skip to main content
Site banner

 

Naomi O'Leary   @NaomiOhReally


Infuriatingly, it's too late: this misinformation has already spread all over the world from Australia to the United States to India. Her name, #noapothoven is even trending in Italy.

I spoke to Paul Bolwerk, a reporter who has been covering the story for @DeGelderlander since 2018. Noa Pothoven had been severely ill with anorexia and other conditions for some time. Without telling her parents, she sought and was refused euthanasia.

The family had tried many kinds of psychiatric treatment and Noa Pothoven was repeatedly hospitalised; she made a series of attempts to kill herself in recent months. In desperation the family sought electro shocktherapy, which was refused due to her young age.

After electroshock therapy was refused, Pothoven insisted she wanted no further treatment and a hospital bed was set up at home in the care of her parents. At the start of June she began refusing all fluids and food, and her parents and doctors agreed not to force feed her.

A decision to move to palliative care and not to force feed at the request of the patient is not euthanasia.

Dutch media did not report Noa Pothoven's death as a case of euthanasia. This idea only appeared in English language pickups of Dutch reporting.

How has this happened? @newscomauHQ and @laubchad have questions to answer, as authors of early English-language articles that made a leap to conclude euthanasia from the report that Pothoven once asked for it, and an Instagram post in which she wrote that she was going to die.

 

A new poll shows a clear majority of New Zealanders want to allow doctors to help the terminally ill to die painlessly and with dignity

14 MAY 2019

See the media release and blog post.

Supporters can submit a blog post here 

 

 

#TellYourMP   It’s important your MP knows how you feel on this issue. Tell your MP here and see how else you can get involved.

 

 

 
 
 
 
 

 

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
/ ( mm / dd )
 

BUY NOW

Dying Badly – New Zealand Stories

by Dr Jack Havill and David Barber

Read it online for free.

Purchase your printed version now for $12 including postage.

Cheques to PO Box 48241, Upper Hutt 5142

Internet banking to Kiwibank 38-9006-0226036-02  including name and "Dying Badly" in the reference fields (if you are not a member then please email your postal address to office@eolc.org.nz)

 

 

 

Why we support
End-of-Life Choice

By Jack Havill, past president of the End-of-Life Choice Society of New Zealand

  • To prevent suffering at the end of life, including pain that cannot be relieved by drugs. Some patients don’t want to be anaesthetised for their last days.
  • To maintain dignity in death. Terminally ill patients often lose control of their bodily functions and would prefer to die before becoming completely dependent on carers.
  • To retain personal control and be able to say when and how those with unbearable suffering die.
  • To allow terminally ill people who want to end their suffering to die in the company of friends and family and not have to commit suicide alone. While suicide is legal, a loved one who assists, or is even present at the time, risks prison.
  • To allow sufferers to depart this life while still possessing their mental faculties. This would allow dignified goodbyes to friends and relatives and limit mutual distress.
  • To eliminate compassionate law-breaking which risks prosecution. It is recognised that some family members and doctors and nurses already assist patients begging for help to die because they cannot bear to see the suffering. A law change would legitimise their humane actions.
  • Surveys show that nearly seven out of 10 New Zealanders across every section of society favour End-Of-Life Choice for those who qualify and request it. Many are angry after watching and caring for family members who have suffered long drawn out deaths and want a good death for themselves.

We believe individuals may seek medical assistance to die, under carefully defined circumstances. He or she (18 years or over) must suffer from either:

  • a terminal illness or other medical condition likely to end his/her life within 6 months.
  • constant and unbearable physical or psychological suffering which cannot be relieved in a manner the patient deems tolerable.

Safeguards include:

  • The individual must request assistance in writing twice, with at least a 7 day interval, from a medical practitioner who will certify:

a) the qualifying conditions above exist

b) there has been no coercion from family or others

c) the patient is mentally competent

d) he/she has given advice to the patient on treatment options including palliative care

e) he/she has given advice to the patient to talk to family and seek counselling

  • In addition a second independent medical practitioner must interview the patient, read the first medical practitioners findings and record their opinion on an official form. If they agree with the first certifying medical practitioner, the procedure may take place. This independent second medical practitioner will be drawn from a panel of experienced participating medical practitioners set up by the Health Ministry.
 
Original generation time 0.1483 seconds.
+ Text Size -
Original generation time 1.4386 seconds. Cache Loaded in: 0.0009 seconds.