (too few) of the fun and wonderful times we shared together. I have also lost more than 30 family members and friends to horrible cancers, brain tumours, and other in-curable diseases and conditions. Although I remember them all with love and remember the joyful times, the memories of their horrible and lingering dying have never left me. The youngest was only 23 when she succumbed to Melanoma. She pleaded with us to end her misery. Palliative care could only offer deep sedation which caused her family the great distress of the hopeless waiting, waiting and waiting until she finally died.

MND stole my 46 years old friend’s life. He had endured 5 long years of degeneration of all his physical powers, mobility, voice and independence, with enormous courage and humour, but when the end finally came he was not spared the terrible death by suffocation that this disease caused. At his bedside not only his friends but all of the staff were weeping. My love-ly friend had a brain tumour which changed her from a beau-tiful artistic, gentle and loving woman into a foul-mouthed

monster. She was 45 when she died and two months after her death her wonderful husband who had nursed her at home with love and compassion and ignoring her verbal abuse committed suicide. He was 46.

I have personally experienced the administration of the so- called “double effect” of morphine relieving injections for pain. I was at my comatose Mother’s side when the attending physi-cian in the emergency ward told the sister, who had only five minutes earlier given my mother a morphine injection, that the patient was in great pain and gave her another morphine injec-tion and a few moments later she died. Whilst I and the other members of the family were grateful for this compassionate act, I am appalled that such decisions can and are made with no checks and balances. This is why we need Legalised Volun-tary Euthanasia Laws in place to ensure that this is what the patient and family want AND to protect the medical fraternity. Also, although AHDs are a good start, there is still no register system in place, and we are still unable to choose and be of-fered a peaceful physician assisted death when we are ready to end the pain and suffering. Pamela Barrett DWDV Opinion: It is a common observation that those with harsh experiences of death and dying amongst family members and friends are often the most active propo-nents for change. Pamela Barrett’s experience reflects this in her moving de-scription of the suffering she has observed and experienced. It always irritates me intensely when media commentators write or say that “this is a very diffi-cult issue” – it usually reflects that they have had no personal experience of a bad death. It is only through experience that understanding and maturity devel-op. It is sad that Pamela has had such trauma, but courageous that she is pre-pared to write about it. It is through such personal revelations that others may learn. Dr Rodney Syme

Volunteer editor

D o you have writing and edit-ing skills that you would like

to put to good use? DWDV is look-ing for a volunteer editor to pre-pare and produce this quarterly newsletter, Update. The ideal per-son would be able to edit raw ma-terial and images for layout into an allocated space. Experience with Microsoft Publisher preferred but not essential as full training and ongoing assistance will be given. If you feel you may be able to contribute or would like to discuss further, please contact Carolynne during business hours (Mon-Thurs) on 9877 7677 for a confidential chat.

Membership

Y ou receive this newsletter because you are a member of DWDV or perhaps you have been given this newsletter

by a good friend. Most of us approach membership of DWDV from a very personal perspective. We may have seen a loved one suffer a painful, protracted death bereft of digni-ty and have suffered along with them. Those of us who want to have a choice about our end for ourselves or loved ones seek, through DWDV, a change in the law which will allow us a dignified death when our time comes. Collectively we have greater ability to bring about change through DWDV.

We sincerely appreciate your continued support through your membership. Some of you have resources, time, skills and abilities to do more. Even talking to your friends and acquaintances about us and passing on your copy of Update helps our cause and organisation’s awareness in the commu-nity. Our Treasurer Mike Tinsley has generously offered a weekend at his chalet in Mt Bulla (off-peak season) to the member who refers the most new members before this year’s AGM. That could be you! In life we are challenged to do our best. Our strength is in our numbers and commitment.

New members very welcome Y ou can join online with secure credit card payment at

www.dwdv.org.au under ‘take action’ tab, or phone us on 9877 7677 for a form. New memberships are being offered at quarter fee to the 1st of April 2013. $5 single pensioner, $10 single non-pensioner, $15 family membership.

