Final Exit Network Members Passing Off "Boilerplate" Op-eds As Original Work?

The possibility that members of the Final Exit Network are passing off boilerplate op-eds as original work may seem trivial. After all, this is a group of people whose "hobby" - like bridge (see below for an explanation) - is to plan and preside over the deaths of multiple strangers. In spite of this (to put it mildly) creepy pastime, the FEN members are aggressively claiming the moral high ground.

So, in terms of the ethical standards of FEN members, it was an eye-opener last week when I read a column by FEN member John Fanning in the Summit Daily News, published on March 25th.

The reason it was an eye-opener is that I had already read parts of Fanning's column - word for word - in a March 19th op-ed by former FEN president Earl Wettstein, published in the Arizona Daily Star.

These op-eds or columns run between 500-600 words, so the following passages (and these are just the best examples) represent a significant portion of these "original" works:

The media is calling the four people involved a "ring," an obviously pejorative word. They are no more a ring than your bridge group. Please call Final Exit a volunteer group of Death with Dignity advocates, but not a ring. -- Earl Wettstein

The four people arrested were members of the Final Exit Network. The media refers to the four people arrested as part of a “ring” — an obviously pejorative word. They are no more a ring than your hiking or bridge group. They are a group of volunteers who are death with dignity advocates. -- John Fanning

The network is an all-volunteer organization with 3,000 members across the nation who pay $50 a year to belong. What they are buying with this annual fee is a form of insurance — that if they become terminally ill from an incurable disease that they can no longer bear, they can request the services of a compassionate, caring exit guide who will counsel them, who will be with them, who will hold their hands when they end their own lives. But who will not physically turn the valve. -- Earl Wettstein

The network is an all-volunteer organization across the nation with members who pay $50 a year to belong. The annual fee buys the assurance of an alternative if they become terminally ill from an incurable disease they can no longer bear. If they choose, they can request the services of a compassionate, caring exit guide who will counsel them, who will be with them, who will hold their hands and comfort them when they choose to end their own lives — but will never physically assist in any part of the process. -- John Fanning

Isn't it strange that physician-assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Washington and Montana, but other states still punish it as a felony or misdemeanor? Bills that would legalize the practice are currently before the legislatures of New Hampshire, Hawaii and New Mexico.

Had the man in Georgia lived in Oregon, for example, he could have received voter-approved, legal assisted dying in the form of a life-ending prescription from his doctor. -- Earl Wettstein

Isn’t it strange that physician-assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Washington, and Montana, but other states still punish it as a misdemeanor or even a felony? Had the man in Georgia lived in Oregon, he could have received voter-approved, legal assisted dying in the form of a life ending prescription from his doctor. -- John Fanning

Aside from the striking textual similarities, the pieces exhibit the same patterns of omissions and at least one outright lie. In both op-eds, no mention is made that John Celmer's autopsy report indicates he was cancer-free at the time of death. Without that information - and with Wettstein's outrageous assertion that FEN clients are "terminally ill," - the lie at the end of both essays can go unchallenged. (Fanning avoids using the term "terminally ill," but still makes the identical closing claim that Wettstein does)

What explanation can there be for the fact that both essays contain the identical factual lie? How could both men come to claim that Celmer - a non-terminally ill man - could legally get help to commit suicide in Oregon? By law and in theory, that would not be possible in Oregon - and both men know it. As mentioned previously here, FEN issued a press release last year announcing it would "help" people who fell outside of the eligibility standards in Oregon and Washington state.

Two explanations come to mind. The first is that Fanning, who published the more recent piece, "borrowed" heavily from Wettstein. The second possibility is that both men worked from a single "boilerplate" set of talking points that made the mistake of going beyond "points" and providing wording - so that sloppy members would take the material word for word instead of rewriting the points into their own style of prose.

We could see more of these. I learned a lesson these past few days about how little one newspaper - the Summit Daily News - seems to care if columns aren't exactly "original work." I called the managing editor at the paper and left voice mail asking if they had a policy in regard to columns and op-eds being original work. I sent email to the same editor asking the same question and gave a link to the Wettstein op-ed in the Arizona Daily Star.

To date, there has been no reply via email or phone from the newspaper. Fanning's column remains on the newspaper site, proudly unchanged - along with my submitted comments questioning its originality - in the "comments" section.

I'm not surprised by the shortcuts apparently taken by Fanning in getting the word out. But I am surprised - and saddened - by the apparent lack of concern over the matter from the Summit Daily News. --Stephen Drake

Newest AP Story on Final Exit Network - NDY Quoted

Until the next round of court appearances and/or criminal charges comes round, I think what we're going to be seeing is a steady trickle of stories of people who either committed suicide - or want to - with the "help" of Final Exit Network (FEN). Predictably, with few exceptions, the surviving family members will defend the Final Exit Network, having already told their "loved one" that they were "accepting" of the suicide. (Note: there has been one exception to that trend - and I'll probably get to write about that tomorrow)

The latest entry in that line of stories comes today, published in the Detroit News. It tells the story of the planned suicide of Maxine Poris - through the accounts of FEN members, her correspondence, and her "accepting" daughters.

Anyone reading with a critical eye can read a story of a woman dealing with the pain and depression that is part of fibromyalgia - and someone who appears to have been pretty isolated. In a story like this, we're not allowed to ask what other kinds of treatments or supports might have helped her live her life, since we are not allowed to ask the dead if maybe they hadn't really run out of options, after all. Nor are we allowed to ask how hard her daughters talked against her decision or denied the idea that she would be a "burden" on them if she lived with one of them.

Here is a link to the story, along with a quote that AP reporter Greg Blustein must have saved from a previous interview with me. I don't recall saying this exactly this way, since the subject was suicide and not killing - or outright killing, anyway. But Blustein has the notes and it's not something I disagree with:

Final Exit's critics are many. "Instead of dealing with ways to support" the sick and the disabled, "we can pat ourselves on the back and say we're compassionate and kill them," said Stephen Drake of Not Dead Yet, an advocacy group for the disabled that opposes assisted suicide and euthanasia.

This could be a long and nasty ride - and just beginning. --Stephen Drake

Peter Singer in Chicago: NDY Moved, But Disability Activism Remains

On March 9th, Peter Singer made an appearance in Chicago promoting a new book. When he recently and belatedly found out that NDY headquarters had moved from Chicago, he might have figured that he'd get a free pass from any annoying disabled detractors.

A free pass is what he didn't get. NDY headquarters is gone, but the community of disability activists is alive and well in that city. NDY was always proud to be one integral part of that larger community.

The following is an account from friend and colleague Gary Arnold, who writes the blog Common Ground, - "Notes and commentary on dwarfism, Little People of America and disability."

