Final Exit Network in the News – Reframing Themselves and Erasing the Past

7 thoughts on “Final Exit Network in the News – Reframing Themselves and Erasing the Past”

1. Stephen,

   Many websites, including those of the Final Exit Network, clear out their archives from time to time. Of course, their are those that don’t. It is a choice of the individual, company, or organization in charge of operating the website, to make the decision whether to keep old archives, or to delete them. There is no “hidden agenda” here. The Final Exit Network still stands for what it stands for, as clearly shown on their website. The only difference between 2008 and the present, is that the organization is not currently attending exits, due to the pending court cases. Because of this, and to the continued service to its members, the organization needs to implemented other services which could be of use to its members, without causing legal risk in the present pending legal situations. It may seem as an “image makeover”, etc. However, it is really just trying to reach out to the public, offering what the Final Exit Network always has offered, which is caring, compassion, and support, yet in ways in which are not of a legal risk to the organization.

2. A good piece of work, Stephen. I appreciate the posting of the text without having to go to pdf (for reasons of CFS/ME and brain ease).

   Looks like the “uphill” roll (not thinking of Sisyphus pushing a ball uphill and it rolling back down,his punishment by the gods, I think, but wheelchair roll), will not only continue but is escalating…

   In the spirit of Disabled in Action http://www.disabledinaction.org
   “Nothing about us without us”.

   An aside:as I was musing on ways to fight “assisted suicide” as it is being used, and will moreso, be used as a money saving measure for societies…how much does it cost to fly to Switzerland, stay in the luxury “Soylent Green” (movie that urged old folks to go willingly to early deaths while watching lovely scenes on a screen – and helped the food shortage, in a sci fi movie)”last-resort”? Or get someone from Final Exit Network to “assist”-or is it “murder” someone?
   Have they yet thought of gift cards?

   Scrubbing their website…
   So the discussion is about men who are killing (or attempts that fail) wives – but not what wives want. What is “mental health” in all of this? Who decides? How competent is a politician? How competent is someone in the medical profession who knows little about disability? Or knows about disability but has a view that we, disabled people, know is “off base” and Wrong – Are people with disabilities getting into psychiatry as physicians?

   Please, I want to live my life as best I can, with supports as needed, as I live with my severely disabling illness. Society has made it more difficult for me/us for decades that I’ve been ill/disabled by illness and centuries for most of us, worldwide. Don’t “help” me by suggesting I’d be better off dead and your group will “help” me. I get to decide what “help” I want: if my caregiver becomes unable to do it, I want supports for life at home, my home. Someone to push the wheelchair for an exit from home, ramps and curbcuts, shopping for me, etc. We all have similar and different needs/wants.
   I was going to list what we “do” for society, but heck with that, we are, therefore we have a right to be. Happy New Year. We are stronger than “they” think we are.

3. Kurt,

   I am reminding you once again – this isn’t the first time FEN members have misrepresented themselves. Earl Wettstein’s op-ed is discussed on this blog – he claimed that FEN aided “terminally ill” people and that John Celmer wouldn’t have “needed” FEN if he had lived in Oregon.

   You need to do your homework – The Internet Archive sweeps the net at regular intervals and caches the content of internet sites. I suspect that it took a specific demand from FEN to halt the caching and archiving of FEN’s content.

   Maybe I am misunderstanding you though. Are you saying they *do* say different things to different audiences? And that it’s OK? –Stephen

4. Stephen,

   I don’t know why there was a need to remove the newsletter from the archive, other than that the Final Exit Network decided to clear out its site archives for space purposes. Personally, I didn’t find the newsletter “damaging” in any way, etc. I probably would have kept the newsletter, if it were my decision. However, I keep alot of archives on different stuff like voice mail messages, letters, email, etc. I imagine that if the Final Exit Network needs to use the newsletter at some point for some reason, they have copies of it around. Also, perhaps the Final Exit Network has revised its site’s caching system, etc, which is causing the Internet Archive not to pick it up anymore, I don’t know.

   In regards to Earl Wettstein’s comments; the Final Exit Network aided people by being there for people, in support and compassion, not in physical intervention.
   “Aided” might not have been the best choice of words though. Perhaps if John Celmer were in Oregon, he may have qualified to be eligible to use Oregon’s assisted suicide law for his own wishes for a peaceful and painless exit. I disagree with the Final Exit Network regarding the statement about him not “needing” the FEN though. If John Celmer lived in Oregon and did happen to qualify under the state’s assisted suicide law, that doesn’t mean that even with the drugs prescribed to him for death, that he still wouldn’t desire to have the Final Exit Network’s exit guides present with him in compassionate support at his exit. In defense of the Final Exit Network though, I imagine that they were referring to John Celmer’s usage of the commonly used method amongst Final Exit Network exited members; that he wouldn’t have needed to use that particular method, if he had been prescribed the drugs under the state of Oregon’s assisted suicide law.

