A Tragic End
By Carroll Rees

On Friday, January 28, 2005 an 82 year old right-to-die advocate took his own life while his wife and children looked on. Marcel Tremblay attended his own “living wake” at an Ottawa area Holiday Inn accompanied by 50 of his friends and family members where he ate his last meal and enjoyed a couple of beer. According to newspaper accounts his best friend of 50 years, Gary Sirna, found it difficult to enjoy the wake and is quoted as saying “I’m not in support of what he’s doing. I won’t support Marcel’s decision. All I can say is that I will miss him. Good luck where you’re going.”

Mr. Tremblay decided three months ago that he had endured enough suffering and it was time to call it quits. He was not dying but had been afflicted with chronic back pain for many years and suffered from a lung disease called pulmonary fibrosis which made it increasingly difficult for him to breathe. “My back was driving me nuts” said Mr. Tremblay while explaining that he could not understand why he had waited so long to end his life. He claims to have been ready to die 28 years ago when he retired at the age of 50.

Shortly after 10 o’clock at night, Mr. Tremblay returned from his “living wake”, greeted journalists waiting outside his home and went inside with his family to prepare to take his life. A reporter and photographer from the Kingston Whig-Standard was also present so that he could report his suicide and witness to the fact that family members did not assist Mr. Tremblay since it is a crime to provide assistance . Mr. Tremblay took a seat in his favorite leather recliner, chatted with his family for a while and then, surprisingly, asked the reporter to leave while he prepared the apparatus to end his life. When the reporter was asked to return, Mr. Tremblay was sitting in his chair with a helium filled turkey-roasting bag over his head and a bungee cord around his neck. A tube leading from a canister to the plastic bag provided a steady flow of helium. Meanwhile, reporters waited outside in the cold to see if he would go through with his plan.

Earlier in the day Mr. Tremblay had attended a press conference with his lawyer where he publicly announced his plan to commit suicide. Tremblay explained that committing suicide is legal and he thinks that a person should be allowed to have his family present while he takes his life.

Mr. Tremblay said that he expected it to take only five minutes. “I’m going to sit here and breathe this gas – what could be easier than going to sleep”, he asked. His suicide was not as quick and easy as he had anticipated. It did not take just five minutes as planned but sadly his wife and children had to sit and watch him breathe through the plastic bag for approximately 25 minutes. According to reports, the only sound in the room was that of his breathing and the crinkling of the plastic bag as he inhaled and exhaled. It is hard to understand how the right-to-die movement refers to a scenario such as this as “dying with dignity.” It is one thing to take your life but quite another to subject your loved ones to sit by and be traumatized by the drama taking place. It goes against all of our instincts to watch someone die and not try to reach out to help them. It actually seems inhumane. Who knows what impact this will have on the family members who witnessed this death and were not allowed to intervene?

Suicide experts are worried about the impact this public act may have on others who face similar circumstances, feel abandoned or are suicidal. The American Psychological Association cautions that “including details about the method of a suicide, signaling suicide in the headline, printing photos of a suicide victim and glorifying the act can encourage readers and viewers to follow through on suicidal thoughts.” That is why newspapers usually refuse to report suicides unless they involve public figures or are unusual as in this case. Suicide experts have expressed concern that this very public suicide may spark “copycat” reactions since the details of this case have been so widely reported. This is a valid concern since approximately 4000 Canadians commit suicide each year, four times as many men as women in most years. We need to ensure that we do not glorify suicide so that it comes to be viewed as a positive way to end emotional or physical pain.

Mr. Tremblay decided to publicize his suicide to spark a debate on the issue. Suicide was decriminalized in1972 because society recognized that suicide was a cry for help and that the person needed compassion and support not criminal intervention. Section 241 of the Criminal Code which forbids anyone to aid or abet a person to commit suicide was retained. Mr. Tremblay hoped that his public suicide would trigger a change to this law leading to the legalization of assisted suicide. Section 241 has already been reviewed and retained for the good of society. This section of the law was upheld in 1993 by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Sue Rodriguez decision. The court ruled that society’s interest in preserving life and protecting those who are vulnerable outweighed the interests of the individual in cases of assisted suicide. The purpose of this law against assisted suicide, according to the Supreme Court, is “the protection of the vulnerable who might be induced in moments of weakness to commit suicide.” In 1995, a Senate committee report recommended that assisted suicide remain a criminal offense and that governments focus on improving palliative care and expand research to develop improved pain control techniques. This was a wise decision. It is better to invest in helping people live than to confirm that their lives are not worth living by offering them the quick fix of ending their life. To propose assisted suicide as a solution to pain or suffering is to abandon the person. Dr. Kenneth R. Stevens of Physicians for Compassionate Care says: “The message of assisted suicide is that doctors can do a better job of killing patients than they can of caring for their medical needs.”

Dr. Harry Chochinov, a psychiatrist at the University of Manitoba and a leading expert on end-of-life issues, has said that Mr. Tremblay “needed looking after. This man needed care. At the very least, he needed to be evaluated as to whether he needed care.” The Ottawa Citizen reported that a local Catholic pastor, Rev. Robert Novokowsky tried to call Mr. Tremblay and his family because he felt a duty to intervene. According to the Citizen Fr. Novokowsky said, “I don’t know him or his family so the chances that I had of being a positive influence was small. That said, I would have tried to encourage him toward hope, and I would have tried to encourage him not to do it.” I think this was the right attitude and hopefully we will continue to encourage people to intervene when someone announces the desire to end their life.

Carroll Ress is the Executive Director of LifeCanada