Below are the opening paragraphs of "Sing out loud," Gary's account of the night Singer came to visit Chicago earlier this month:

On Monday, March 9, a group called the Public Square hosted a lecture by Peter Singer, a professor of Bioethics at Princeton University. The event took place at the International House on the University of Chicago Campus. Singer's lecture was titled "The Life You Can Save"; the title echoes his latest book (THE LIFE YOU CAN SAVE Acting Now to End World Poverty), in which Singer argues that individuals who are economically comfortable, or safe, in developed countries should do more, and have a responsibility to do more, to help end poverty and starvation in developing countries.

Many people, both university students and community members, attended the lecture, but not everyone was interested to hear about the new book. Five disability rights activists also showed up to remind the audience, or to inform the audience, that Singer is not always in support of saving lives.

Please go read the rest of Gary's account at his blog. --Stephen Drake

LA Times Op-Ed: "Different assisted-suicide groups, one goal"

On March 23, the LA Times published an editorial titled Sense and suicide, which bemoaned the damage that the Final Exit Network could do to the mainstream assisted suicide movement. From that starting point, they went on to extol the virtues of legalized assisted suicide, arguing that the expansive eligibility criteria of the FEN would never be tolerated by society. The editorial staff, who, like most of the reporters and editors covering FEN, seem to be drinking from the same large cup of "stupid," haven't noticed that a lot of public reaction is supporting the FEN.

Today's issue of the same paper features a "blowback" op-ed by Stanton J. Price, "a health lawyer and member of the Los Angeles County Bar Assn.'s Bioethics Committee, which he recently co-chaired."

Below are some excerpts from Price's excellent refutation of the Times Editorial:

Different assisted-suicide groups, one goal

Both Compassion and Choices and the Final Exit Network take the definition of "intolerable suffering" beyond terminal illness. They believe that a person suffering from a condition that he or she believes is unbearable (rightly or wrongly) should legally be allowed assistance in ending their own life, whether by inhaling helium from a tank or overdosing on barbiturates. This is a frightening prospect for people with disabilities, particularly those who think they may be burdens on their family and for those of us fighting for disability rights.

Price reminds people of a pivotal deciding vote in the legislative defeat of the last attempt to legalize assisted suicide in California:

For The Times to write about the Final Exit Network, "Society is unlikely ever to condone the kind of ethically questionable 'help' such groups offer," is naive. When this issue was before the California Senate's Judiciary Committee two years ago, then-state Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana) voted against the bill and said that he "could not resolve the risk that the power of money will ultimately define [assisted suicide's] parameters." To me, Dunn has a more realistic view of society than The Times.

Please go and read this op-ed in its entirety and comment on it. Right now, there are no comments, and it would be good for Mr. Price and the editors to know there are people out there who appreciate his insight. --Stephen Drake

Drake & Sobsey: "Let's put this pet theory to sleep" on MercatorNet

About a month ago, I wrote two blog entries dealing with the mythology vs. the reality of pet euthanasia. It's an important topic, since euthanasia advocates often say something along the lines of "we can put a suffering dog to sleep, but we make humans suffer." All the variations on this theme imply that all acts of pet euthanasia are acts of kindness to alleviate the suffering of a beloved pet.

The two articles have been edited and made into an article now available on MercatorNet, which has a publishing focus, in part, in "reframing ethical and policy debates in terms of human dignity, not dollars and cents or political calculation."

The original blog entries drew on Dick Sobsey's writing and research. He agreed to work with me and we submitted this as a coauthored piece.

I'm providing a link and an excerpt. MercatorNet has a generous redistribution policy, but it's only right that I show my gratitude by directing you to their site to read the article. --Stephen Drake

Stephen Drake and Dick Sobsey | Friday, 27 March 2009

Let’s put this pet theory to sleep

We have suffered long enough the euthanasia lobby's myth that society is kinder to animals than to humans.

Over the years, we've gotten thoroughly sick and tired of the repeated use of the myths surrounding pet euthanasia as an argument in favor of providing the same "service" for humans. The myth seems to gaining new vigor in recent months.

Clarification on Facebook Entry

One person has submitted a comment expressing a concern that the instructions regarding access to this blog on facebook. Since I was sloppily wrote with facebook users as my readers, I forgot that people who don't use it might think the blog was actually moving there - which would mean only facebook users could access the blog.

That is not happening. This blog will continue to be readable in whatever way you are currently accessing it.

The facebook instructions were meant to give some people an additional option for reading this blog - for facebook users only.

Nothing, really, has changed about how anyone can read this blog - except for facebook users who want to use the networkedblogs feature.

I apologize for the confusion. --Stephen Drake

Viewing Not Dead Yet - and Other Blogs - on Facebook

Confession: the instructions below have been only slightly modified from an original set of instructions written by Dick Sobsey at the ICAD blog. I've already suggested that people who check this blog regularly should bookmark the ICAD blog. Similarly, substitute "ICAD" for "Not Dead Yet" in the instructions below and you can view ICAD easily on Facebook.

Ripped off and slightly edited instructions below:

Facebook users may want to follow Not Dead Yet and any other blogs of interest through the Facebook NetworkedBlogs application. It is an easy and efficient way to keep up with the various blogs you follow. If you are interested and use Facebook here is how to get started (If you are interested but don’t use Facebook, you will need to register for Facebook first). Just follow the six easy (honest!) steps below:

1.Click here on NetworkedBlogs. The application page will open in a new browser window. (You may be asked to sign in to facebook if you are not already signed in or haven’t enabled automatic sign in).

2. On the NewtworkedBlogs page, click on “Go To Application,” which is near the top right-hand corner.

3. You will probably asked for permission for the application to access your profile. You need to tell the application that this is okay.

4. You will now see a page with lots and lots of blogs on it that you can add to the blogs you want to follow. You simply click on “add this” to add any blog to your list.

5. In the search box below the blue facebook bar at the top and directly to the right of NetworkedBlogs logo, type Not Dead Yet and click the Go button. (hint: if you put a space after "Not Dead Yet" or type in Not Dead Yet News, it will help eliminate some false hits and insure that the NDY blog is the first choice).

6. The Not Dead Yet News & Commentary blog will come up at or near the top of the list. Simply click on follow. In a second or two, the word follow will change to following and you are signed up.

==============

There are three more optional things that you may want to do. You can do any or all of them now, or you can decide whether to do them later on.

First, at the very bottom of the page, you can click on bookmark NetworkedBlogs. This will add a small circular symbol in your bookmarks at the bottom of the page that you can use to take you to your blogs instantly anytime that you are using facebook.

Second, find and add any other blogs that you would like to follow on facebook and add them to your blog list.

Third, You can add a blogs tab on your profile page, if you wish. Just go to your Facebook Profile Page. Under your name, you will see tabs for Wall, Info, and any others you’ve added. The final tab on the right is a + sign. Simply click on it. to reveal a menu and click on Blogs under teh menu to add a blogs tab to the page. This is another way of making your blogs quickly accessible through facebook.