   The Final Exit Network legally has to do things different with different audiences. The Final Exit Network has rules and restrictions about who qualifies for certain services, etc, in order to minimize liability. Involved in this, is a great point which Sanda made about mental health and psychiatry, which is an issue that I’ve mentioned to the Final Exit Network, as an issue which I think that the organization ought to address. The entire right-to-die movement actually is going to have to address the issue eventually. Now that “mental illness”, is considered by psychiatry as a physical disease, will disability acceptance for right-to-die services eventually include the “mentally ill”, who haven’t been cured, or properly treated to bring the outcome of the person’s quality-of-life as acceptable to that person, once every “humane” measure has been taken in trying to treat or possibly cure the “mentally ill” person. Personally, I question psychiatric treatment methods as “humane”, since there can be alot of damage caused by those methods. Society is increasingly giving psychiatry more power, in doing things such as forced Involuntary commitment of people whom psychiatry deems as “mentally ill”, forced drugging, etc.

   The physically disabled also are prime targets by psychiatry which assumes that because we are physically disabled, that carried with it the symptoms of depression. Seriously Stephen, if you are so concerned about the medical system forcing itself onto the physically disabled, psychiatry is a much bigger predator than any right-to-die organization could and would ever be. A reminder; the right-to-die movement advocates choice, not forced treatment.

5. Kurt,

   You’re getting pretty good at sophistry.

   You ignore the deliberate attempts – repeatedly in the press – by FEN members to reframe their image – emphasizing “terminal” when talking to reporters.

   Wettstein’s column was a lie – pure and simple. And parts of it were appropriated and published as an original work by another FEN member.

   And, frankly, Kurt, you don’t really know squat about the disability rights movement. You’ll be hard-pressed to find support for forced treatment from anything in the movement – including NDY. In the case of Robert Yagi, I found it surprising that a little care hadn’t been taken with him, but he’d already committed a pretty irrationally-planned attempt on his wife.

   Do me a favor and learn about what the disability rights movement is about before you tell me what it should be doing.

   And while you’re at it, tell me all the great things that FEN members are doing to help PWDs *live* with dignity and independence.

   You’ll have to go beyond leaders such as Humphry, Girsh, etc. Their interest in disability has always been limited to two issues – distinguishing our suicides as nontragic and worthy of assistance on one hand; and how to deal with us as political opponent on the other.

6. The previous comment which I made on here, was not intended by me to be meant as an insult towards you, Stephen, nor towards Not Dead Yet nor towards any disability rights organization. I never have claimed to be an “expert” about disability rights organizations, nor am I now. From reading your blog, Stephen, it is obvious that you are not an expert on right-to-die organizations. You are overly paranoid about the right-to-die movement, Stephen. You seem to believe that the right-to-die movement is “out to get” disabled people. I’ll give you some credit based on some of your concerns regarding care and support for the disabled though, and I hope that you wouldn’t even attempt to claim that I don’t know “squat” about the sufferings of the disabled. As you are well aware of, I am physically disabled, and I have experienced discrimination done against me by people who were suppose to help me, people who hurt me alot. I understand the concern about society and its lack of support given towards disabled people. You have every right to want better support and to fight for equal rights for the disabled. However, your claims that the right-to-die movement somehow wants to “off” the disabled, simply is not justified.

   You said, quote “Do me a favor and learn about what the disability rights movement is about before you tell me what it should be doing.”
   I suggest that you do the same about the right-to-die movement, Stephen, before you criticize it for doing things which it is not doing.
   Oh, and you also said, quote “And while you’re at it, tell me all the great things that FEN members are doing to help PWDs *live* with dignity and independence.”
   Stephen, tell me what you are doing in order to help people who are in extreme pain, suffering beyond what pain management can adequately provide for them, people who are literally begging to die, people who want a peaceful and painless death? What are you doing for them, rather than your telling them stuff like, “Well, I’m going to oppose assisted suicide and euthanasia, even if it would help you, because in my paranoia delusions, I’m afraid that by legalizing assisted suicide and euthanasia, that somehow the government and the medical system will come after me and disabled people like Nazis did during the holocaust. So, to prevent that from happening, you’re just going to have to suffer.”?

7. Kurt,

   Your latest comment you argue against statements you seem to think I’ve made but haven’t. I don’t know if you’re being deliberately dishonest or you just haven’t done enough research and reading.

   I have not said the “rtd movement simply wants to off the disabled” – it’s a lot more complicated than that. When suicides of disabled people are applauded and publicized by these groups as acts of bravery and heroism, it says that the suicides of disabled people should be treated differently than those of nondisabled people – that they should be applauded rather than discouraged.

   And if you’ve actually read content on this blog, you’ll find that I’ve specifically blasted the use of Nazi analogies.

   I have no doubt you’ve suffered discrimination. The difference between the disability rights community and the rtd community is what we see as solutions: the “rtd” community sees helping oppressed people commit suicide as a reasonable step toward justice. The disability rights movement believes in fighting for what people actually need to live. NDY is involved with a coalition of national disability groups in advocating for the right kind of changes in health care policy – that would include better access to pain management/palliative care.

   Please – next time try to argue with something I have actually said. You could start with actually addressing the hypocrisy of the shifting media message that FEN is engaged in. –Stephen

Comments are closed.