The director of the New Zealand Catholic Bioethics Centre was commenting on a recent survey prepared for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of New Zealand Inc by Horizon Research.

He said the recent Health Select Committee process is a much better indicator of people's real position because it involves a far more deliberative process than answering a single question telephone survey.

"Of the more than 21,000 people who wrote into the Health Select Committee to express their views on euthanasia and assisted suicide, more than 77% were opposed."

What did the poll reveal?

The Horizon Research poll found New Zealanders support medical practitioners assisting adults to die by majorities ranging from 66% to 75% in specified circumstances.

These include:

• Where such a request has come from a mentally competent patient, 18 years or over, who has end stage terminal disease (e.g. cancer) and irreversible unbearable suffering: 75% support
• Where such a request has come from a mentally competent patient, 18 years and over, who has irreversible unbearable suffering which may not cause death in the immediate future (e.g. motor neurone disease or some other degenerative or irreversible condition): 66% support

"The level of overall support shown in this poll falls within the broad range of many such polls conducted over the recent years," said Kleinsman.

Polls do not allow people to engage in the complexities

Kleinsman said said polls like this one do nothing to help people engage with the complexities of this issue and they are not at all productive in helping us to have a robust and better informed debate.

"The key issue for MP's and policy makers is less about the overall number of people who might support it and much more about whether such a regime can be implemented safely."

He said other research around the world has shown that the more people become aware of the complexity and risks associated with euthanasia, the less likely they are to support it.

There has never been a more dangerous time

"I maintain that there has never been a more dangerous time to introduce euthanasia or assisted suicide in New Zealand," said Kleinsman.

He pointed out that New Zealand is currently in the middle of Elder Abuse Awareness week.

"And this is a serious issue for us in New Zealand, one that is increasing in magnitude despite our best efforts to bring the numbers down."

"Add to that last week's OECD Report which shows that we have the highest rates of youth suicide in the OECD, more than twice that of the United States and almost twice that of Australia."

"This is not the time to send a contradictory message about the acceptability of suicide."

Source

• Supplied: Dr John Kleinsman
• Image: 3.bp.blogspot.com

For more information contact:
027 846 7489
jkleinsman@nathaniel.org.nz

Institutions that don't comply will face a $20,000 fine.

A time limit was set by legislators 10 years ago.

From November 21, institutions like fertility clinics will not be able to keep frozen sperm, embryos, eggs and testicular tissue if they have stored them beyond 10 years.

Dozens of fertility clinic customers who have such material in storage have not been able to be contacted to date.

Anyone wanting an extension would need to apply to the Ethics Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology (ECART) and their application would be considered on a case by case basis.

The United Kingdom has a five year legal storage period.

Continue reading

Fifty years of stem cell research have brought cures for intractable diseases within reach but they have also generated firestorms of controversy. Between 2001 and 2008, stem cell research vied with climate change as the most contentious issue in science. But since then, the firestorm died down — basically because of Yamanaka's achievements. In fact, Tom Douglas, of the Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, at Oxford University, describes Yamanaka's work as "a rare example of a scientific discovery that may solve more ethical problems than it creates".

So what happened in these 50 years? (Click here for a graphic explanation from the Nobel Committee.)

In his classic experiment at the University of Cambridge, Sir John discovered that cell development is reversible. The conventional wisdom was that cells could never change once they had specialized as nerve, skin, or muscle cells. He proved that this was wrong by replacing the nucleus of a frog egg cell with a nucleus from a mature intestinal cell. This modified cell developed into a normal tadpole.

This astonishing development eventually led to the cloning of the first mammal, Dolly the sheep, in 1996 and subsequent attempts by rogue scientists to clone human beings.

But while the technique clearly worked, no one really understood how cell development worked. The obvious target for research was the embryo. From this ball of undifferentiated cells come each of the body's specialized cells — more than 200 of them in humans. Surely the answer must lie there. In 1998 an American scientist, James Thomson, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, isolated and cultivated human embryonic stem cells.

But a one-eyed focus on embryos left stem cell science hostage to ethics. Despite scientists' bravado, everyone had some qualms about destroying embryos for their stem cells. Even Thomson admitted to the New York Times that "if human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough". Read more

Sources

• MercatorNet
• See also ProLife NZ
• Image: The Catholic Spirit

The treatment involves transplanting choroid plexus cells from the Auckland Island pig herd into the brain. Choroid plexus cells are naturally occurring "support" cells for the brain and when transplanted can help protect the brain and repair damaged nerve tissue.

These cells will be encapsulated with LCT's IMMUPEL(TM), to prevent the immune system from rejecting them as foreign.

The study will last up to 60 weeks and involve patients that have been diagnosed with Parkinson's for at least four years. Patients will receive either NTCELL treatment or the current gold standard of treatment for their symptoms, deep brain stimulation.