Arizona Daily Star Allows Final Exit Network Activist Free Rein in Terms of "Spin" and Outright Lies

The Arizona Daily Star may just win the "lowest editorial standards of the year" for this year. I hope so, anyway. I'd hate to see what it would take to beat the combination of unconcern for factual accuracy and the apparent ignorance of criminal investigations in their own state. That is the only way to explain the free hand they gave to Earl Wettstein, former president of the Final Exit Network, in spinning and outright lying about his organization and its activities.

On March 19th, the AZ Daily Star published Wettstein's essay "Final Exit Network helps people die with their dignity intact."

In the course of the op-ed, Wettstein engages in the following outright lies:

• Describes John Celmer (Georgia "client") was terminally ill.
• States that the people they "help" are "terminally ill from an incurable disease."
• States that Celmer would have been able to get assisted suicide legally if he lived in Oregon.

In fact, John Celmer was found to be free of cancer, according to the coroner's autopsy report. John Celmer was not "terminally ill" by any recognized definition of the term.

All of this means, of course, that John Celmer would not - in theory - have qualified for getting physician "assistance" in Oregon. Unless Wettstein knows something about doctors breaking or bending the laws there that the authorities don't, that is.

But I have no doubt Wettstein knows this is false (that's a polite way of saying he's lying). As mentioned in yesterday's blog entry, FEN issued a press release last year that stated the laws in Oregon and Washington didn't go far enough and that FEN would "help" those who weren't eligible for legal "assistance" in those states.

The Arizona Daily Star should have known the "terminally ill" claim was a load of crap if they followed the news in their own state. Considering they are supposed to cover the news Arizona, that would seem to be a minimum standard.

See, Wettstein carefully avoided mentioning the death of Jana van Voorhis, who committed suicide with the assistance of FEN members in 2007. Voorhis had minor physical ailments, but had struggled for years with emotional and psychiatric issues. Her death has been under investigation since August 2007, and that investigation is now part of the multi-state effort to examine FEN and its activities.

But the Arizona Daily Star never covered the story - I guess that, as far as they're concerned, if its news from another paper, it doesn't exist.

The involvement of FEN members is not in dispute. Two members admitted to being present at the time. More recently, Ted Goodwin admitted they were a little sloppy back then, but (trust him!), they are much better now:

Goodwin says the vetting process was tightened in 2007, after questions about Van Voorhis' death.

Goodwin defended the group's involvement, saying Van Voorhis suffered from other illnesses, but people who sought help after her were asked to detail their complete mental history.

Obviously, op-eds are submitted to looser editorial standards than basic news stories, but there is a difference between "loose" and "nonexistent." The editorial staff at the AZ Daily Star found that line and crossed it with ease. --Stephen Drake

Timothy Quill on the Final Exit Network - Is He Lying Deliberately or Just Incompetent?

It's been dizzying trying to keep up with the onslaught of one-sided, sloppy, careless, misleading coverage of the Final Exit Network. It gets hard to know what to pick and where to begin.

Today, though, one article jumped out through the pile of slush masquerading as journalism. It isn't the worst example of coverage, but it contains what is possibly the most blatantly false claim about the Final Exit Network (FEN) "activities" and how the laws in Oregon and Washington State affect those activities.

"Doctor faces assisted-suicide charge in Georgia" by Kevin B. O'Reilly shares several flaws common in much of the coverage of FEN. First, his information on the state of assisted suicide legislation isn't current. Contrary to the information in the article, the bills in New Hampshire and Hawaii are dead for this year.

Second, he allows the FEN members to describe, unchallenged, what "assistance" consists of when they serve as "exit guides":

Dr. Egbert, a retired Baltimore anesthesiologist, would not speak about the Georgia case. But he said the network advises its members on how to die peacefully using a helium gas tank and a plastic hood, both of which are easily accessible to nonphysicians. Volunteers, called "exit guides," are present, but Dr. Egbert said the people seeking death must initiate the death procedure and can change their minds at any time.

There is no mention in O'Reilly's article about the allegations made by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation that the "assistance" of FEN "exit guides" goes alarmingly beyond what Egbert claims. In fact, the undercover agent has alleged that he was told, while posing as a potential 'client,' that part of the "assistance" would entail having the "exit guide" hold his hands down to prevent him from tearing off the bag (which would be filled with helium). This allegation means that even if a person changed their mind, they would still end up dead.

But the real "prize" in this article isn't something that Kevin O'Reilly wrote, but what assisted suicide advocate Timothy Quill had to say:

The Georgia investigation is "good for the [aid-in-dying] movement, in a strange way, because it's symptomatic of how desperate people are, and we just have to say there's got to be a better way to deal with these cases," said Timothy E. Quill, MD, director of the University of Rochester Medical Center's palliative care program in New York. "Where don't you need the Final Exit Network? Oregon and Washington, because they have a forthright system." (emphasis added.)

That's a ludicrous statement. But don't take my word for it. The Final Exit Network issued a press release on Nov. 5, 2008 celebrating the passage of legalized assisted suicide in Washington State. But the press release carried a strong caveat (note - per our standing policy, we will not link to the FEN website. We have ethical concerns about suicidal people finding information and "support" to kill themselves so easily. A concern that is obviously not shared by the editors of AMNews - a publication of the American Medical Association, since they do provide a link for readers.)

From the Final Exit Network press release:

Although, like Oregon’s “Death with Dignity Act,” I-1000 gives doctors the authority to prescribe a lethal dose of medications to terminally ill individuals under strict controls, it condemns to continued suffering as many as 40% of those who desperately want to end their life because of intolerable suffering but cannot under the law because their illness is not diagnosed as “terminal”.

“Unfortunately,” said Goodwin, “many patients do not meet I-1000’s strict criteria. Individuals with neurological illnesses such as Parkinson's disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Muscular Dystrophy, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease) and Alzheimer's disease often lose the reason and will to live long before their disease qualifies as ‘terminal’.” Goodwin adds, “For these individuals, neither I-1000 nor the Oregon law go far enough. “That is why Final Exit Network pledges, until laws protect the right of every adult to a peaceful, dignified death, Final Exit Network will be there to support those who need relief from their suffering today!”

“The Network’s Exit Guide Program is available nationwide,” Goodwin said. “With the Network’s compassionate guidance and support, physically and mentally competent adults in all fifty states are free to exercise their last human right — the right to a peaceful, dignified death. “Final Exit Network is the only organization in the United States that will support individuals who are not "terminally ill" - 6 months or less to live - to hasten their deaths. No other organization in the US makes this commitment,” said Goodwin.

