From https://lecretia.org/about/
Lecretia Seales was a lawyer based in Wellington, New Zealand. She was diagnosed with brain cancer in 2011. In January 2015, Lecretia’s health entered a decline despite her treatments and she came to the end of her options for treating the cancer effectively.
She began to review her end-of-life alternatives. She discovered that if she was very lucky, she might die quickly, but that the more likely outcome was that she would have to undergo a drawn out, undignified death, after losing her mental faculties and all quality of life. Her other alternative was suicide.
Lecretia would have liked the choice to receive physician-assisted death, to bring about her demise before she entered a long, pointless and wasteful period of suffering prior to her death.
On 20 March 2015, Lecretia and her lawyers filed a statement of claim
with the High Court of New Zealand arguing that her GP should not be
prosecuted under the Crimes Act 1961 in assisting her in her death with
her consent, and that under the Bill of Rights Act 1962 she had the
right to not be subjected to the unnecessary suffering of a long, cruel
death. Her claim was denied.
Lecretia’s case brought awareness to the plight of the terminally
ill, and through her hearing she both clarified the current state of New
Zealand law and catalysed New Zealand politicians into engaging with
the issue of assisted dying for the first time in more than a decade.
Lecretia passed away on 5 June 2015, the same day the judgment was released to the public. In December 2015, Lecretia was named New Zealander of the Year by the New Zealand Herald.
Parliament had attempted to legislate assisted dying or euthanasia three times since 1995 but all had been blocked. The End of Life Choice Act was passed in November 2019 with the proviso that a public referendum needed 50% support before the Act became law. In October 2020, it passed with 65% and will become law on January 1, 2021.
If a person requests assisted dying, two doctors – the person’s doctor and an independent doctor – must agree the person meets all the criteria:
- is suffering from a terminal illness likely to end their life within six months
- significant and ongoing decline in physical capability
- unbearable suffering that cannot be eased in a manner that the person finds tolerable; and
- be able to show they can understand the decision and communicate their response.
I mention all of this for two reasons. First, obviously, the option of physician-assisted dying has become very personal to me, and I am very grateful this is an option. And second, because my wife and I were house-hunting and looked at a home just a few blocks from us. It's very hard to go house-hunting because it's a constant reminder that at some point my wife will not be able to use stairs, and may not be able to get out of bed, and we want a place that she will be happy in.
This particular house was perfect: One level, on the flat, just a short walk from the shops, quiet with a lovely deck and backyard. The vendor said she was selling the house on behalf of her niece, who had died a few years previously. We noticed handrails in the shower and asked if she had mobility issues. That's when the vendor told us her niece was Lecretia Seales.
I'd only been in New Zealand about six months when her court case unfolded on television but I remembered it well, especially how heartbreaking it was she died the same day they unsealed the judgment. Unfortunately we did not get the house -- the New Zealand property market is out of control, and we were outbid by a significant amount -- but it was only because of that interaction that I realised the End of Life Act was a direct response to her case, and that I owe a debt of gratitude to this woman I'd never met.
No comments:
Post a Comment