Voluntary Euthanasia
and Humanism in New Zealand
by Frank Dungey

Euthanasia is derived from Greek words meaning a good death and in the ancient world was used to describe a natural death that was gentle and dignified. In more recent times the meaning of the word has been extended to include the bringing about of such a death where it would not occur naturally, for example, in cases of incurable and painful disease.

References to the idea may be found from the classical writers onwards. If we may count the Stoics and Epicurians as proto-humanists, we find the Stoic, Seneca, writhing " Must I await the cruelty either of disease of man, when I can depart through the midst of torture, and shake off my troubles?" And Epictetus, in referring to death, said "But remember the principal thing: that the door is open."

Much later, Sir Thomas More, a humanist in the Renaissance sense, described euthanasia as practised in Utopia, without deploring the custom.

In modern times Humanists have taken the lead in pioneering social reform including voluntary euthanasia and abortion law reform. Once firmly established such movements ten to attract adherents from all religions or non. They may even become trendy as witness the green movement.

No special efforts have been taken to ascertain the religious allegiance of members of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, Wellington, but it is known that it includes many Christians, including Roman Catholics.

All honour to the freethinkers who kept the idea alive by bringing it up from time to time even when their efforts led to no permanent result. Thus an early reference to Humanist interest in the matter is in New Zealand Humanist (VolII, No 2, August 1971), which reported a discussion on euthanasia led by Bryon Mann at Christchurch on July 11 that year. The Auckland Branch held a public meeting on 7 April 1974 where copies of the British Voluntary Euthanasia Society declaration were distributed to members and visitors.

It does not appear that any Humanist Society policies were decided upon at either of these meetings and we had to await Dr Jim Woolnough's call in the December 1976 issue of New Zealand Humanist (No 41, page 3) for Humanist policies to be considered on a number of matters. He had been authorised by the National Council to convene a voluntary euthansia committee which members could apply to join if they were interested. Members of the Wellington Branch formed a special interest group convened by Peggy Slater and held a first meeting on 13 March 1977 to discuss voluntary euthanasia in general terms.

Son after, on 24 March 1977, the National council supported Jim Woolnough's motion that the Well ington Branch work on the question and eventually present the result of its deliberations to a general meeting of the Humanist Society.

We subsequently called the special interest group, the Voluntary Euthanasia Subcommittee and the Humanist members included Peggy Slater, Eileen Bone, Janice Witham, Iain Middleton, Dr Helen Mansfield and Frank Dungey, acting as secretary, (being the secretary of the Wellington Branch at the time). We kept in touch with Auckland members such as Jim Woolnough, Tay and Barbara Carr adn Nina Barraclough, also with Norman Lewis of Tauranga and Isabella White of Dunedin.

The Quakers and Rationalists were approached for their views.

Frank Dungey joined the British and both Australian voluntary euthansia societies for their literature and advice.

Although freethinkers have had the highest proportion of supporters of voluntary euthansia in their ranks, as evidenced by overseas public opinion polls, one prominent Humanist member made many objections to voluntary euthanasia proposals and this forced us to think hard about them.

Letters were sent to possible supporters outside Humanist ranks and one ended up on the front page of NZ Truth under the sensational headline "First comes abortion - NOW ITS DEATH ON DEMAND?" The text said "Secretive efforts are being made to forma death-on-demand organisation in New Zealand. This sensational development, coming in the middle of the abortion issue, is revealed for the first time in TRUTH today". It went on to print the contrary views of the then Minister of Health, Frank Gill, land of the MP for Porirua, Dr Gerard Wall.

Truthdid not print a letter of protest from Frank Dungey but did print one fro Des Jennings, then President of the Humanist Society of New Zealand.

Several meetings later the subcommittee recommended that a Voluntary Euthanasia Society should be formed at a suitable time and this came when Derek Humphry visited Australia to promote his book Jean's WayHe was invited to visit New Zealand on his way home to the USA and a generous Auckland Humanist paid the difference in fare. This was in October 1978. This programme was chaired by Lindsay Perrigo and a tape of it is available to VES members.

The strong support given to voluntary euthanasia overseas was reflected in the activity of Humanists in the establishment of voluntary euthanasia societies in new Zealand. Of the thirteen founder members of the VES, Wellington, in 1978, over half were humanists and most of these are still member today.[ed - 1993]

In May 1988 a question in a poll was commissioned on adult voluntary euthanasia which showed a high proportion of approval - 77% of those who were prepared to express an opinion (62.8% of the whole).

Liaison with the Humanist Society still continues and Frank Dungey was asked to give a talk on voluntary euthanasia and the Humanist philosophy at a monthly meeting on 4 April 1989. He tried to show that the two were compatible by defining voluntary euthanasia and the even trickier question of what constituted the Humanist philosophy.

Objections to voluntary euthanasia may be practical and rational for example one may dwell on the difficulty of framing workable legislation or overcoming the prejudices of the medical profession, but these are not insuperable. The real fundamental objections are religious or moral and we have found that the most strident groups opposed to voluntary euthanasia are likely to be those encouraged or dominated by the Catholic Church. Last year saw meetings organised by them at Karori, Wellington, and in Nelson.

Humanists would dispute the right of minorities or even majorities to impose their beliefs on others b the force of law and this was what the present law in effect does. It does not allow liberty of conscience so that those faced with an intolerable situation of suffering could opt out, helped by those medical personnel whose consciences allow them to do so.

No one would be threatened by this or compelled to act against their will. Humanists may well feel that no good purpose is achieved by prolonging life beyond the point where it ceases to be of any value to the individual concerned. No one else has the moral right to insist on anyone living a life devoid of value. Humanism surely combines a rational attitude to all aspects of life and death with concern for human welfare and an open-minded approach to the discussion of all subjects. Nothing is taboo. It is therefore no accident that Humanists have been in the forefront of many social reforms including the voluntary euthanasia movement both in New Zealand and overseas.

Civil liberties, personal autonomy, individual choice and freedom from preconceived ideas are all closely associated with Humanist ideas and voluntary euthanasia.

The sinfulness of suicide is a religious concept whereas commonsense suggests that suicide may be quite rational in certain unfortunate circumstances. Opponents say "Leave the timing of your death to God" but one Christian supporter of voluntary euthanasia said in response " You should see the bits of my garden that I have left to God!"