Click here to go back to the issue outlines list

Sections in this issue outline (in order)
1 What they said. 2 The issue at a glance. 3 Background. 4 Internet information links. 5 and 6 Arguments for / against. 7 Further implications on this issue. 8 Newspaper items used in the compilation of the outline.
Related issue outlines
1998 - Melbourne euthanasia clinic

1997 - Euthanasia and NT laws

Dictionary
To activate the in-built dictionary linked to this issue outline, double-click on any word in the body of the text (IE only).
Analysis help
Students and others can read a guide to analysing the language of the news media by clicking the graphic at right.
Age and Australian items
To list all Echo-indexed items on this topic for 2002, click the graphic at right
Sydney Morning Herald items
To list items indexed by the NSW State Library's Infoquick, click the graphic at right

Outline 2002 / 15: Should assisted suicide be available to those in chronic pain who are not terminally ill?



What they said...
'At a certain age you become old enough to understand about death, and if your life is no longer worth living according to your estimation, you have a right to give it away'
Dr Philip Nitschke

'What is the kindest and most loving way we can react to cries for help from such (people)? Do we help them to get rid of themselves, or do we do all we can to make them feel wanted and loved?'
Herald Sun commentator, Sally Morrell, considering alternatives to assisted suicide

The issue at a glance
On May 22, 2002, Mrs Nancy Crick, a 69 year-old Queensland woman who had previously been treated for bowel cancer, took a lethal dose of barbiturates and died some 20 minutes later. Twenty-one friends and family members witnessed Mrs Crick's death.
Prior to her death, Mrs Crick had been advised by Dr Philip Nitschke, a well-known euthanasia proponent and the only doctor in Australia to have assisted in the deaths of terminally ill patients under the provisions of the now inactive Northern Territory Rights of the Terminally Ill Act. Dr Nitschke was not present when Mrs Crick died.
The authorities were notified of Mrs Crick's death and criminal investigations are underway into the role of the 21 witnesses and of Philip Nitschke.
An autopsy was performed on Mrs Crick and the results were immediately leaked to the press. The Herald Sun reported that there was no sign of cancer at the post-mortem, but that there was evidence of an 'inoperable twisted bowel'.
Public opinion had previously appeared to be behind Mrs Crick's wish to die. With the announcement that she not been suffering from bowel cancer at the time of her death, the popular view appeared to shift and concerns were expressed that the public and perhaps Mrs Crick herself had been misled about the nature of her condition.
The pro-euthanasia movement has since claimed that Mrs Crick was aware that she no longer appeared to have cancer and still wished to die because of the distress her bowel condition caused her. The movement has acknowledged that it was unfortunate that this information had not been more clearly conveyed to the public.
The pro-euthanasia movement now appears to be openly supporting assisted suicide for the chronically, but not necessarily terminally, ill. It remains to be seen whether it can take popular opinion with it.

Background
Suicide and the law in Australia
In Australia, the criminal law concerning suicide varies according to the jurisdiction in question. In all jurisdictions, suicide is no longer a crime and, except in the Northern Territory, the crime of attempted suicide has also been abolished. It is, however, still an offence for a person to assist another person to commit suicide or to attempt to commit suicide (the precise wording differs according to the jurisdiction), and if the act occurs as part of a suicide pact, the survivor will be guilty of manslaughter rather than murder in Victoria and South Australia, while in New South Wales such a person will be subject to liability for aiding and abetting a suicide or attempted suicide.

Trends in suicide within the Australian population
Studies of suicide trends over the past 25 years show that suicides have increased dramatically among young males aged 15 to 29 years and have remained relatively high among the elderly (70 years and older).
In 1964 the rate for 75 years and older men was 40 per 100 000 and it had declined to 31.8 per 100 000 population which was about 60 per cent higher than the overall male suicide rate in Australia in 1990. The elderly female rates had also declined slightly from 8.5 to 8.1 in the same period and this again was about 60 per cent higher than the overall female rate for Australia in 1990.
The evidence also shows that, in Australia, prisoners and people suffering from life-threatening illnesses tend also to have very high suicide rates.

Euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide
Euthanasia is generally understood to mean the hastening of the death of a suffering, terminally ill person.
Those groups supporting euthanasia expect it to be voluntary. That is, the decision to die should be the free, informed choice of the person concerned.
A distinction can be drawn between active voluntary euthanasia, where the doctor administers a lethal substance to a patient, and doctor-assisted suicide, where the doctor facilitates and oversees the suicide of a terminally ill person. The now inactive Northern Territory Rights of the Terminally Ill Act legalised both these means of hastening death.
Active, voluntary euthanasia is illegal throughout Australia and almost everywhere else in the world, except The Netherlands and Belgium. Active, voluntary euthanasia is also legal in the North American state of Oregon.
As already noted, suicide is not a crime in any Australian state. However, it is a crime to help anyone kill themselves or to encourage them to do so.

Who should be candidates for legally available euthanasia or doctor-assisted suicide?
Popularly, it is usually considered that only the terminally ill are ever likely to have euthanasia or doctor-assisted suicide made available to them. Terminal illness was one of the pre-conditions for being considered for euthanasia or doctor-assisted suicide under the provisions of the Northern Territory's Rights of the Terminally Ill Act.
What the Nancy Crick case has demonstrated in Australia is that terminal illness may not always be a precondition for assisted suicide.
A number of pro-euthanasia groups and individual advocates appear also to favour making assisted suicide available to those in chronic and intractable pain. There is also a group who appear to believe that assisted suicide should be available for the severely depressed.
For example, many of the people whom Dr Jack Kevorkian helped to die in the United States were not terminally ill. Herald Sun commentator Sally Morrell has noted, 'The first 93 people who were "helped" to die by American euthanasia campaigner Dr Jack Kevorkian ... included more than 60 people who were not terminally ill at all ... six weren't even sick.'

Internet information
A useful anti-euthanasia site is Living in Australia - without deadly deliverance. The site's home page can be found at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8270/index.html The site has links to position statements, opposing euthanasia, by a number of churches and Aboriginal spokespeople. It also gives the viewpoint of the Australian Medical Association and hospice workers and doctors, arguing against euthanasia. In addition it has an interesting, but highly critical, overview of Dr Jack Kevorkian, an American doctor who assists suicides. An index of these links can be found at http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/8270/reasons.htm
An informative site supporting euthanasia has been set up by the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria. The Society's home page can be found at http://home.vicnet.net.au/~vesv/Dr Rodney Syme, the president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria, has published an article on the site attempting to justify Nancy Crick's actions and the pro-euthanasia movement's dealings with her. This article can be found at http://home.vicnet.net.au/~vesv/docs/crick050602.htm

The Australian Family Association has posted on its site an article critical of Mrs Crick's death and the circumstances surrounding it.
This was published on June 6, 2002, and can be found at http://northernlife.senet.com.au/19jun2002.htm

The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance has set up a very useful site that has a sub section dealing with euthanasia. The group's writers provide background information on a wide range of ethical issues, attempting to present and discuss a range of views on each.
Their treatment of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide can be found at http://www.religioustolerance.org/euthanas.htm This supplies a helpful set of definitions and much background information on euthanasia as it occurs or has occurred in the United States and other nations, including Australia.
Though the site is generally impartial, please note that when it considers the Ethical Questions Raised by Euthanasia it appears to have a pro-euthanasia bias.

In June 2000, the American Psychological Association (APA), released a report on assisted suicide and end-of-life decisions.
The report includes a simple but quite comprehensive discussion of arguments for and against assisted suicide.
The introduction to the report, which includes, at the bottom of the page, its overall index, can be found at http://www.apa.org/pi/aseol/introduction.html
The index for Section one, which includes an historical overview and some useful definitions, can be found at http://www.apa.org/pi/aseol/section1.html
The index for Section four, which includes arguments for and against assisted suicide and a discussion of the euthanasia/assisted suicide practices applying in both The Netherlands and Oregon can be found at http://www.apa.org/pi/aseol/section4.html
All these discussions are clear and informative and apparently unbiased. The association's report recommends taking no position on the issue at this time.

