Canada hosts International Right to Die Conference
By Carroll Rees

Canada’s Dying with Dignity organization hosted the 16th Biennial Conference of the World Federation of Right to Die Societies in Toronto from September 7 to 10.  Delegates from many countries came to demonstrate their wares designed to assist troubled persons end their lives most efficiently,  pro-euthanasia writers promoted copies of their latest books, and speaker after speaker presented ideas and formulas to promote the ‘right to die’ in Canada and other countries. 
           
Some pro-life delegates attended the conference and learned about their plans to “nudge the law” in Canada and elsewhere to bring about the legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide, attempts to re-frame the debate using language that makes euthanasia and assisted suicide more acceptable, and their plans to reach out to the disabled and faith communities. 
           
Most revealing was the information about their “Client Support Programs” which often includes being present at a person’s suicide and cleaning up the scene by removing evidence such as the helium tank and plastic bag which the dead person had placed over their heads.  Volunteers are assigned clients at all stages of disease.  We heard a very disturbing account of Evelyn Marten’s involvement with the death of two BC women who took their own lives.  It was shocking to learn that Dying With Dignity in Canada have received support from the Ontario Trillium Foundation “to enable the development” of their Client Support Program.
           
Conference delegates were invited to visit displays which were available throughout the conference.  Euthanasia advocacy groups from many countries were on hand to distribute literature, sell books with such dubious titles as Lethal Choice, The Best Way to Say Goodbye and The Peaceful Pill Handbook.  Also on hand was a macabre exhibit displaying devices which could be used by persons wanting to hasten their deaths.  Members of right to die groups were invited to attend an additional all-day workshop outlining the different methods of death including how to make your own crystal cyanide tablets and how to ensure that planning your death with helium gas would be “successful”.  A Saturday night film festival featured a host of films produced with the intent of generating emotional support for euthanasia.
           
During a lunch break, we met a young nursing student from the University of Toronto who enthusiastically explained that she was attending the conference as part of her work placement with the University’s nursing program.   She will be working with the Dying with Dignity organization for the fall semester which will count as part of her nursing training.  This is rather disconcerting since this organization is an advocacy group promoting legal acceptance of assisted suicide and euthanasia, which are now illegal.  Throughout this conference, which was heavily sponsored by Dying with Dignity, participants listened to speakers who promoted ways “to skirt the law” to help people end their lives.  It is hard to believe that a nursing program would view this as a legitimate placement.
           
Speaker, Lesley Martin, told the audience about how she hastened her mother’s death by giving her two injections of morphine and 24-hours later suffocating her by holding her very tightly against a pillow wedged between them.  It was declared that she had died of natural causes.  Martin decided to turn this experience into a personalized campaign to promote support for assisted suicide and euthanasia.  She wrote a book about her mother’s death and her role in hastening it since this was the best way to promote her cause.  This book resulted in her being charged in her mother’s death and she spent fifteen months in jail. 
           
Canadian law professor, Jocelyn Downie, was present to offer her thoughts about the best way to “nudge the law” in Canada.  She offered four legal and political avenues to pursue which could eventually lead to a change in the law in her view. 
           
Downie explained that prosecutors have discretion in the area of whether to charge a person with a crime and what to charge them with.  The person is usually charged only when a conviction is likely or if in the public interest to prosecute.  Prosecutors need to be persuaded that it is not worthwhile to charge someone in a euthanasia or assisted suicide case. She then offered advice on how to do that.  Downie urged conference attendees to promote the doctrine of nullification which was used in the Morgentaler case.  Nullification occurs when jury members believe the law is morally wrong and they refuse to convict the person.  This could result in acquittals which would result in fewer charges.
           
Ms. Downie’s third avenue is to bring forward cases to challenge the law using the defense of necessity.  The Supreme Court ruled already in the Sue Rodriguez and Latimer cases but Downie pointed out that the Supreme Court has been known to change its mind. For example, Canada would never extradite persons to countries with capital punishment and is now agreeing to extradition if the country agrees that the person will not be executed. She pointed out that there is only one judge left on the Supreme Court who heard the Sue Rodriguez case and she dissented from the majority view – she is now the Chief Justice. She believes that it would be possible to persuade the new court that the old court was wrong by showing that they got the legal analysis wrong.  The courts are restricted by what is presented to them. 
           
