“Even if they arrest us and send us to prison, it would have made no difference because it is what our parents wanted,” he said.
That quote is from a New York Times story today regarding the suicides of a celebrated British conductor and his wife. It is the deceased pair's son who is speaking. A lot is made of the fact that while the wife was terminally ill, her husband was not. Yet he had decided that he would die with his longtime companion. They flew to Switzerland, swallowed a clear liquid, and died holding hands with their children present. Scotland Yard is investigating. 
Yet it seems to be a poster-child case in favor of assisted suicide, no? Other than The State, who's objecting? And even if others did, who should have the right to that final decision other than the individual? Please don't misunderstand. There is a huge difference between the rational, planned and considered passing of those two Brits, surrounded by loved ones, and the impulsive taking of one's own life, fueled by liquor or other drugs in the heat of the night. I've been through those and they are to be prevented whenever possible. But why would society use the power of its laws to block the conductor from joining his wife in the end?
Yet it seems to be a poster-child case in favor of assisted suicide, no? Other than The State, who's objecting? And even if others did, who should have the right to that final decision other than the individual? Please don't misunderstand. There is a huge difference between the rational, planned and considered passing of those two Brits, surrounded by loved ones, and the impulsive taking of one's own life, fueled by liquor or other drugs in the heat of the night. I've been through those and they are to be prevented whenever possible. But why would society use the power of its laws to block the conductor from joining his wife in the end? 
I don't see how Britain would have jurisdiction on this. The couple died in Switzerland.
ReplyDeleteJay,
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Time story: "British news reports about the Downeses’ suicides noted one factor that appeared to set the case apart from others involving the Dignitas clinic: Sir Edward appeared not to have been terminally ill."
But your point is well taken. I suspect Scotland Yard is looking into it the same way the FBI might look into the death of an American in another country.
"...the rational, planned and considered passing..."
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing "rational" about suicide.
In suicide, one is despondent of life, for whatever reason.
It is a clear case - cut and dried - of ill mental health, most typically accompanied by depression.
Those whom are mentally ill are NOT healthy - they are mentally ill. Thus, they are not qualified to make "rational, planned and considered" decisions.
In mental health diagnoses, there are five axes (i.e., multi-axial) upon which the diagnosis(es) are made. They are:
I-Clinical Disorders;
II-Personality Disorders;
III-General Medical Conditions;
IV-Psychosocial and Environmental Problems;
V-Global Assessment of Functioning.
Mood Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition is characterized by a prominent and persistent disturbance in mood that is judged to be a direct psychological consequence of a general medical condition.
Mood disorders are organized as, Mood Episodes (including Major Depressive, Manic Episode, Mixed Episode and Hypomanic Episode), Depressive Disorders, Bipolar Disorders, Other, Specifiers describing the most recent mood episode and Specifiers describing course of recurrent episodes.
There are subcategories, of course.
The most serious consequence of a Major Depressive Episode is attempted or completed suicide.
Mood Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition (293.83), may contain the subtype "With Depressive Features," or "With Major Depressive-Like Episodes." The criteria for MDE include five or more symptoms (from a list of nine) in the same two-week period which also represent a change from previous functioning. Excluded are changes resulting from medication, substance abuse, which are not accounted for by Bereavement, and are characterized further by suicidal ideations.
ref: DSM-IV
Concerning the matter of law...
If the plans were made upon British soil, the conspiratorial aspect of the crime was committed in the UK, for which Scotland Yard would have jurisdiction.
Regarding international law, if a crime is committed in another nation, having begun or abetted in the "host" country, the "host" country would have jurisdiction.
Further, if Switzerland's laws substantially differ from the UK's laws (and it appears they may), then the Swiss are bound to obey the UK's laws - if communication (conspiracy) was used in furtherance of the crime - because the communication would have crossed international lines. (Think "What happens in Las Vegas, stays in Las Vegas.")
Not so sure about that, Kevin.
ReplyDeleteIt's possible that the couple left no "paper trail." It could be done by phone calls, personal visits to Switzerland, or even the judicious use of a paper shredder.
Undoubtedly the clinic has lawyers to sort these things out.
While it is possible there may be no "paper trail," I would imagine the likelihood of ANY trail existing is HIGHLY likely.
ReplyDeleteThat's because today's modern digital era allows for, and does much tracking. Even phone calls - cellular or landline - can be tracked... long after the fact.
So if an international phone call was placed, doubtless, there exists a record of the same. Even ISPs have the ability to record traffic. And while there are exceptions to that ability, they are very few.
While visits beforehand could have occurred, I would imagine that personal visits - if they did occur - would have occurred only after initial contact. How that contact was initiated would, I imagine, be a point of scrutiny.
The establishing of a course of action - the conspiracy - I would imagine, would have occurred in their domicile.
If the decedents were to, for example, reside in Switzerland foe a period of time - a month or more - then, I would imagine, one would hardly blink an eye at what transpired.
However, to reside in the UK, then plan, coordinate international flights, and other transportation, lodging, meals, and other such corollary incidentals would require significantly great planning efforts and coordination with those involved (family, et al).
Further, it (any visit in person) would likely exist only after the fact. That fact being deciding to commit suicide (the conspiracy).
The abetting aspect of conspiracy - the criminal act being the setting of a date and time certain for the act of aiding and abetting in a suicide of a mentally ill person, that being the decedents - would very likely have included international communications.
And yes, one would imagine - or in the case of the decedents, would have previously hoped - that "...the clinic has lawyers to sort these things out."