In February 1996, the Australian Institute of Criminology, published an article by Riaz Hassan, Professor of Sociology at Flinders University of South Australia, titled 'Social Factors in Suicide in Australia'.
The article is an excellent overview of suicide in Australia with a clear discussion of both trends and what appear to be contributory factors. It also gives an overview of Australian law re suicide.
Please note it is in pdf format and requires Adobe Acrobat Reader.
The article can be found at http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/ti52.pdf

Arguments against assisted suicide being made available to those in chronic pain who are not terminally ill
1. Non-fatal conditions can be ameliorated or endured
It has been argued that it is particularly inappropriate to make assisted suicide available to those with non-fatal conditions.
It is claimed that chronic pain is frequently treatable. Even where such pain cannot be reduced by medication, those suffering it can have their quality of life improved by pain management strategies that make it possible for them to better endure their pain.
It has further been argued that many of those suffering chronic pain are also depressed and if something can be done to improve their mental state then their ability to cope with their physical suffering can be increased.
It is argued that where suicide is presented as an acceptable option for those suffering chronic pain, this reduces the readiness of both the sufferer and those attempting to assist them to find alternative remedies. As an indication of this it has been noted that assisted suicide has recently been made available to a woman in the Netherlands who was suffering only from depression. In a jurisdiction where euthanasia and assisted suicide were not accepted then such a treatment for depression would be unthinkable and different remedies for the woman's suffering would be sought.

2. Those contemplating suicide may later change their mind or have their circumstances alter
It has been noted that even those with supposedly fatal conditions have been known to change their minds about seeking death or have had their prognosis change. An example frequently cited of this is a female cancer patient of Dr Philip Nitschke's who, after she had campaigned with him for the legal acceptance of physician assisted suicide, then had her cancer go into remission and now wishes to continue living.
Those who oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia argue that had these 'remedies' been more readily available to this woman and others like her she may well have taken her own life before her condition improved.
It is further argued that if such a change of heart and change of circumstances can occur in someone with a supposedly terminal condition, how much more likely is it to occur in someone whose condition is not terminal.

3. Vulnerable, dependent groups may be subtly pressured into ending their lives
Riaz Hassan in a study titled 'Social Factors in Suicide in Australia', produced for the Australian Institute of Criminology, has suggested, 'The high suicide rate among the young and the elderly may ... be due to the high dependency of these age groups in society. Dependency itself is consequence-neutral but if stigmatised it produces social disruption and disorganisation.'
According to this line of argument, dependency, of itself, should not prompt suicide, however, if those in a dependent position are encouraged to see themselves as a burden on their loved ones or on society as a whole, then they are likely to want to end their lives. A study in the New England Journal of Medicine of people asking doctors for euthanasia concluded, 'The overriding reason for pursuing (death) seems to be a fear of being a burden to others.'
The high percentage of women found among those seeking assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia may in part be accounted for by their apparent reluctance to make demands on others.
Last year, psychologist Professor Silivia Sara Canetto, of Colorado State University, surveyed more than three decades of mercy killings in the records of the Hemlock Society, a voluntary euthanasia group in the United States. The survey suggested that some two-thirds of those killed were women.
Professor Canetto argues, 'You have a person who is very ill, dependent on others for care, vulnerable and exhausted. If you perceive yourself as a burden, or others perceive you as being a burden, you could be seen as a good candidate for death.'
Herald Sun commentator, Sally Morrell, has summed up these concerns in this manner, 'I worry that ... there will be ... unloved (people) pushed into taking the easy out because their dying is a nuisance to those around them.'

