Euthanasia movement's dark side

DAVID Leung (South China Morning Post, August 19) certainly seems to have grasped one argument by me against euthanasia - that the existence of effective medication makes it unnecessary for anyone to die in pain. This point is one which needs to be made, not least to allay public fear. Medical journal articles stress that mitigating the fear of pain is extremely important for its control.

Euthanasia advocates often erroneously claim that patients are condemned to excruciating deaths, thus exacerbating the very fear which makes pain control more difficult.

To support their claims, they often introduce anecdotal evidence of patients who did not receive necessary pain management. As a solution they suggest euthanasia - or suicide. David Leung uses the story of L. Tomlinson (Post, July 16) to make the same point. Yes, she needs better medication, but, equally important is caring support. He chooses to ignore her own testimony that it was the support of caring friends which helped her away from suicide. Without that, her suffering would indeed have been intolerable.

The Voluntary Euthanasia Society which David Leung espouses has two stated criteria for euthanasia practice - the suffering must be ''intolerable'' and the request ''must be voluntary''.

Let's look at the evidence from their paradise, Holland, where they claim euthanasia is practised with adequate safeguards. The Remmelink Report commissioned by the Dutch Government revealed some terrifying facts: Only five per cent of cases of euthanasia were for ''intolerable suffering''.

Nearly half of the cases were involuntary.

Since that report in 1990 there has been a widening of the criteria, not a tightening.