DWDV Update Summer 2013 | Page 7

New committee member profiles

W e are very fortunate to have four new committee members for the

2012-13 year; Penny Casey, Lucinda Lodge, Dorothy Reading and Janine Truter. They bring with them a wealth of experience, and we are delighted to have them on-board. You can read about Pen-ny, Dorothy and Janine below. Lucinda will be profiled in the next edition.

My name is Penny Casey, and I grad-uated as a General Nurse from the Royal Melbourne Hospital in 1992. Over the last 20 odd years I have worked in acute and community settings, specialising in Infections Diseases, HIV/AIDS, Commu-nity Nursing and Neurosurgery. I have taught nursing in the private and public sector for about the last 10 years of my career, during which time I was fortunate to have my two children, Thomas (7) and Amelia (5). Two years ago, my husband Simon supported my decision to leave work and settle into full time mothering and agreed that I should be the executive manager of our household! Being gener-ally of an active mind and active disposi-tion, it wasn't long before I was looking for somewhere to use the many skills I had acquired during my years as a nurse and teacher. DWDV has been a wonder-ful opportunity for me to learn new in-formation whilst sharing my own skills.

In my first 12 months as a member of DWDV I have been fortunate to work with Carolynne, Judith and Dr Syme on strengthening the format and delivery of the workshops, editing some of the exist-ing documents, and responding to Ju-dith's calls for action regarding the media and politicians when appropriate. DWDV has had a big impact on me per-sonally. While I have not recently had a personal contact with the death of a loved one, I have nursed many people to their death during my career, some deaths which still remain in my mind as examples of pain, suffering and complete loss of dignity, with no conceivable bene-fit for anyone involved, least of all the

patient. I have had cause to reflect on my own actions as a nurse, engaged in a medical model of care that still does not afford what I consider to be basic human rights regarding end-of-life care. While some may find such personal reflection confronting, I am delighted to be able to challenge my own practices, so that go-ing forward I can join the fight to chal-lenge the system and improve the choices available for those approaching the end of their life.

I am looking forward to continuing to promote the messages that DWDV is sending to the community - that urgent legal reform should be undertaken to enable more choice around how and when we die. Penny Casey

Dorothy Reading entered the area of

public health and preventive medicine in 1986 when appointed Director of the Vic-torian Smoking and Health Project (Quit Campaign) and held this position for two years. In 1987 Dorothy was involved in the development of Victoria’s Tobacco Act and the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. The following year she was appointed to the position of Director of Education at the Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria (now the Cancer Council Victo-ria). In this role she was responsible for the development and delivery of pro-grams on prevention and early detection of skin cancer (SunSmart), breast cancer and cervical cancer (PapScreen) and a comprehensive telephone information service (Cancer Information and Support Service). Other areas of responsibility included the development of resources, information and training for health pro-fessionals, teachers and community

workers, recruitment of well populations to cancer screening programs, a program to train bilingual facilitators for non-English speaking communities, consumer education on prostate cancer screening, familial bowel cancer, colorectal cancer screening advice for the Victorian gov-ernment and a review of the Cancer Council patient services. As a member of the Cancer Council’s senior management team she shared responsibility for strate-gic planning, policy development and implementation, and day to day admin-istration of all aspects of the organisation.

From 2004 until her retirement in De-cember 2010 she held the role of Senior Strategic Consultant in the Office of the Director where she was responsible for developing the Cancer Council’s strategic plan and risk management policy. She reviewed programs including the Hu-man Resources service, the corporate communications strategy, the in-house publications office, and the Victorian Co-operative Oncology Group among oth-ers.

My interest in dying with dignity

started with a high school creative writ-ing piece and I've always felt very strong-ly that everyone should have the legal right to a pain-free death, including de-ciding when the pain - physical or exis-tential - is enough. My background is with organizing things, so Judith Hoy has entrusted me with co-ordinating the Rapid Response Writers' group, which aims to contribute to newspapers when topical articles are published. My fervent hope is to be out of a job - that DWDV will succeed in having well-written and compassionate legislation passed by our State parliament. Janine Truter