4. The more media exposure and public acceptance there is of suicide the more likely it is to occur
Riaz Hassan in a study titled 'Social Factors in Suicide in Australia', produced for the Australian Institute of Criminology, has suggested, 'The average daily rate of suicide in Australia increases significantly after the publication of suicide stories in the Australian media.' Sociologists and others refer to this as a copycat effect but the phenomenon is likely to be more complicated than this.
Repeated discussion of euthanasia and assisted suicide seem to breakdown the taboo usually associated with these acts so that they progressively become more acceptable as possible courses of action. Suicide thus may come to be no longer seen in the popular mind as a tragic and unbalanced response to the demands of life, but as a legitimate and reasonable choice for an individual to make. There are those who are concerned that such a value shift will lead to an increase in suicide among all age groups, including the young and the elderly, who already shown a disproportionate readiness to take such action.
A growing acceptance of the legitimacy of suicide can be seen in a letter from Dorothy Kiers, published in The Australian on May 27, 2002. Ms Kiers writes, 'I am a woman, 72 years of age, and of sound mind and body ... the witnesses to Nancy's Crick's death should not be prosecuted. I thank them for being there for her, and for helping to make it easier for me to make the same decisions that she has, should I so desire.'
Those who want to encourage individuals in distress to keep living are concerned about this destigmatising and popularising of suicide.

5. Sanctioning suicide removes the need to offer other forms of assistance to those in distress
It has been argued that where suicide is seen as an acceptable option to end the distress of either those in chronic pain or the terminally ill, this reduces the pressure on doctors, caregivers and governments to find and fund alternative solutions. Equally, it has been claimed, it helps to free the families of those suffering from the responsibility of providing them with care and ongoing emotional support.
In a letter published in The Australian on May 27, 2002, Tony Claridge referred to Government's apparent reluctance to fund the care of the dying adequately. Mr Claridge specific criticism was that the federal Government refused to fund pain-relieving medication for the terminally ill who wished to die at home, while such drugs would be subsidised if administered in a hospital.
Mr Claridge wrote, 'Please spare a thought for the thousands who have a terminal illness and whose only wish is to die in their own home and cannot do so due to the uncaring approach of the Government.'
]Critics of doctor-assisted suicide argue that this would further reduce governments' readiness to support those in chronic pain and suffering terminal illnesses.
Considering the position of the terminally ill and severely depressed who have requested suicide, Herald Sun commentator Sally Morrell has asked, 'What is the kindest and most loving way we can react to cries for help from such (people)? Do we help them to get rid of themselves, or do we do all we can to make them feel wanted and loved?
Referring specifically to Nancy Crick, Ms Morrell wrote, 'I ... wonder whether Mrs Crick in her heart really wants people to help her kill herself or wants them to help her fell loved and able to live on.'

6. Allowing assisted suicide to those in intractable pain dangerously extends the euthanasia debate and is an instance of the 'slippery slope' in operation
Critics of euthanasia argue that moving from a request for assisted suicide for the terminally ill to assisted suicide for those in intractable pain demonstrates that supposed concern for the terminally ill is only an opening gambit and will lead to ever more extreme demands.
The situation in Holland is cited as an instance of what is likely to happen. It is claimed that, in the past two decades, the Netherlands has moved from considering assisted suicide to giving legal sanction to both physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia; from euthanasia for terminally ill patients to euthanasia for those who are chronically ill; from euthanasia for physical illness to euthanasia for psychological distress; and, from voluntary euthanasia to nonvoluntary and involuntary euthanasia.
David Kissane, professor of palliative care at Melbourne University and a psychiatrist who works with cancer suffers, has cited a recent case in the Netherlands in which a 52-year-old woman suffering from deep depression after the death of her two children requested and received euthanasia.
Professor Kissane states, 'This is where we head when we start accepting that people with chronic conditions are candidates for euthanasia.' Kissane is clearly concerned that assisted suicide will ultimately be offered to those with treatable, reversible conditions, perhaps because, like Nancy Crick, they want no further treatments.