As the November press release by FEN makes clear, they are not satisfied at all with the limits - such as they are - in the legislation in Oregon and Washington State. They made it clear - in November - that passage of the law in Washington wouldn't deter them from being active there and they strongly imply they have been active in Oregon.

This makes Tim Quill's statement pure BS. There are only two possible explanations for the blatant misrepresentation of facts. Quill, a respected leader in the "right to die" movement, doesn't bother to keep track of what different organizations such as FEN are doing and advocating. If that's true, it certainly calls his "expertise" into question.

The other explanation is that he's deliberately misleading the public by misstating the facts. That doesn't speak well of him either.

So - we're left with two possibilities to explain the statements by Timothy Quill. He's either sloppy and/or incompetent - or he's a liar.

I know which explanation I lean toward, since several fellow board members of his on the Death with Dignity National Center board of directors have a rich history in advocating expansive "eligibility" criteria for suicide assistance very similar to FEN's. I'll write about that another time. --Stephen Drake

Georgia NDY/Disability Activist on Fox5 Coverage in Atlanta - Final Exit Network

Yesterday (March 18), Fox5 in Atlanta, GA aired a long (over 6 minutes) piece on the Final Exit Network on the 6:00 p.m. news. A similar piece, but edited to give more in-depth coverage of the FEN activists themselves, was aired at 11:00 p.m.

Although there are serious problems with the reporting overall, we're happy to say that the NDY/disability rights perspective was well-represented by Rebecca Ramage-Tuttle. Rebecca is a long-time organizer/activist in both ADAPT and NDY. She is also the president and CEO of disABILITY LINK in Decatur, GA.

Below is a link to the page on Fox5 that carries the text version of the story. There are also video links on the page, along with a link to a poll asking "is assisted suicide unethical?" Please take the time to answer "yes."

Fox 5 Special: Inside Final Exit Network

(Rebecca Ramage-Tuttle's quotes highlighted in story text)

ATLANTA (MyFOX ATLANTA) - Some call assisted suicide an act of compassion, others call it criminal. Four members of the Georgia-based Final Exit Network were arrested in February for assisted suicide in the death of a Cumming cancer patient.

The Final Exit Network is a right to die advocacy group. The group's president said members will only support certain people with incurable or intolerable conditions, but insisted it wasn't assisted suicide.

At 26-years-old, one Chicago man suffers from an incurable neurological disorder known as Charcot Marie Tooth or CMT. Patients who suffer from the disorder slowly lose the use of their legs and feet. The patient's nerves and muscles in the hands slowly degenerate causing fingers to contract permanently. CMT sufferers also undergo excruciating pain.

"Sometimes it's a burning neurological pain like boiling hot water is running through my nerves," Kurt, who asked that only his first name be used.

CMT is not fatal, but Kurt suffers from a rare form of the disease that causes severe respiratory problems which can make breathing feel more like suffocating.

Kurt said he didn't want to grow old with the disease and that is why he made the decision to take his own life before CMT could leave him helpless and struggling to breathe.

In 2006, Kurt sought help from Final Exit Network and met retired geriatric scientist Rosalie Guttman. Guttman reviewed Kurt's case and became his, what the organization called an exit guide.

"I tried to discourage him from ending his life anytime soon, because I perceived him to be, well, he's young," Guttman said.

Guttman said she told Kurt that medical advancements could help him in the future, but as his exit guide promised to be by his side when he chooses to end his life.

The Final Exit Network's recommended method involves inhaling helium gas, while wearing a plastic hood called an exit mask.

"This is extremely quick, this is like 10 seconds and you're unconscious," said Dr. Jerry Dincin.

Dr. Dincin is a retired clinical psychologist and the president of the Final Exit Network.

"People who are in these extreme circumstances have the right, the human right, to end their lives when they feel they need to do it," said Dr. Dincin.

The person who wishes to end their life is required by the organization to perform all of the tasks on their own, such has buying the helium, turning on the tank and applying the mask without assistance.

"After they repeatedly say to us, 'I can't stand living,' we will be with them in their last moments. It's only a compassionate act of love," said Dr. Dincin.

Dr. Dincin said the Final Exit Network limits its services only to those with terminal, irreversible or intolerable health problems. The group's president insisted exit guides only offered clients information and emotional support.

Dincin said what Guttman will one day offer Kurt is not assisted suicide.

"That's all we want to do is be there with a person so they don't die alone. Its swift, it's painless, you do not feel asphyxiated," Dr. Dincin said.

"How can putting a plastic bag over your head with no air not be a horrible way to die? I don't buy it," said Becky Rumage Tuttle.

Tuttle is a member of an advocacy group for people with disabilities, called Not Dead Yet.

Tuttle said groups like Final Exit Network do a disservice to disabled people who could benefit from therapy, medical advances or support groups.

"You're not just standing back and saying, 'I understand how you feel, it must be really tough right now,' they're saying, 'Here's a way out,'" said Tuttle.

Tuttle applauded the arrest of four Final Exit Network members in February on assisted suicide charges. The members are accused of helping 58-year-old John Celmer of Cumming take his own life in 2008.

"What options are they giving them if the sole purpose of their organization is to give the resources to end your life," asked Tuttle.

"We ask them 10 times, we ask them 20 times, 'Are you absolutely sure that you want to do this today ' and most of the time the people will say, 'Shut up and let's get to it,'" said Dr. Dincin.

Kurt said he wasn't sure when he will end his life. The Chicago man said his mobility has gotten worse, which meant he may have to end his life before his respiratory troubles become intolerable. Kurt said the decision was his and his alone to make. Kurt also insisted his exit guide's role has been clearly defined.

"To hold my hand, not to hold down my hand, but to hold my hand in comfort and support so that when I die, I don't feel like I'm alone," Kurt said.

Agents with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said Final Exit Network members did much more than hold hands.

Legal documents from Celmer's case allege group members helped write suicide notes before patients' deaths and threw the helium tanks away after they died.

Final Exit Network members said they were only following wishes of the dying.

With a little trepidation (I'm not really good at this) here's my attempt to provide a link to the video story, with filmed interview of Rebecca as the only voice opposed to FEN:

The Wreckage Suicide "Helpers" Leave Behind - A letter from a bereaved family member

As I mentioned in my interview on Bax & O'Brien, there is no way in a free society to control information - and with rare obvious exceptions (think "how to make an atom bomb"), there shouldn't be.

Most people are blissfully unaware, though, of just how many people out there are willing to provide the kind of pushes, prods and advice that will push someone who is considering suicide into someone who actually commits the act - and succeeds, thanks to that advice.

A little over a week ago, I was contacted by a woman whose sister committed suicide with the advice and encouragement of online "friends." Part of her information and "encouragement" came from ASH - alt-suicide-holiday, a newsgroup that is notorious for urging suicidal people standing on a ledge to jump. She also bought her copy of "Final Exit" through the web - no doubt through Derek Humphry's ERGO site or through the Final Exit Network.

