CNA Staff, Oct 30, 2020 / 04:21 pm (CNA).- A strong majority of New Zealand voters approved the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia for the terminally ill Oct. 30. Foes of legalization said many voters appeared confused about the measure’s far-reaching effects and warned that the move will have consequences for the vulnerable.
The nationwide referendum passed with support from 65% of voters on Friday. It allows terminally ill persons who are believed to have six months or fewer to live to be euthanized or to take a lethal dose of prescribed drugs themselves, on the condition that two doctors agree the person is well-informed. Patients are eligible if they show significant, ongoing decline in physical ability and experience “unbearable suffering that cannot be eased.” The law will take effect Nov. 6, 2021.
Legalization opponent Euthanasia-Free NZ said some 80% of adult New Zealanders appeared to misunderstand the referendum. Only 20% knew the act would not make it legal to turn off life support machines. Such a practice is not illegal under current law.
“It seems that most New Zealanders voted for an end-of-life choice that is in fact already legal,” Renée Joubert, executive officer of Euthanasia-Free NZ, said Oct. 30.
Surveys indicated similar confusion about eligibility criteria. Only 29% knew that terminally ill people who have depression or another mental illness would be allowed to seek euthanasia. Only 13% of adults knew that the act does not require an independent witness.
The New Zealand law does not require a waiting period before a lethal dose is prescribed, nor does it require a competency test.
In November 2019 the New Zealand Parliament approved the bill, officially called “The End of Life Choice Bill,” by a vote of 69-51. The bill had the backing of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of the ruling New Zealand Labour Party and her main rival, Judith Collins of the center-right National Party, the New York Times reports. Voters had to approve the act in referendum in order for it to become law.
An earlier version of the bill would have allowed those with severe or incurable conditions who were not terminally ill to seek euthanasia or assisted suicide as well.
Joubert objected that parliament voted down more than 100 amendments that “could have made this law safer” and said the law lacks safeguards that have been standard in U.S. law.
“It’s disappointing that the New Zealand public were generally uninformed about the details of the End of Life Choice Act,” she said.
When New Zealand’s National Party was governing the country, a parliamentary study on assisted suicide and euthanasia proposals concluded that “the public would be endangered” by legalization of the practices.
In 2017, the National Party-controlled Parliament’s health committee said submissions on the proposal “cited concern for vulnerable people, such as the elderly and the disabled, those with mental illnesses, and those susceptible to coercion.”
“Others argued that life has an innate value and that introducing assisted dying and euthanasia would explicitly undermine that idea. To do so would suggest that some lives are worth more than others. There were also concerns that, once introduced, eligibility for assisted dying would rapidly expand well beyond what was first intended,” the committee said.
In 2018 the Catholic bishops of New Zealand published resources against assisted suicide legislation and encouraged Catholics to oppose legalization. The Nathaniel Centre, the New Zealand bishops-founded Catholic bioethics center, posted resources on Church teaching on euthanasia and assisted suicide to their website and social media pages ahead of the referendum.
Ahead of the election, the Nathaniel Centre said the act is “badly drafted and seriously flawed.”
“It will expose many New Zealanders to the risk of a premature death at a time when they are most vulnerable. Whatever one’s views about the idea of euthanasia, it is not compassion to vote for a dangerous law,” the center said. “The group most at risk if we legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide are those vulnerable to the suggestion they would be ‘better off dead’ – our elders, disabled people, and people with depression and mental illness who find themselves fitting the eligibility criteria.”
The center cited the Lawyers for Vulnerable New Zealanders, a group of over 200 lawyers, including some supporters of euthanasia, opposed the act on the grounds it is too broadly drafted, “dangerous,” and “broader in its scope and riskier than comparable laws overseas.”
Other opponents of the act included the New Zealand Medical Association, Hospice New Zealand, Palliative Care Nurses and Palliative Medicine Doctors.
David Seymour, the lawmaker who sponsored the act, praised its passage as “a great day,” the New York Times reports. In his view, the vote made New Zealand “a kinder, more compassionate, more humane society.”
Pope Francis has on multiple occasions spoken out against assisted suicide and euthanasia, both of which are “morally unacceptable” according to Church teaching. In 2016, Pope Francis told medical professionals that assisted suicide and euthanasia are part of the “throwaway culture” that offers people “false compassion” and treats human persons like a problem.
Euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Canada and Colombia. Doctor-assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland. Some U.S. states have legalized assisted suicide.
Also on New Zealand’s ballot was a proposal to legalize recreational marijuana use, allow adults age 20 and over to buy cannabis from licensed outlets, and allow adults to grow the plant at home. Advertising and smoking the drug in public would be banned. That proposal failed by a vote of 53% to 46%, according to preliminary results.
The country already has legalized medical marijuana.
Critics of the recreational use legalization warned that it would make the drug more accessible to children, Bloomberg News reports. They said cannabis is a serious drug harmful to mental health, especially among adolescents.