Arguments in favour of assisted suicide being made available to those in chronic pain who are not terminally ill
1. Suicide is not illegal and should be the right of those who desire it
Suicide is not a criminal offence in any jurisdiction in Australia and only in the Northern Territory is attempted suicide an offence.
Supporters of assisted suicide argue that this situation indicates that Australian law effectively acknowledges that an individual should be able to end his or her own life if this choice is freely taken.
Marshall Perron, a former Chief Minister of the Northern Territory and architect of the territory's voluntary euthanasia legislation, has made this point. Mr Perron has stated, 'We all have the right and the ability to take our own life.'
Brent Howard made a similar point in a letter published in The Australian on March 27, 2002. Mr Howard states, 'The finding that Mrs Crick did not have cancer at the time of her death is not important. Mrs Crick was entitled to take her life. She had given the matter extensive consideration and was experiencing a quality of life that ... she found unacceptable.'
According to this point of view if, after advice and careful consideration, an individual persists in desiring to end their lives they should be able to do so. This should be the case irrespective of whether they are suffering from a terminal illness.

2. Those who wish to end their lives should be able to do so in humane circumstances
Dr Rodney Syme, president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria, has indicated that he believes the problem of unsupervised suicide, especially among the elderly, may be even greater than in reported. Dr Syme has written, 'Statistics for suicides of people over 75 reveal a far higher incidence than the more publicised youth suicides, and these statistics I believe are merely the tip of the iceberg.' Dr Syme suggests that doctors 'out of respect to the patient and their family' do not report many suspected suicides.
Supporters of assisted suicide argue that without help many people who find their lives no longer worth living suicide in unnecessarily painful circumstances. Marshall Perron has noted, 'For example, in the past decade more than 1,300 Australians 75 or older took their own lives. Some were nearly 100 years old.
All of them died alone. Most hanged themselves. The second-most used method was firearms, then came poisoning by gas and other substances. Cutting and piercing instruments were used, as were jumping from high places and lying in front of a moving object. Some even took their lives by fire. While we would all hope our senior citizens would never feel a need to end their lives deliberately, those that do should not have to resort to such violent methods ... Those who are suffering ... should die peacefully and in the presence of loved ones if that is their wish.'
Relatedly, it has been argued, that without a certain degree of informed assistance those wishing to kill themselves may do so unsuccessfully and actually worsen their situation. This point was made by Nancy Crick who was apparently very concerned that she not be left in a coma or otherwise further debilitated as a result of a failed suicide attempt.

3. Those suffering intractable pain, as well as the terminally ill, should have access to assisted suicide
It has been argued by supporters of assisted suicide that this should be available to more than those suffering terminal illness.
Dr Rodney Syme, a urologist and president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria, has stated, 'Many people might think that terminal cancer is a fundamental requirement for voluntary euthanasia, but, in fact, it is a combination of hopeless illness (a grave illness from which there is no hope of improvement or certainty of progression) and intolerable, unrelievable suffering that is central.'
Dr Syme has put the same point even more succinctly. Dr Syme has argued that imminently terminal illness should not be the issue. 'A time frame should not be imposed on suffering; we say that hopeless suffering is the criteria that euthanasia should be measured against.'
Prahan GP Darren Russell, who specialises in the treatment of HIV and AIDS has made the same point, stressing that the grounds on which assisted suicide is available do not have to involve terminal illness. 'The issue is suffering; that's the issue,' Dr Russell claims.

4. The right to decide when life is intolerable rests with the individual concerned
It has been claimed that only the person concerned can judge whether his or her life is any longer worth living. Nancy Crick made this point repeatedly.
Mrs Crick claimed that her life had become a choice between intolerable pain and being rendered a 'zombie' by medication. To those who criticised her desire to die she replied, 'They don't know the pain. They don't know.' To those who recommended further palliative care she responded, 'I can't see them doing anything more than dosing me up with more morphine. It does stop the pain, yeah, and I'm a zombie. I don't want to be a zombie, I like to be in control.'
Supporters of Mrs Crick's suicide have argued that her freedom from cancer in no way altered the pain she was enduring or her right to end that pain through death. Dr Rodney Syme, a urologist and president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria, has stated, 'The fact that Nancy Crick's suffering was due to a twisted bowel rather than cancer did not alter her suffering.'