It's impossible to know just how many people she emailed or talked to - part of the detailed preparations she learned involved erasing all her emails and phone logs. All that was left were some references in a handwritten journal.

That's enough intro. Below is a letter from Karen, which tells the story much better than I can. Anyone who is interested in talking to her can contact me for information on how to reach her. I won't pass her contact info without her explicit permission and she's understandably more comfortable with verifiable media inquiries. Hate mail is a reality for those who choose to engage in the public arena - and it's an experience Karen would like to avoid. --Stephen Drake

On February 11, 2007, I was on my own at my new job for the first time. This should have been an exciting night for me. At about 7pm we had a flood emergency! If I thought that wasn’t exciting enough, at approximately 9pm I got a call from security! They asked me to come up to the emergency room. Working for a big hospital, I didn’t think anything of it. I guess I assumed they needed me for something. I was in for the shock of my life! There was a Lancaster Police Officer standing there. He introduced himself to me, and asked if my name was Karen (last name omitted). Right then and there I thought I was going to fall over! I asked if something happened to my daughter. I was shaking terribly. The officer asked me what my daughter’s name was. I told him “Bonnie (last name omitted)”. He shook his head “no”. My heart sank as I asked him if something happened to my little sister. Again, he asked her name. I replied “Lisa Bernstein”. He then changed my life forever by replying with a yes! He told me to sit down. I asked if my sister was alive. He said “no, she committed suicide in her apartment in Duchess County, New York! I’m so sorry Ms. (last name omitted)”! With that, a Pastor walked over to me. I don’t remember too much else from that night, except calling my older brother and sister to tell them.

Lisa was put up for adoption at birth, so I didn’t know her most of our lives. Growing up, I always dreamt about finding her, and how we would live happily ever after. We spent many years looking for her. We never dreamed we would find her, and lose her the way we did! My older sister, Beth, got a call on a Saturday. It was the day before Easter Sunday, 2003. We were finally going to meet our baby sister! My older brother, Richard, my older sister Beth, and myself, made plans for Lisa to take the bus from Queens, NY to Matawan, NJ. Beth and I picked her up at the bus station on Easter Sunday. I brought her a little purple bunny. Meeting her was the most fulfilling day of my life, other than the birth of my daughter! We spent two hours at Dunkin’ Donuts, chatting.. We also learned that Lisa had a sweet tooth! We then took her to Beth’s house to meet everyone else.

We all became close, fast! Lisa went through a rough time with depression throughout her life, and things were tough for her. After about 6 months, I convinced her to come to Pennsylvania, and live with me. I wanted to get her the best help I could, and I did! I found her doctors and therapists. She went on new medications. Some days were better than others. Lisa told me on more than one occasion that she was very fearful of death. That was the reason she was still here. She stayed in Pa for about two years, and then did what we all thought was the best thing for herself. In October of 2007, she got an apartment, in Duchess County, with her best friend that she grew up with. We were so happy for her, because she had said this was a great move for her. There were even some days she would tell me that the medications made her stop dwelling on death. She was feeling better! She even put in for a name change! She named herself after our deceased mother. Her name was Sandy. Our Aunt called her Sam, so Lisa decided to take the name “Sammi”. I called her “Sissy”..

After her death, I realized she moved in order to be away from her family, in order to plan her suicide! She got her guts up from a web site and book called “The Final Exit”! She also visited a site called “Ashers”. They all convinced her that she could take her life painlessly, and she did! The site told her verbatim, what to drink, what to eat, what meds to take, the position to sit in to avoid leaving a big mess, and finally, how to “hook” herself up to the tanks.

She was a brilliant girl, and followed those rules to the finest of detail! The Officer that found her said he had never seen such planning involved like this in his life! He said he spent hours with her, reading her journal aloud trying to make some kind of sense of it all! He couldn’t leave! He said it was so devastating to see her all hooked up to those tanks!

Her adoptive Aunt and I went to her apartment the following day. Her body was gone, but everything else was still there! The tanks, tubing, the plastic she covered her head with, the video rocker she sat in, empty TV dinner trays, Gatorade, duct tape, empty pill bottles, and so much more!

I remember the last time she called me. My friend answered the phone. I was lying down due to a bad headache. I didn’t come to the phone. Sissy said she would call back in a day or so, and to tell me she loved me. How I wish I came to the phone! Maybe I could have sensed something from her, but I didn’t! I know her death was not because I missed her call now. What I do know, is that these horrific animals told my baby sister that it was okay to die, and they would make it happen painlessly for her! Who the hell are they!? If they’re alive, how can they preach this!? Did they hook themselves up to tanks meant for blowing up birthday balloons! Did they turn on the tanks just long enough to feel like they were going to die!? I don’t get it! I’m so hurt and angry, I could spit fire! I know my sister was suffering from depression, but it wasn’t up to those animals to help her die! It was up to me and my family to do everything we could to help her heal, and live! They’re COWARDS, and they intentionally helped my sister die!

SHAME ON THEM!

Emotionally and grief stricken,

Karen (last name omitted)

Transcript of Bax & Obrien Interview on Final Exit Network

This is the transcript of my appearance on the Bax & O'Brien radio show linked last Friday. This transcript would never have happened if I had been the one who had to do it.

To anyone who needs or prefers a written transcript over audio, you (and I) owe your thanks to Dawn Willis, an activist in the U.K.

Dawn has a great website and resource on the too-often ignored issue of bullying and it's long-term effects on individuals. You can check it out at http://www.quinonostante.com/.

This transcript should be mostly accurate. Dawn left a few blanks where she wasn't quite sure what was said. I filled it in as best I could. Any errors in this are undoubtedly mine - in failing to check carefully in filling in the blanks.

An additional note - the show had two hosts - but I couldn't for the life of me tell them apart and still can't. Dawn couldn't either, so they are just identified in black type with my own responses in (I think) brown.

Without further introduction and explanation, here it is:

Intro: A little while ago now, I’m not sure how long ago Georgia Bureau of Investigation infiltrated a group called ‘The Final Exit Network’ and found out that this group would help people to facilitate their own suicides. Not only help them to put the plan together but would even be there when it happened and even hold down their hand, so hold down their arms so that the natural instinct to stop it wouldn’t take.

On the phones right now is Stephen Drake from notyetdead.org and they are opposed to assisted suicide, and he’s on the phones right now.

· Good Morning Stephen, how are you?