Parkinson's disease is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder after Alzheimer's disease and affects four to six million people worldwide.

The Principal Investigator for the trials will be Dr Barry Snow an internationally recognised clinician and researcher in parkinson's disease who leads the Auckland Movement Disorders Clinic at the Auckland District Health Board.

Source

• Living Cell Technologies
• Image: Positively Parkinson's

The study showed that babies which grow from thawed embryos are less likely to be born preterm or underweight and have a lower risk of dying in the days after their birth.

Thawed embryos also reduced the risk of bleeding for the mother during pregnancy.

Existing research has also shown there is no difference in pregnancy rate whether fresh or frozen embryos are used, but experts from Aberdeen University reviewed 11 previous studies which followed more than 37,000 pregnancies from implantation of either fresh or thawed embryos to birth, and have concluded differently.

The Aberdeen University experts showed that when frozen embryos were used, there was a

• 30 per cent lower risk of bleeding during pregnancy,
• 30 to 40 per cent less chance of the baby being born underweight,
• 20 per smaller risk of it being born preterm and
• 20 per cent less likelihood of it dying shortly after birth.

Researchers put the increased reliability of frozen embryos down to the delay between removing the eggs from the mother and implanting it back in the mother after fertilisation.

The fact that only the healthiest embryos survive the freezing and thawing process could also increase the likelihood of the pregnancy going according to plan, it was claimed.

The study by Dr Abha Maheshwari of Aberdeen University was published in the Fertility Sterility journal and was presented at the British Science Festival in Aberdeen on Wednesday.

Source

• The Telegraph
• Cambridge News
• Image: The Health Age

In a study carried out by Auckland University researchers interviewed 11 healthy men and women aged between 69 and 89 asking why they supported voluntary euthanasia.

Reasons included not wanting to be a burden on their families and healthcare resources and fears of losing their independence and dignity.

"If you couldn't do your basic care, couldn't wash yourself or go to the loo by yourself, I don't want to go on after that," an 86-year-old woman said.

Kleinsman said he was familiar with the New Zealand study and that it was consistent with findings overseas. The 2011 statistics from Oregon, where physician-assisted suicide is legal, show that 42% cited being a burden as a reason for wanting to die, up from 35% the previous year. We have to carefully consider the sort of message the legalising of euthanasia would give to those who are elderly, ill or disabled and the message it would send to the rest of society about a person's worth.

Kleinsman says other studies have shown that persistent requests for euthanasia are also driven by a sense of social isolation and a desire for control. This explodes the myth that the push for euthanasia is about the relief of people's physical pain. It is, in fact, influenced by various social and cultural drivers, including the increasing fragmentation of families and a growing sense of alienation felt by many elderly and sick people.

"In a society in which euthanasia was legalised these social and cultural drivers would create a new form of coercion that cannot be safeguarded against by any kind of legislation. If people who have an illness or have become increasingly dependent are citing a sense of feeling a burden as a reason for euthanasia then this is not ‘free choice'. It is also noteworthy that all participants in the study were European. Other cultures, including Maori and Pasifika, have a very different attitude to the care of persons at the end of life. They are able to show us a different way."

"Then there is also the issue of elder abuse and the fact that a law change would open up new pathways for abuse of those most vulnerable. We know from overseas experience that no law can prevent such abuses. For example, a recent Belgian study found that 32% of all euthanasia deaths in the Flanders region were without request or consent. The debate about euthanasia is actually a test of our commitment to those most vulnerable, says Mr Kleinsman. The introduction of state-sanctioned killing is not the way to go."

Source

• The Nathaniel centre
• Image: Local List.co.nz

Kleinsman is the director of the Nathaniel Centre which is the New Zealand Catholic Bioethics Centre. He was speaking at a public forum on euthanasia and assisted suicide for healthcare and palliative care specialists, politicians, academics and activists hosted by the University of Otago Centre for Theology and Public Issues on Thursday.

At the forum, Labour MP Maryan Street explained the details of a member's bill to legalise end of life options she is presenting to Parliament.

She said she thrashed the issues out with a couple of Nelson preachers before deciding to sponsor the bill on behalf of a Nelson group of euthanasia advocates, because the debate shoud be religious as well as secular.