5. Making assisted suicide legally available to those in intractable pain would allow this practice to be properly regulated
It has been argued that while assisted suicide is practised illegally and those who do so have to hide their involvement for fear of prosecution, the wellbeing of the suffering person cannot be properly guaranteed.
This argument was put by Lynda Cracknell in a letter published in The Australian on May 27, 2002. Though Ms Cracknell believes that assisted suicide should only be available to end the suffering of the terminally ill, she argues that the practice should be made legal so that it can be employed openly and proper safeguards employed.
Ms Cracknell states, 'A number of doctors admit that voluntary euthanasia (or assisted suicide) happens widely already, but because of the covert nature in which it has to be carried out there are no proper checks and balances.'
Ms Cracknell argues that among the safeguards that should be guaranteed by regulation are 'checks for treatable depression, availability and consideration of palliative care and the free exercise of choice by the patient.'
One doctor who has admitted to having helped patients die is Darren Russell who specialises in treating those suffering with AIDS and HIV. Dr Russell has stated, 'It's a fairly standard thing. Just because it is not in the media all the time, it doesn't mean that it's not happening. It still goes on.'
Those who would have the practice legalised argue that without this society cannot be sure that voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide are not happening in ways that violate patients rights. This point has been made by Roger Magnusson, a senior lecturer in law at Sydney University and author of Angels of Death, an investigation of the pro-euthanasia underground.
Magnusson has claimed that underground euthanasia is a public health problem that neither the medical profession nor politicians are currently willing to confront.

6. The slippery slope argument does not pertain in issues such as euthanasia and assisted suicide
It has been argued that merely because a society decides to legislate to allow assisted suicide for either the terminally ill or those in chronic and intractable pain, it does not follow that progressively less acceptable and more radical measures will follow.
Those who oppose the slippery slope argument claim that ethical decisions taken by governments and enacted in laws are discrete, that is, that there is no inevitable flow-on effect. They also argue that if later seen to be unacceptable, such ethical decisions can be altered and the laws they produced overturned.
Those who hold this view often refer to the increasing unpopularity among many Western governments, including Australia's, of capital punishment. Opponents of the slippery slope argument maintain that capital punishment is an area where governments have become progressively more cautious and where they are actually enacting legislation that is counter to the views of many within their electorates.
This position has been put by Paul Komesaroff, director of the Monash Centre for the Study of Ethics in Medicine and Society.
Komesaroff has stated, 'There is no "slippery slope" in ethical discussion. As countless examples have shown - including those of capital punishment and abortion in the United States - decisions can later be reversed or altered.'

Further implications
Whether or not it was the intention of Dr Philip Nitschke and his supporters, it would appear that the circumstances surrounding the death of Mrs Nancy Crick, has significantly extended the euthanasia debate in Australia. Up to this point the central question has been whether those suffering terminal illness should be assisted in ending their lives.
Once it was revealed that Mrs Crick had no longer been suffering bowel cancer, some of those who supported her suicide argued that irrespective of her cancer-free state, her bowel condition and its effects were likely to prove terminal. This point has been made by Dr Rodney Syme, president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria. However, both Dr Syme and Dr Philip Nitschke have clearly stated, since Mrs Crick's death, that it is not necessary that someone suffer from a terminal condition to be eligible for assisted suicide. Each of these men has argued that the Australian euthanasia movement has never sought assisted suicide or euthanasia only for the terminally ill.
The position statement of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria (VESV) bears out these claims. It includes the following as among its aims, 'to promote legislation that gives effect to freedom of choice and individual human rights so that any person suffering, through illness or disability, severe pain or distress for which no remedy is available that is acceptable to the person, should be entitled by law to a painless and dignified death in accordance with his or her express direction.'
Clearly what is at issue here is that the person is suffering, either as a result of illness or disability, and that there is no treatment that the sufferer finds acceptable.
There are a number of points of significance here. Clearly, terminal illness is not a necessary factor in judging suitability for euthanasia or assisted suicide. All that is considered relevant is that the person is suffering. It is also notable that illness need not be a factor either, those suffering disabilities should, it is argued, also be able to access euthanasia or assisted suicide.
Though the VESV later states 'The Voluntary Euthanasia Society of Victoria (VESV) aims to change the law so that medically assisted dying is permitted at the request of competent, incurably ill people who wish to avoid pointless suffering and degeneration, and to control their own dying'; it is apparent that this is only one of its aims and that the Society's definition of what constitute grounds for assisted suicide or euthanasia is significantly broader than this.
It remains to be seen whether the death of Nancy Crick has been, as some commentators have suggested, 'a public relations disaster' for the euthanasia movement in Australia. Much will depend on whether the Australian community, let alone its legislators, is willing to accept this widened definition of who should be able to chose to die with the assistance of others.