· “I’m fine thank you”

· Stephen let me understand your philosophy here, are you against to a person wanting to end their own life or are you against to the idea of other people assisting them with it”

· Yes, what we have a problem with is assistance, people commit suicide every day in this country , thousands of them every year, and people who are serious find ways to do this on their own. I think that one of the things you can look at here are the people who go to final exit network the fact they are unwilling to commit suicide unless they have people by them and comforting them means that that they already have some ambivalence . These aren’t terminally ill people, these were people with chronic disabilities and conditions.

· Well I don’t know if that matters, my personal opinion if you are a competent individual , whether you are terminally ill or not it’s your choice whether you want to end your life or not, but let me also ask you this, when you start talking about assisted suicide, are you opposed to the idea of somebody telling you how you can do it? Or are you opposed to the idea of somebody being there and actually participating in you doing it?

· Well I think there’s a real problem with spreading the information but we believe that there is very little you can do about that. The book Final Exit has been around for decades now with information on different ways to kill yourself, there’s internet groups devoted to that. The Assistance is the real problem and the Georgia case highlights that. As you said there are these allegations about holding people’s hands down, and y’know I don’t know how you distinguish that natural instinct to tear a bag off, and somebody who actually changed their mind, and the difference between working out whether somebody carried out what they wanted to and actually committing a murder.

· I thought I had a problem with your opinion but I guess don’t , I mean I certainly, like I said believe that a person should have the right to choose to end their own life but I certainly don’t think that anyone is entitled to be an active participant. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with telling somebody well ‘here’s how you do it and here's what you need and this is where you get the stuff,’ but to actually be there and assist in it, I think that is a little bit different so,

· It’s very different, and if you believe in the first amendment, it’s very dangerous territory in terms of controlling information

· This is Stephen Drake from notdeadyet.org. As I understand it assisted suicide is illegal in all states except for Oregon and Washington, what is about their laws in those states that is different from anyone else

· Well they, theoretically limit eligibility for getting a prescription to enabling them to kill themselves with barbiturates, if they are expected to have six months or less to live, one thing which should be highlighted is that the people who go to Final Exit Network wouldn’t be eligible for assisted suicide in Oregon or Washington

· Yeah Oregon or Washington allows medical facilities and Doctors to help you to end your life but you have to be terminally ill

· Correct, expected to die within six months

· Right, now you, people should know Stephen that as you talk about this you are not only an advocate, but you yourself were born with a brain injury and your physician told your parents that you would be better off dead

· Correct, that’s correct the word he used was “vegetable” and when doctors use that word, and I hear stories like that with frequency whether its with an adult with a brain injury or a newborn what comes next is the discussion about warehousing and institutionalisation or disposal or neglect

· But I don’t know how that’s related to this because we’re not talking about taking someone else’s life we talking about taking your own life

· It’s interesting though because in the pro euthanasia movement they don’t separate them out real well and two the people right now who are acting as spokespersons for the Final Exit Network – people who haven’t been arrested - have both been active spokespersons in the past of decriminalising killing children with disabilities – killing without prosecution

· You see I’m not, the reason I brought it up, there is always going to be the moral question about the quality of life, the respect of life, and how that feeds into assisted suicide and I have a hard time reconciling y’know, what is right and what is wrong, I mean while much of my whole philosophy of life is that, life is important regardless of where it stands. If it were me and I were in constant pain and there was no medical way of improving I can see where you might thing well maybe I would be better off dead,..................

· And that should be fine if it’s your decision

· Clearly I think there’s a real moral implication in having an organisation come to your house and hold your hands down,

· But not if you solicit them, that’s the other problem I have here, these investigators infiltrated the Final Exit Network, they was an undercover investigator who went to them and said that he wanted to kill himself and they put forth together this whole plan, and then that’s how they made the arrests. That’s borderline entrapment.

· They didn’t go hunting for them, they did this at the request of the families of one of the people whose death is being investigated

· The family of a person who had originally used The Final Exit Network, the family members went to the investigators and asked them to investigate the organisation.

· That’s correct

· Because and it’s understandable but I don’t think its relevant because the surviving family members couldn’t come to grips with the idea that their loved one, for whatever reason, wanted to end his life so they are looking for somebody to blame

· Well the question is if he hadn’t found Final Exit Network, would he have committed suicide?

· Well he might or might not have but if he was a competent individual, a competent adult, that’s his business

· Sting operations are complex and inherently problematical. There are things we would never be able to get to the bottom of, including political bribery cases if we didn’t engage in them in some way.

· That’s true, sting operations

· Court cases , the courts sort out what is a fair sting operation and what’s not

· Ok, but as far as the one you’re talking about, the case you’re talking about I don’t care if you are married, if your parents are alive or you have adult children, there is nobody else who should be allowed to make the decision for a competent adult if they’ve decided they want to end their life. Their parents shouldn’t be able to step in and stop it, their spouse shouldn’t be able to, and their adult children shouldn’t be able to. It’s your choice.

· But then you have a problem deciding on who is and who is not a competent individual.

· No, not at all

· If they succeed in their bid how do you prove it?

· It’s not as simple as that due to existing statues - because the law already mandates law enforcement and healthcare providers to prevent a suicide, so this thing about anybody has the right, yeah they do, but there are also mental health protection laws, that aren’t criminal statutes but they require certain professionals to act in certain ways.

· Listen Stephen, just so you know where I’m coming from. I have a very close loved one who committed suicide, conversely I am also a certified suicide prevention person. But, and I understand that I would have a responsibility to try to prevent a suicide if I have to find myself in a place where one is about to take place, what I’m talking about is on a principalled level a person’s choice, this is not very different from abortion, a person’s choice to whether they themselves want to live or not, if they are a competent individual, and it’s not that hard to determine whether they are competent or not, if they had a job, if they had a household, if they had no signs of incompetence all the way up until the day they died then obviously they were competent to make that decision, and I don’t have a problem with that. Yes I would try to stop someone because I am supposed to but that doesn’t mean morally I’m objecting to it.

· Well the problem with drawing a line with abortion and you hear people say this, it’s like abortion is a right for all women. When people talk about not just prevention of suicide for some people but putting assistance into the mix they are not talking about all people who are serious about wanting to commit suicide, they are really just talking about old, ill, disabled people, people who are one of those or all three

· And I think that’s the bulk of people who commit suicide looking for assistance.

· Well no it’s not, there are a lot of people very serious, and in fact one of the cases under investigation is a woman who had no physical illnesses, but had long term emotional struggles

· And searched out Final Exit. OK but really you think the bulk of them, you see I think the majority of people who .......assistance are competent and not necessarily emotionally disturbed, addicted to substances or clinically depressed.

· You know neither of us has any information to go on, we have our opinions and beliefs, but the fact is we have no hard information. The only thing we can get on this is the word of the people from The Final Exit Network, who are going to colour everything, even if they are trying to be honest, it’s for their own self interest.

· What if The Final Exit Network people weren’t physically there holding the person’s hand down? Would you still have a problem with them?