For their part, advocates said legalization would weaken the power of drug trafficking gangs, regulate quality and raise awareness of health risk through the use of warning labels. They said indigenous Maori people are disproportionately arrested and convicted for the drug.
Some figures suggest that New Zealanders are among the biggest users of marijuana in the world, with 80% having tried the drug by age 20 and 12% reporting use of the drug in the past year.
Pope Francis criticized drug use and legalization in a 2014 address to the International Drug Enforcement Conference in Rome.
“Let me state this in the clearest terms possible: the problem of drug use is not solved with drugs! Drug addiction is an evil, and with evil there can be no yielding or compromise,” the pope said. “To think that harm can be reduced by permitting drug addicts to use narcotics in no way resolves the problem. Attempts, however limited, to legalize so-called ‘recreational drugs’, are not only highly questionable from a legislative standpoint, but they fail to produce the desired effects.”
[…]
Sounds weird to say the least.
Probably diabolical in nature.
I wonder what awful thing this priest did to upset the students? The lack of detail makes it seem like it was pretty horrible. I hope the students really are safe.
More likely the students were doing something to the relic. I know Fr. Carlos. This is a witch hunt.
This CNA article is a perfect example of sensationalist journalism and is unworthy of CWR. The piece reports scandal, an “incident” but provides absolutely no detail. Add to that, an unsubstantiated name was dropped followed by the temerity of stating that “This is a developing story.”
The author would have done better to let it develop some more. This piece reminds of a sewing circle of breathless, gossiping busybodies.
Joseph Meynier: my sentiments exactly. I’ve thought for a long time that CNS is not a reliable source of news and ought to be considered with a very critical eye.
Sorry, I meant to say CNA.
Thank you. This is the first time I can remember being disappointed in something CWR published, but someone was a definitely a bit too eager.
I’m a bit puzzled by the responses here. It’s a straight-up news report. There is no sensationalism, no editorializing, no claims made. Just facts. This did happen and it is, as the CNA note states, a developing story.
What was printed was all the information that the diocese made available. It would have been so easy (and fair-minded) for them to have specified that the incident was not of a sexual nature. But they didn’t and now the priest’s reputation is harmed and Joliet Catholics are deprived of the chance to honor the relic.
Agreed. Lack of essential detail. Therefore,not newsworthy
I hope that when the details of the case are known, you will update this article, so we can know the exact nature of the allegations against the unnamed priest, and the identity of the individual.
The accusations are false against fr martins…thevtruthvwill come out…he is being attacked by Satan for his work exposing satan….beware of jumping to false conclusions….
I attended the display when it came through our parish. Nothing weird happened here. I really enjoyed it.
I would suggest, if it turns out that this priest did nothing illegal or immoral according to Church teaching and if his reputation was damaged by the action taken by the diocese of Joliet and its bishop, that he ought to then sue the latter for damages.
Relic priest responds to ‘incident’ allegation
THE PILLAR
November 25, 2024 . 2:51 PM 5 min read
Apparently, this priest is alleged to have handled the long hair of a girl attending the relic presentation in order to illustrate a point. Probably unwise but hardly an illegal “assault” as alleged nor a violation of morality. As a comparison, I’m sure we can all recall photos of Pope Francis in all sorts of fatherly embraces of young children yet no one lodges a single complaint about it.
Those were my thoughts too, Deacon Edward.
A recent update by the Pillar has more details as indicated earlier. As the saying goes someone seems to have made a mountain out of a molehill. In this case, a priest making note of his bald head and a girls hair to some students to engage them in a discussion. If the Pillar latest account holds true as of this writing, which I hope it is, then the person making a report to the police should be admonished and should publically issue an apology to the priest. Also think if the Pillar up date is true then I think the Father making a report to the police has his own issues leading to this situation. Think CWR should also do an update when final facts are known.
Grabbintg anyone’s hair for any reason, without their consent is certainly immoral.
And I would lock up Francis and throw away the key for hundreds of things he has done.
No idea how you can define this as immoral?
As usual, this is turning out to be a witch hunt brought on by a hyper-conscious parent and the regular group of ninnies that try to make every good priest a villain. Fr. Martins did nothing wrong. See the latest:
https://www.ncregister.com/cna/illinois-diocese-halts-st-jude-relic-tour-amid-incident-involving-priest-students
Waiting for the pastor of the church and the bishop of Joliet to restore Father Martins’ reputation.
Unfortunately, Daniel Payne left out significant details in his article about the allegations against Fr. Martins. In front of over 200 people, as
Fr. Martins joked about his baldness he touched a teen’s hair. The girl’s father complained of assault. This ridiculous act against Fr. Martins may be an example of how Satan attacks the highly faithful. Fr. Martins is a well-known exorcist. Remember how Fr. Pio was also attacked with false charges. In this case, numerous witnesses shared that nothing inappropriate happened.
After reading the additional information in the Pillar, I think this is all diabolical. Fr. Martins is an accomplished exorcist. The evil one hates him.
How devastating this must be for him. Yet, he’ll come through it.
And I agree the Bishop over reacted as did the parent.