|
European
Disability Rights Groups Confront the
"Slippery Slope" of Euthanasia
By
Mike Ervin
The recent case of Diane Pretty made big headlines in Britain and
internationally. The 43-year-old woman who had motor neuron disease
and used a wheelchair fought a very public battle in British courts
in the hope of having her husband granted immunity from prosecution
if he aided her in killing herself.
When she lost at every stage of appeal in her country, her lawyers
took her case to the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that
by not enabling her to commit suicide legally, British law violated
articles of the European Convention on Human Rights that prohibit
degrading treatment of citizens by their government. But, all those
arguments were lost in that court too on April 29. Pretty died May
11.
George Levvy, chief executive of the Motor Neuron Disease Association
in Britain, was quoted in the British press as saying his members
were divided in their opinions over the Pretty case. But an informal
grassroots disability rights network arose in Britain to counter
the threat they thought was posed by the case. Their challenge was
to break the media of its habit of framing the euthanasia debate
as progressive proponents of autonomy and choice versus religious
and social conservatives. They met with some success.
British groups tackle the media
BBC internet coverage of Pretty's death quoted Rachel Hurst, director
of Disability Awareness in Action, who said granting Pretty's husband
immunity from prosecution, "would be a slippery slope and many people
who did not want to die could be affected." The London Herald quoted
a statement on the European Court decision issued By Very Much Alive,
which it characterized as a "disability pressure group." The statement
said, "We hope this is the end of a sorry chapter in legal history,
but we will remain vigilant to ensure that euthanasia is never acceptable
in a civilised society."
Very Much Alive founder Andy Barry, who has cerebral palsy, says,
"I think we created an atmosphere in which people can't say that
every person with a disability is for euthanasia." It's no coincidence
that Very Much Alive sounds like the proper British version of the
American disability anti-euthanasia group Not Dead Yet. Barry and
others formed it early this year to "challenge the increasingly
common view that sick and disabled people may be "better off dead,"
he says.
Barry says most of those in the small membership are people with
severe disabilities who need daily physical assistance. Like Not
Dead Yet, it uses listservs and the internet as it's primary communication
and organizing tool.
Hate mail for Hurst
Hurst says she got hate mail in response to her perspectives in
the press, but two journalists in particular understood what she
was saying and wrote good things. DAA was founded in 1992 by Disabled
Peoples' International, World Federation of the Deaf, Inclusion
International and IMPACT as an international information network
on disability and human rights. The three paid staff produce monthly
newsletters and resource kits to help disability rights organizers
throughout Europe.
Hurst says "society" is her disability. "DAA does not accept disability
as another word for impairment or functioning, but defines it as
the interaction between a person with an impairment or condition
and the barriers of attitude and environment."
The British Council of Disabled People also took a very public stance
in opposition to Pretty's assisted suicide wish. Council director
David Coley says the coalition, which formed in 1981, has 130 member
organizations. Coley says, "The message from our conferences has
been clear: given the current climate of viewing disabled people's
lives as lives 'not worth living' it would be immensely dangerous
to allow euthanasia. It would inevitably be impossible to legislate
to ensure adequate protection, and many disabled people would be
offered support in killing themselves rather than addressing the
real shortage of adequate independent living services.
We have definitely seen more calls and media articles on assisted
suicide, and in nearly every case disabled people are held up as
a justification of this as a 'caring solution' rather than addressing
the rampant underfunding of accessible assistance, housing, transport
and free adaptive equipment. The benefits of funding for personal
assistance, and full equal social rights are not given any where
near the same media coverage."
Belgium, France and Denmark
But whatever credit this grassroots effort can claim in the outcome
of the Pretty case in the editorial pages, it's likely to only be
round one. News stories that stir the debate over euthanasia have
surfaced around Europe this year. Shortly after Pretty died, Belgium
became the only country besides The Netherlands, to legalize euthanasia
under certain circumstances. Three days later, Dominique Knockaert,
44, a French woman with the same disability as Pretty, called upon
her government to follow Belgium's lead. Knockaert told Agence France-Presse
that while she still wants to keep living, she doesn't want to travel
to another country should she choose to have her husband assist
her in committing suicide.
An opinion poll published in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten,
in May said 82 per cent of Danes supported legalizing euthanasia
for those with "incurable illnesses."
Hurst sees in these examples an ominous trend in Europe that is
not new. It takes root, she feels, in the better-dead-than-disabled
theme of the larger global debate of bioethics. She said, "All of
us at DAA know that the current attitudes regarding our quality
of life, resulting from genetic advances, are increasing the underlying
hate of disabled people and discrimination."
Coley says, "Clearly this issue does need an international response
from disabled people, but this is difficult given the different
social understandings of our experiences as disabled people around
the globe. The fact that the UK and US have been able to speak clearly
and with the same voice that euthanasia is a modern peril has undoubtedly
strengthened our lobbying."
Grassroots action across Europe
Hurst says, "The European disability movement is trying to do something
about this issue, but it is slow as in most of the countries, disabled
people are too busy fighting for accessible transport and services
and have little understanding of the impact of these eugenic attitudes."
But she believes some seeds from which such a movement could grow
have already been planted. "We have been informing our (about 70,000)
readers about bioethical concerns for at least eight years, through
our newsletter and special reports." DAA materials go to 164 countries
and are translated into 44 languages.
Hurst also says DPI's European Region has done some important groundwork
by speaking out forcefully against many of the negative disability
assumptions of bioethicists. In 2000, DPI Europe convened a working
group of members from France, Italy, Portugal, Spain and the UK.
The result was a position paper entitled," Disabled People Speak
on the New Genetics." Its stated purpose is "to influence the European
Union, Council of Europe and national governments in their way of
thinking on bioethical concerns and to educate disabled people within
Europe and the rest of the world"
On euthanasia, the paper states,
"Supporters of euthanasia argue that voluntary euthanasia
is a matter of personal choice without recognising the sometimes
very persuasive powers of doctors and relatives who may have subjective
reasons for hastening the death of an individual, and the lack of
palliative care and support services available to ensure a better
quality of life.....
"We are deeply alarmed that without proper social and medical support,
disabled people are often made to feel a social burden and are under
pressure to choose the option of legalised euthanasia. We repudiate
the utilitarian ideology which informs much of the new human genetics,
particularly the assumption that society would be better off without
the inconvenience and expense of disabled people."
Hurst thinks this is powerful ammunition. "As a result of the work
done on this, there are more disabled people knowledgeable and committed
enough to do further work in their own countries. The really crucial
thing is to get more disabled people to feel that they can argue against
the scientists and not be intimidated."
Go To Top
Back
to DAWN Ontario homepage
This
page was created/updated on Sept. 2, 2002
|