· I think there’s still a problem determining how much assistance they are giving

· If they weren’t present at the suicide, I think that makes a difference, do you?

· Yes, if they are not present. That makes a big difference

· OK. Stephen Drake from notdeadyet.org, we appreciate the time, thank you

· Thank you

As I mentioned in my earlier post, this was a much better exchange than I am used to.
--Stephen Drake

Final Exit Network Discussion on Bax & O'Brien (Rock 102 - Springfield, MA)

This morning, I participated in a discussion of the Final Exit Network arrests/investigations on the Bax & O'Brien show on Rock 102, broadcasting from Springfield, MA. I always approach live morning shows with a certain degree of apprehension, especially when dealing with two hosts. In the worst of cases, it can be a real experience of having been thoroughly piled-on by two pros at talking fast and holding the microphone.

This morning's experience was a pleasant break from that tradition. It's not that we agreed on everything, but both hosts were thoughtful and let me reply fully when challenged. I think the end result was a discussion worth listening to.

The link below is to an archived mp3 file of the broadcast. Within the next few days, I will post a transcript of the discussion, which lasts about ten minutes. Someone has volunteer to transcribe the show for me -- and long-time readers know such a transcript might never happen at all if it was up to me to do the typing.

Link:

Debate on Assisted Suicide

So, please have a listen and see what you think. Personally, I think that Bax & O'Brien did a better job on this than the coverage I've listened to on NPR. Not just because they had me on the show, but they asked much better questions. --Stephen Drake

Final Exit Advisory Board Members Supporters of Parents Who Kill - Or Want to Kill - Their Disabled Kids

In case you thought that the so-called "right to die" movement was limited to support for voluntary euthanasia, we have some info on related activities of two of the advisory board members of the Final Exit Network. In addition, these two FEN advisors have cosigned an appeal for donations to a defense fund for the arrestees from FEN.

First up is Ruth von Fuchs, whose creds are listed this way on the FEN website:

Ruth von Fuchs, MA
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Founding Network Board Member
President, Right to Die Society of Canada
Member of Network Training Faculty
Board Member, ERGO (Euthanasia and Research Guidance organization)

Canadian disability activists are familiar with Ms. von Fuchs. She has been a vocal defender of Robert Latimer, convicted twice in the 2nd-degree murder of his daughter Tracy. Tracy had cerebral palsy and cognitive disabilities. Part of her defense has entailed treating the parental murders of children as "compassionate" and subject to lesser penalties - or to no prosecution at all. Here is a sample of her "advocacy" in the Latimer case:

Proponents of euthanasia say that, until proper legal and social supports are in place, many people, like Latimer, have to take the law into their own hands. "This law is being written unofficially in emergency rooms and intensive care wards every night," says Ruth von Fuchs, a member of the Right to Die Society in Toronto. Von Fuchs views Tracy's death as part of a "continuum" that begins with brain-damaged infants, some so severely handicapped that doctors quietly remove life support within hours of birth. It is unfortunate, she adds, that because mercy killing has been "criminalized," Latimer felt he had to act alone, without the help of a social worker or medical expert. Von Fuchs, and other members of the euthanasia movement, is calling for a change in attitude to mercy killing. "In our society, we forbid people to give up," she argues. "We say, 'Never say die,' but sometimes you have to stand back and realize that really is a cliché. We cannot fix everyone every time forever."

Faye Girsh is another advisory board member of FEN - and one with a history of defending NONvoluntary killing of kids with disabilities and elderly people with alzheimers. Here is the info for Girsh as it's featured on the FEN website:

Faye Girsh, EdD.,
Sr. Advisor LaJolla, CA
Founding Network Board Member
Exit Guide and Network spokesperson
Board member/editor, World Federation of Right to Die Societies
Former president of The Hemlock Society USA

Those of us who have been in the euthanasia struggle for over a decade are very familiar with just how wide an agenda Girsh advocates. On December 3, 1997 the Hemlock Society (now Compassion and Choices) issued a press release titled: "Mercy Killing: A Position Statement Regarding David Rodriguez." The release is almost entirely composed of one long statement by Girsh, who was executive director of the Hemlock Society at the time. I don't have a link to the press release. After reading it, no one will be surprised that the Hemlock Society and its successor organization (Compassion and Choices) prefer to pretend this document never existed. Those of us who received the press release in our electronic newsfeeds made sure to save our copies. Here it is below, in its entirety (with portions emphasized by me):

Mercy Killing: A Position Statement Regarding David Rodriguez

DENVER, Dec. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- The following statement is issued to Louisiana media by Faye Girsh, executive director of the Hemlock Society USA, the nation's oldest and largest right-to-die society, regarding the David Rodriguez case:

"The Hemlock Society USA advocates that a suffering person at the end of life should be able to receive compassionate help from a physician to end his or her life if that is the wish. This should be done lawfully and under conditions which ensure that the diagnosis is correct, the request is an enduring one, and that the person is mentally competent."

"Unfortunately, our proposal has been enacted as law in only one state -- Oregon. Even with such a law, there are many people suffering from chronic and terminal illnesses who either beg to have their lives ended or who are not competent to make this decision and are in those instances assisted to die by a loved one. In a few rare instances death has come this way with the help of a friend, family member, or physician. In Louisiana, David Rodriguez shot his father who had repeatedly begged to be killed so that he would no longer suffer. Cases such as this are prosecuted either under murder or assisted suicide statutes. Juries, who see these as crimes of compassion, are at a loss to render a just and appropriate verdict under existing law."

"We suggest that, if these cases are to be prosecuted, they should be treated as special crimes of compassion and evaluated separately. The criteria might include the person's wishes to die, the person's medical condition, the family's concurrence, the alternatives available, and the motives of the person being tried. In many of these cases the person who did the killing is a distraught family member who is put through the horrors and expense of a humiliating criminal process that eventuates in probation or a suspended sentence. There should be a way which would still protect innocent people from being murdered but also take into consideration that mercy
killing is not a cold-blooded, malicious crime but one in which the motivation is kindness and relief of suffering."

"In the case of a minor or an incompetent adult, the law now allows life or death decisions to be made by a designated health care agent and/or a family member in most jurisdictions. If the Rodriguez death had been the result of a decision to forego life-sustaining medical treatment no criminal liability would have ensued. In such instances, the person "dies naturally."

Some provision should be made for a situation in which life is not being sustained by artificial means but, in the belief of the patient or his agent, is too burdensome to continue. It is pathetic that a son should have to shoot a suffering father. Death should come in a more humane and less violent way."

"A judicial determination should be made when it is necessary to hasten the death of an individual whether it be a demented parent, a suffering, severely disable (sic) spouse or a child. Consultants should evaluate what other ways might be used to alleviate the suffering and, if none are available or are unsuccessful, a non-violent, gentle means should be available to end the person's life."