Finally, Downie discussed the possibility of using the Senate to decriminalize assisted suicide and euthanasia since Senators don’t have to face the electorate and could take the heat for politicians.  She went on to explain that she did not think that law reform was possible now under the current Conservative Government.  In the meantime, she suggests that they prepare by drafting arguments that the courts can agree with, draft legislation which  could be introduced at the right time and prepare an education campaign to sway public opinion.   
           
The most important strategy that was shared, and that we as pro-lifers need to be aware of, is that they are planning to change the language they use to promote euthanasia and assisted suicide and are presently working to re-frame the debate.  This means that they will no longer use words such as euthanasia, assisted suicide or hastened death because they have a negative connotation. They will now refer to assisted death because it appeals to everyone.
           
But, more important, they will frame the debate around the question “Who decides?”  Previously the discussion revolved around the concept of “sanctity of life” which they could not reasonably oppose but now by appealing to personal autonomy and the notion of “choice” they have a much better chance of reaching people.  This is a very smart strategy which resembles that used by the pro-abortion lobby years ago and was very successful in changing people’s attitudes about abortion.  We must be aware of these tactics so that we can warn people about their strategy to ensure they do not inadvertently fall into this trap.
           
Notorious Dr. Philip Nitschke, best known for his suicide machine, was on hand to promote his latest projects; production of a deadly pill by 20 elderly members of his organization and an Australian documentary in which he appears with 79 year old Mrs. Lisette Nigot who wants to end her life before she turns 80.  Ms. Nigot, who is quite healthy, wants to avoid inevitable mental and physical deterioration.  Nitschke explained that this case has caused division in the movement.
           
Australia has passed legislation making it illegal to provide information or instruction on any method of suicide using the telecommunication carriage service which includes telephone, fax, email or the internet.  As a result Nitschke has had to move his website to New Zealand.  Other delegates seemed to imply that the new legislation was a response to activists such as Dr. Nitschke going too far.
           
Lord Joffe from England spoke about his attempts to legalize euthanasia by introducing Bills to the House of Lords.  He credits the Catholic Church’s influence for the defeat of his latest Bill “Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill”.  He explained that, even though the Church represents only 20% of the population, it had a tremendous influence.  The Archbishop of Tardiff distributed 500,000 DVDs to laity and members of other Churches.  We learned that many pro-life petitions were signed and presented in the House and numerous demonstrations opposing the right to die bill were organized.  Another speaker expressed dismay at the fact that right to die advocates were not actively involved politically.  Pro-life supporters and the voice of the Catholic Church were much more prominent and contributed greatly to the defeat of the bill.
           
As a pro-life participant it was refreshing to be reminded by almost all the speakers what a great impact pro-lifers are having in country after country.  They believe that we are well organized and well funded by numerous foundations and the Churches – generally referred to as the Christian right. Jon Eisenberg, one of the attorneys who represented Michael Shiavo, spoke about the tremendous influence pro-lifers have had on legislation, influencing ethical guidelines in Catholic hospitals, the growing demand for conscience legislation for pharmacists and the Presidential Council on Bioethics in the United States. 
           
The last session of the conference was a debate with opening statements presented by Derek Humphrey, right to die activist, who supports public activism and Dr. Rob Jonquiere, CEO of Holland’s Right to Die Society, who advocated for a slow and steady approach using legislative change.  Humphrey believes that the best way to achieve their goal is through court activism which involves pushing the limits of the law by helping people end their lives and forcing legislative change.  Dr. Jonquiere explained that public activism may result in immediate gain because it offers an opportunity to educate the public but it harms the movement over the long term by alienating politicians and the support of the medical associations which they need. 
           
A Swiss delegate shared a few insights about developments in Switzerland where assisted suicide has been practiced for many years.  It seems that the organization Dignitas has gone too far by helping end the lives of tourists who come to Switzerland for this purpose.  The government is quite concerned about this “suicide tourism” and may bring in legal restrictions. 
           
All in all, this was a most informative conference which gave us much information about their strategies and will greatly help us plan our future educational efforts to promote the pro-life perspective.

Carroll Rees is the Executive Director of LifeCanada.