Sources
The Age
27/3/02 page 1 news item by Julie-Anne Davies, 'Unafraid to die, scared to live: Nancy Crick states her case'
28//3/02 page 15 comment by Michael Cook, 'Nancy pays the price for being elderly and female'
30/3/02 page 7 (Insight section) comment by Fiona Stewart and Tim Watts, 'We should insist on the right to die in a way and at a time of our choosing'
31/4/02 page 14 editorial, 'The grey area between life and death'
2/4/02 page 13 comment by Marshall Perron, former Northern Territory Chief Minister, 'Nancy has exposed the plight of many elderly'
4/4/02 page 14 letter from Rowan Foster, 'When euthanasia is just for children's convenience
4//4/02 page 14 letter from Greg Evans, 'Euthanasia: they don't speak for me'
4/4/02 page 15 comment by Paul Komesaroff, 'Dealing with medical ethics the humane way'
26/5/02 page 3 news item by Larry Schwartz, 'She told us she had cancer'
27/05/02 page 2 news item by Darren Gray, 'Doctor poses doubts on Crick suicide'
27/5/02 page 15 comment by Rodney Syme, 'Nancy's death cannot be in vain'
28/5/02 page 14 editorial, 'The troubling death of Nancy Crick'
28/5/02 page 14 cartoon by Wilcox
30/5/02 page 1 news item by Andra Jackson, 'Nitschke admits "mistake" in Crick case'
31/5/02 page 13 analysis by Julie-Anne Davies, 'The unbearable pain of being'
1/6/02 page 7 (Insight section) comment by Hugh Mackay, 'Any legal killing degrades life'

The Australian
30/3/02 page 1 analysis by Leisa Scott, 'A life in pain is a life in prison'
24/5/02 page 11 analysis by Miriam Cosic, 'Life: the legal arguments'
25/5/02 page 9 comment by Graham Preston, 'Prosecution only way to stem tide'
25/5/02 page 9 comment by Terry O'Gorman, 'No precedent for laying of charges'
27/5/02 page 10 editorial, 'Dignity of life debased by euthanasia'
27/5/02 page 10 six letters under the heading, 'Covert illegality final indignity for the dying'
28/5/02 page 5 news item by John Kerin, 'Aged care group backs AMA euthanasia stand'
30/5/02 page 1 analysis by Richard Yallop, 'Truth and consequences'
4/6/02 page 11 comment by Angela Shanahan, 'Mercy killer must be made to pay'


The Herald Sun
27/3/02 page 20 comment by Sally Morrell, 'Dying for lack of love'
1/4/02 page 19 comment by Andrew Bolt, 'Such pressure is killing'
27/5/02 page 18 editorial, 'Questions of death'
27/5/02 page 19 comment by Andrew Bolt, 'The case for life'
4/6/02 page 19 comment by Dr Rodney Syme, 'Nancy suffered enough'