"As life expectancy increases, chronic diseases proliferate and medical science can lengthen life almost indefinitely. We must find ways to provide help to people who wish to hasten the dying process. Clearly the popular sentiment is not to punish and incarcerate but to provide merciful alternatives for those who act out of love."

SOURCE Hemlock Society USA
12/03/97 /CONTACT: Don Blake of Hemlock Society USA, 800-247-7421

So if anyone thought that the latest episode with FEN and its advocacy of "facilitating" deaths of NONterminally ill people was as far out as this movement goes - you ain't seen nothing yet. Not only is the "advocacy" of zealots of Girsh and von Fuchs broader than terminal -- the idea of "voluntary" is somewhat quaint in that weird mental world they live in. --Stephen Drake

NY Times on Final Exit Network - NDY Quote

Today's NY Times includes a story on the Final Exit Network (FEN) by Robbie Brown titled "Arrests Draw New Attention to Assisted Suicide."

The article's strongest point is that it clearly states the allegations by an agent of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation posing as a man with cancer wanting the group's assistance in planning his suicide:

According to the agent’s affidavit, network members instructed him to buy a helium tank and a plastic “exit mask.”

Thomas E. Goodwin, who was the network president at the time, and Claire Blehr, a member, planned to hold down the agent’s hands while helium flowed into the mask, the affidavit says.

The agent would lose consciousness within seconds and die within minutes, and the guides would remove evidence from the scene.

“They went through a dry run just to let the agent know what would happen,” Mr. Bankhead said. “Mr. Goodwin got on top of the agent and held down both of his hands,” which investigators say would have prevented him from removing the mask if he had changed his mind during a real suicide.

A passing mention is made of the group's willingness to give "assistance" to people who are "incurably ill" and "suffering."

The matter drops there, though, leaving the representatives of pro-assisted suicide groups free to criticize the "underground" nature of the activities of FEN.

For what it's worth, here's my contribution, lifted out of about 20 minutes of conversation with the reporter:

“These are people who instead of pulling you back from the ledge, they shove you off,” said Stephen Drake, a research analyst for Not Dead Yet, an advocacy group for the disabled that opposes assisted suicide. “Legally, we may not know what this means. But in a personal sense, it can mean the difference between life and death.”

I recall having more to say than that - about the widespread support within pro-assisted suicide advocacy organizations for broader "eligibility" - but that isn't the kind of approach this particular reporter - or any reporter so far - had in mind. --Stephen Drake

Final Exit Network, Zealotry and Groupthink

The latest story from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution centers on Dr. Lawrence Egbert, the "medical director" of Final Exit Network (FEN). According to the AJC, Egbert's own words describe him as some sort of Bizarro-world version of Will Rogers, who said "I never met a man I didn't like."

In the Bizarro world of Egbert and company, it runs like this: "I (almost) never saw a suicide plea from someone who didn't deserve to die."

From the article:

As medical director and co-founder of the Georgia-based Final Exit Network, Egbert in the past four years approved the applications of people who wanted to die because they were diagnosed with terminal cancer.

He approved the applications of people who wanted to die because their bodies were wasting away with ALS or multiple sclerosis.

He approved the applications of people who had not been diagnosed as terminally ill but whose quality of life, in their mind, was no longer worth living.

Egbert, an 81-year-old Baltimore anesthesiologist and teacher affiliated with the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said in an interview Friday that there were times when he rejected people who wanted to die, “but not very frequently.”

Of course, the allegations from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation go beyond simply providing information and "being there.":

The GBI says the group has a pattern of assisting people in suicides in which a “hood” is lowered over the person’s face, and the person breathes helium until losing consciousness. Death can take 10 or 20 minutes longer.

The GBI alleges that the group breaks state law by holding the hands of the person to prevent struggle or removal of the hood.

There's no word yet as to whether or not the GBI has this on tape, which is a common practice in "sting" operations.

Friends and sympathizers reject the notion that members of FEN could ever have actively prevented someone from taking the "exit bag" off.

Yet, out of at least 200 (Egbert admits to this) suicides, there apparently hasn't been one single case in which a person changed their mind - rejecting the feeling of suffocation and claustrophobia. Not one. If there had been one, that person would have needed immediate medical attention. There would be no time to get rid of evidence - paraphernalia, fingerprints, etc. before the paramedics arrived. There sure would be a lot of unpleasant questions to deal with - and possibly a civil suit by the family if brain damage occurred.

But that is pretty cynical and self-serving motivation. It's easy enough for those of us who don't think much of the ethics of pro-euthanasia/assisted suicide activists to believe members of FEN would slide from "assistance" to "murder."

But most people probably don't feel that way. It's unthinkable, many would say, that intelligent and ethical people could let their behavior lapse so badly.

Guess what. It's not unthinkable at all. In fact there's a name for the phenomenon in which intelligent and ethical individuals - as members of a tightly knit group - can do stupid and unethical things.

It's called groupthink - originally studied and defined by psychologist Irving Janis. It's a fascinating and complex topic, with some real-world examples.

Janis identified eight symptoms that put a group of individuals at risk for falling into groupthink:

1. Illusions of invulnerability creating excessive optimism and encouraging risk taking.
2. Rationalising warnings that might challenge the group's assumptions.
3. Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions.
4. Stereotyping those who are opposed to the group as weak, evil, disfigured, impotent, or stupid.
5. Direct pressure to conform placed on any member who questions the group, couched in terms of "disloyalty".
6. Self censorship of ideas that deviate from the apparent group consensus.
7. Illusions of unanimity among group members, silence is viewed as agreement.
8. Mindguards — self-appointed members who shield the group from dissenting information.

Afte years of operating without any consequences, it's easy to see how FEN members could have developed a feedling of invulnerability. Anyone who has lurked on Derek Humphry's (Humphry is an advisor to FEN) email list or engaged the most zealous euthanasia supporters has encountered the symptoms covered in numbers 2-4 firsthand. Number 5 has played out on Derek Humphry's email list several times - most notably when one member suggested that Jack Kevorkian's activities in assisted suicide might have been reckless and irresponsible. Seeing that kind of thing play out makes it quite possible that there is at least some degree of self-censorship going on within the movement to avoid the dogpiling that occurred in the Kevorkian episode. That, of course, leads to the illusion of unanimity. While it's impossible to know if there were "mindguards" in FEN itself, Humphry is pretty careful in handpicking information sent out to his list, highlighting news items that reinforce the "rightness" of his cause and framing the opponents as opportunists and/or religious zealots.

So, even starting from the highly questionable assumption that FEN members are moral and ethical people, they operate in a world that is geared toward the erosion of those aspects of their character in favor of group cohesion, loyalty and self-preservation. --Stephen Drake