Penny Casey with her young daughter

Above: Dorothy Reading

Above: Janine Truter

Page 8 | DWDV Update Summer 2013

Published by Dying With Dignity Victoria Inc ABN: 80 591 186 892 Reg. No: A00006974B E: dwdv@dwdv.org.au W: www.dwdv.org.au T: (03) 9877 7677 F: (03) 9877 5077 P: 3 / 9 b Salisbury Avenue, Blackburn, Victoria 3130, Australia Patrons: Mr Julian Burnside QC Hon. Rod Mackenzie OAM President: Ms Lesley Vick Vice-President: Dr Rodney Syme Secretary: Mr Mark Newstead Treasurer: Mr Mike Tinsley Other committee: Mrs Penny Casey, Mr John Hont, Ms Judith Hoy, Mrs Lucinda Lodge, Mrs Rowena Moore, Ms Janine Truter,

Ms Dorothy Reading

Please pass on your copy of Update to anyone you know who may be interested.

Meetings and workshops

Advance Directives Workshop Led by Dr Rodney Syme, this friendly and comprehensive workshop will teach you all you need to know about completing and storing DWDV docu-ments aimed at ensuring your end-of-life choices are respected. Monday, April 15th, 10am – 12:30pm

Inaugural Advance Directives Evening Workshop Thursday May 2nd 6.15pm for a 6.30pm start—finishes at 9.00pm sharp

Dignity in Dementia Workshop Based on Dr Rodney Syme’s experienc-es of many people’s fear of developing dementia, attendees will (1) learn about dementia and its effects; (2) understand how it is diagnosed and managed; and (3) complete DWDV’s Advance Di-rective for Dementia to document your treatment or refusal wishes. March 18th, 10am – 12:50pm Nearly full

Phillip Island Workshops Advance Directives: Saturday 13th April Dementia: Saturday 9th November Workshops will commence at 10.00am and conclude at approx. 12.30pm Both workshops will be held at the Cowes Cultural Centre. Bookings es-sential via DWDV office, 9877 7677.

Workshop Bookings You can book and pay online via our website www.dwdv.org.au/WorkshopsAndMeetings or call the office on 9877 7677 to register your at-tendance, and pay by credit card, cheque or money order.

Member pensioner $25 Member non-pensioner $50 Non-member pensioner $50 Non-member non-pensioner $100

Melbourne workshops are held in Kew and further details given upon registra-tion. Easy access via public transport and parking onsite. Light refreshments served. Members Information Session Our next informal and informative get-together will be held at the Evergreen Community Centre in Balwyn for members, particularly new ones, and other interested people. It is a great opportunity for like-minded people to hear a little about the history and cur-rent initiatives of DWDV. Why not bring a friend? Gold coin donation re-quested on the day. Phone the office to reserve your seats. Saturday, April 6th , 1.45—4.00pm.

Ballarat Group meeting Locals are cordially invited to attend the next DWDV Ballarat Group meet-ing on Tuesday 14th May. Other mem-bers, particularly in the Geelong and Bendigo region are also very welcome to attend. RSVP Ken on 03 5331 1328 We hope you can attend!

Early notice—2013 AGM The 2013 AGM will be held on Satur-day the 16th November at 1.45 for a 2.00pm start at the Unitarian Church in East Melbourne. Keynote speaker to be advised.

Mark the date in your diary now!

D WDV would like to say a heartfelt thank you to the Life

Members who responded so gener-ously to our recent letter suggesting a donation. We are deeply grateful to those who were able to donate.

We would also like to thank the anonymous person who gave a most generous donation at the AGM in November 2012. It is this generosity that encourages us to pursue our mission on behalf of all our mem-bers and goes a long way towards helping us achieve our goals.

Thank you!

Donations

Movie Fundraiser

C alling all Charles

Dickens fans. We will be holding our next fundrais-ing-social event in March. Come along and enjoy this classical tale about a humble orphan who sud-denly becomes a

gentleman with the help of an unknown benefactor. Where: Palace Cinemas, 231 Whitehorse Road, Balwyn When: Thursday 14 March 2013 Time: 11am Followed by lunch/drink. Cost: $20 per head. Booking and payment essential via the office by Wednesday 6 March 2013. Come along and enjoy this event with like-minded DWDV friends. Thank you Jill Paterson for organising!