Sean Davidson, the Dunedin man imprisoned last year for helping his mother Patricia commit suicide, and who today returns to his family in South Africa, also spoke in support of the bill

Kleinsman said there is a need for honest and open discussion about the potential unintended consequences for society as a whole if euthanasia were legalised. "We should all be concerned about what it could mean for the severely disabled or terminally ill if euthanasia becomes an option," he said

"It is often argued by those advocating to legalise euthanasia that it will not impact on the choices of those who do not want to end their life. They remain free to make that choice. On the other hand, the prohibition of euthanasia unfairly prevents some (albeit a small minority) from exercising their personal choice. However, the reality is that we don't make our choices in isolation; our so-called ‘free' choices are constrained by factors beyond our control,"

"There is the very real danger that people who feel neglected and undervalued will see themselves as a burden and will want to do the ‘right' thing, especially when there are growing economic pressures on providing health and other forms of care for the aged. The ‘right to die' will quickly become a ‘duty' to die,"

"No euthanasia legislation can effectively protect against the misuse that would arise. This issue is about the protection of those most vulnerable at a time in their life when they most deserve to feel safe, valued and cared for. When making laws, the first priority must be to ensure that the rights and well-being of the majority are not prejudiced,"

"While protections and safeguards may be promised by those proposing legislation, there is no law that can adequately protect against abuses, no matter how much we want to offer such protection. The very act of legalising euthanasia will remove the most effective protection against abuses because the message it would send would be that human life can be traded against other things. It will open up new pathways to abuse of the elderly, sick and disabled,"

"We cannot even contemplate creating a legal ‘right to die' for some when it means many more will lose their right or will to live."

Source

• NZCBC
• Stuff.co.nz
• Image: TVNZ

The article entitled After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? by Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva was electronically pre-published by the Journal of Medical Ethics

Catholic bioethicist John Kleinsman who is Director of The Nathaniel Centre, the New Zealand Catholic Bioethics Centre, says the prospect of deliberately killing children after birth is appalling but he agrees that if society allows abortion, there is no rational basis for forbidding the killing fo the new born.

"While I'm appalled about infanticide, I think it actually highlights, really, the problems with abortion."

"If society allows abortions then there is no logical reason to say 'no' to infanticide," he says. "This way of thinking turns children into commodities to be disposed of at will."

The editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics has defended his actions. He said that the arguments presented were are largely not new and have been presented repeatedly in the academic literature and public fora by the most eminent philosophers and bioethicists in the world, including Peter Singer, Michael Tooley and John Harris.

"The novel contribution of this paper is not an argument in favour of infanticide - the paper repeats the arguments made famous by Tooley and Singer - but rather their application in consideration of maternal and family interests. The paper also draws attention to the fact that infanticide is practised in the Netherlands," he said

Read After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Source:

• New Zealand Catholic Bishops' Conference
• Journal of Medical Ethics Blogs
• NZ City.com
• Image: The Blaze

Speaking at the end of a three-day Vatican conference on diagnosing and treating infertility, Benedict also reiterated Church teaching that marriage is the only permissible place to conceive children. Matrimony "constitutes the only 'place' worthy of the call to existence of a new human being," he said.

About 30 people gathered at the Petone Library to hear the candidates - plus New Zealand First's Rongotai candidate Brent Pierson - tell them why they should get their vote.

Creating stem cells without the use of embryos offers scientists a powerful new set of tools for studying the molecular mechanisms driving genetic kidney disorders such as polycystic kidney disease and Alport syndrome, as well as for testing new treatments for the diseases.

"This research is a stepping stone for the development of iPS cells from patients with genetic kidney disease, which is one of the most common life-threatening genetic conditions," said team leader and kidney specialist Sharon Ricardo, with Monash Immunology and Stem Cell Laboratories. There are currently no treatments to prevent or slow life-threatening damage caused by such inherited kidney diseases.

Bernie Tuch, director of the NSW Stem Cell Network, welcomed the "novel" work. "The advantage in having a kidney cell as the source iPS cell is that it's the only type of cell that retains the full genetic defect," he said.

That is, if skin cells are used to create iPS cells for kidney research, they do not "remember" the defect causing the person's inherited kidney disease.

Source

• The Australian
• Image: Health Science Technology

But while they have proven to be a powerful new way to study human disease, the reprogrammed cells — known as induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells — are no substitute for embryonic stem cells.

"This has strong policy implications," Dr. George Daley of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute and Harvard Medical School said in a telephone interview.

"It has not ever been a scientifically driven argument that iPS cells are a worthy and complete substitute for embryonic stem cells," Daley said. "Those arguments were always made based on political and religious opposition to embryonic stem cells."

Scientists typically harvest embryonic stem cells from leftover embryos at fertility clinics. But the issue has been a point of controversy for some religious conservatives, who believe the destruction of any human embryo is wrong.

When they were first discovered in 2006, induced pluripotent stem cells looked like a perfect solution to this ethical debate.

Instead of destroying an embryo, iPS cells are made in a lab from ordinary skin or blood cells. Using various methods, scientists introduce three or four genes that return these cells to an embryonic-like state in which they, too, are able to turn into any type of cell.

And because iPS cells can be made with tissue from people with known genetic diseases, scientists can use them to study how diseases develop or to test the effectiveness of drugs.

But recently, scientists have started to raise concerns about iPS cells

Read more about Reprogrammed stem cells and the problems scientists are now having.

Sources

• Reuters
• Wiki-Commons