Murder of a Prominent Scientist or a Daughter’s ‘Act of Mercy’?

Passing and implementing death with dignity is a tough uphill slog. Finding a legislator to introduce a bill is pretty easy; getting it through the Legislature is another matter entirely. Several attempts have failed in Maine. In 2015 it came closest, with a majority in the House approving but a slim majority in the Senate voting no. I attended the public hearing at the joint House/Senate health committing & spoke of my mother’s horrible death. However, those favoring the bill were outnumbered by religious zealots and those earning their livings from the status quo. Alas, it wouldn’t have mattered if it had passed because our Republican governor would have issued yet another of his knee-jerk, uninformed vetoes. It’s the Republicans. It’s always the Republicans. Death with dignity is yet one more reason why this year’s election is so important. And from what I’ve heard about Vermont’s death with dignity law is that once passed the next major hurtle is finding doctors who are willing to participate. I suppose they fear a backlash from those who would impose their religious beliefs on everyone.

I was the primary caregiver for my mother-in-law who had Alzheimer's during the last four years of her life and held her frail hand as she died. And now sadly, my husband has started showing early signs of the disease. I can't imagine that anyone but a masochist would choose to continue living with advanced Alzheimer's. People with Alzheimer's don't just forget things, The brain and the entire body shut down. These people lose the ability to walk, move, think, speak, control their bowels, breathe and even swallow. There is a long, horrible decline, for both the person and the people who take on the emotionally, physically, and economically draining burden of providing care. You may choose to wax poetic about the privilege of being a caregiver. But It is an open secret among doctors that the previously healthy spouse of an Alzheimer's patient often dies before the patient does. That's what happened to my father-in-law, and, to be brutally frank, I expect it will also happen to me. Modern medicine is a double edged sword. By extending people's lives, we guarantee increasing numbers of us will experience, either first hand or second hand, the horror and pointlessness of living in a shell of a body with a dying brain. We owe it to the millions of Alzheimer's patients and their millions of caregivers to allow a legal and merciful assisted death. Anything less than that is callous and self-righteous cruelty.

This is a tragic story and one where we don't know all the details yet. However Ms. White was clearly a self-sufficient, highly competent and high achieving person in her lifetime. Somebody that didn't retire at 65 but kept working in her field into her late 80's. Not every human is like Ms. White. Perhaps this is why her quick and steep decline shook her daughter so much. Perhaps Ms. White requested her daughter assist her when needed. Or maybe her daughter just couldn't stand seeing her so deprived of her own humanity.

My mom is 89 and has had Alzheimer's since 2010; last August she had a stroke, taking her from left field to far left field. I've been her caretaker; I've watched the leaf by leaf decline, yet she still retains such a core of her sweet self. Because of help from my siblings, we've been able to keep her at home; she is now in home hospice. Unless someone is wealthy, help for families caring for a disabled or elderly person in the Unites States is quite limited. This is the toughest job I've ever had; it would seem the government could provide at least some Social Security credits for those tending loved ones for years on end. It doesn't happen. We assume, but don't know the motivations of the daughter in this case; I reserve judgment. Here, in the US, there is so much more we could do as a country to provide adequate health care for everyone, and make mental heath care readily available. To add financial stress to people already suffering from the day to day diminishment of a loved one's health is cruel. We can do so much better than this. I participate annually in the Walk to End Alzheimer's (Flanagan Family & Friends) in the hopes of finding a cure. I intend to vote in every election for candidates who back policies that actually help all humans: complete healthcare for all -- this includes mental health; physical health; and dental and eye care too -- the whole body. Not too hard. We could shift our priorities just a tad and make it happen. Let's get it done! VOTE!

In most jurisdictions that have a "right to die" law, they include a requirement that says the person asking for euthanasia must be of sound mind and be able to administer the medication themselves. This requirement makes it impossible for many to have access to this option. We must develop better protocols. For example: How about a will we can sign, while still of sound mind, that states at what point in our mental and physical deterioration we wish to be given the life-ending drugs. By detailing, while still younger and clear-headed, at what point you wish to receive the drugs in the future, this then gets rid of the problem some fear of having relatives make the decision for us, while we are incapacitated. Let's take control of our lives, our whole lives, and write down and dictate at what point we want to be put out of our misery. There are medical parameters that can be used, such as cognition tests and any other parameter one may want to include in the document. We must learn, legally and medically, to incorporate quantitative measures into health care directives, for future use and guidance. If we do so, it will provide clear guidelines for medical personnel who work in this area. It will also help get rid of the fear some have that their relatives may not make a decision they would agree with, in a future when they are incapacitated.

Death with Dignity <https://www.deathwithdignity.org&gt; is a resource.

It is alarming that those in the article and many commenters here hardly consider that other motives may have been at work. No one really knows what went down .

Anyone who steps in to delay or stop an individual from their right to an assisted suicide, should be legally responsible for all their medical and legal bills.

