Euthanasia and murder
A woman is currently standing trial for assisting in the death of her partner Graeme Wylie:
Alzheimer's sufferer Graeme Wylie would have been unable to get and ingest the drug that killed him without the help of his partner, Shirley Justins, and friend Caren Jenning, Justins told the Supreme Court yesterday.
Justins acknowledged she stood to gain financially and had been relieved of the obligation of “caring for a sick and difficult man for several more years” when he died.
But she rejected suggestions that she had a conflict of interest or had placed her interests above his in organising for Jenning to obtain the drug Nembutal from Mexico. (Source.)
If euthanasia became legal, how would it be possible to separate ‘genuine’ cases of euthanasia (whatever that means!) by a close and loving relative (who incidentally would benefit from the terms of the will) from murder by a close relative who stood to gain financially?
Prominent Australian euthanasia advocate Dr. Philip Nitschke is a witness, due to his assistance in offering advice to the woman who is being charged. He has been offered legal protection in his role as witness in the case.
For some reason, people who argue the case for euthanasia invariably offer an overwhelmingly sunny view of the motives of those who want to pursue euthanasia. That's not wise, is it? Jeremiah interrogates such people, and us, with these words:
The heart is deceitful above all things,
and desperately sick;
who can understand it?(Jer 17:9)
UPDATE: The jury agrees with Jeremiah, in this case.