I read somewhere that we'll make more progress in medicine in the next ten years, than we have perhaps in the last three hundred years. It's encouraging, especially with ravaging diseases like Dementia, and Alzheimer's. But it pains me when I think of so much lost time, because of gutless politicians and clueless religious leaders, with ideas from the Middle Ages. I'm curious with how many will still possess the fortitude of their beliefs, if either they or a loved one is struck down with any one of these horrible diseases.

There's no quandary for me. None. I have watched fortunes dwindle to nothing to keep elders in vegetative states for years. My father, with dementia, was tortured with all manner of physical therapy until he mercifully passed. I have made my wishes clear to my children, in conversation and in writing, that they must act if a stroke renders me mentally and physically incapacitated. If it's a diagnosis of dementia, I'll have one more twirl on the dance floor with my darling ones, and end my life. We send children off to war to be slaughtered in the thousands, but our elders must be kept alive long past their expiration date, and often to their incalculable misery? Strange. And not for me. My money will be enjoyed by my children and their children in the business of living, and not wasted on me in the business of dying. Bill's wife.

I hope that my family would be so kind...if the brain goes life is meaningless.

I think I know quite well what happened here, as I lived through a similar experience with my grandmother. Over the years, as her health declined and she lost the loved ones in her life by outliving them, we had many discussions about what the point of living is once you are nearly 100 and have lived a full life. These were not discussions I instigated, but rather very frank conversations about how complicated the issue is, and that, while I really wanted to help her, I was unsure Id be able to. She didn't want to be a burden on people, she felt like life was complete, and really just wanted to be out so she could join rejoin her deceased husband, wherever he might be. And she said many times, if I knew how to kill myself, I would just do it. Had she the means or knowledge, I'm sure she would have done so, but lacking that, she asked me to help her. We spent years discussing this, going through how she thought about it, what it would be like to experience this, how it could happen, who it would affect and how, etc. But in the end, after we had talked about all of the pluses and minuses, I had to tell her that it was too risky to help her, as the likely outcome would be an investigation and in the end, we'd end up creating two deaths, as the court system took my life after I helped her take hers. So, it never happened, and fortunately, health decline led her to hospice years later. Same outcome, much more suffering.

It's premeditated murder. She killed her mother who lived in a nursing home. Most families find a way to cope with the horribleness of it all - she is the outlier. She took matters into her own hand and gave her mother an overdose. She broke the law. I wish she had been able to find the help she needed so that she didn't have to commit murder. Perhaps the law should be changed to allow "mercy killings" through injections of patients who are at a certain stage in dementia. And, before anyone writes that I don't understand the daughter's strain, I wish to say that I am taking care of my 97-year-old mother who has many problems at this point.

Sounds like murder without malice to me. Though I’m a proponent for euthanasia, it MUST be established that a person wants to die given certain criteria. Absent a living well prior to becoming symptomatic...I don’t know how one can not rule this murder.

We have legally assisted suicide in Oregon. Very rigorous screening takes place, person has to be within 6 months of death as determined by their doctor, they must be of sound mind and administer the drug cocktail ( 1000 mg Seconal) to themselves ...( so they need to be able to swallow). But this article isn't about that. It's about pre meditated murder. So there will be a conviction for murder if they can prove it...and the length of sentence or type of sentence may be mitigated by the facts.

Was she in pain or discomfort? The article suggests that cognitive decline is intrinsically painful. It's painful to witness, but is it painful to experience. I'm sure it's very frustrating, when one can't interact with others, but in olden days, they had opium dens, a place where people went intentionally to lose their cognitive ability. Physical pain/discomfort is no fun, but is the measure of a person his or her ability to recognize faces or recollect personal history? Perhaps a semi-vegetative state is akin to an opium-induced state, which, for many, I gather, was pleasurable and timeless. My mom died quickly of emphysema at 83 with no mental decline. My dad is 93 and entirely there mentally, but starting to shuffle instead of walk. Almost all of his decline at 93 is mobility-related. I've never had to deal with any sort of age-related cognitive impairment.

I have made my own plans for the day I realize my mind is deteriorating. I refuse to either live on as a shell of a human or subject my family to the legal abuses that come with assisting a welcome death. I have never understood why the religious feel it is their solemn duty to force their beliefs on everyone around them, as we see happening with theological opposition to assisted suicide. Believe what you like, subject yourself to the horrors of dementia if that's what you think your god wishes, but keep your morals off my body!

We legally provide compassionate, painless death for our beloved pets, why not for our beloved family members suffering from dementia and other terminal illness? I watched my mother lose her cognitive ability to dementia for seven horrific years before she died at 92, feeling I had failed her by not ending her suffering earlier.

My heart goes out to Ms. Eckersley and her family. The anguish and feelings of helplessness one has in the face of this terrible disease are almost indescribable. I belong to a women's support group. Most of us are in our 60's; a few of are in their early 70's. We are our elderly parents' primary caregivers. (A few members of the group of also care for ailing spouses.) Our parents are living into their 90's, and modern medicine keeps them going, no matter their actual quality of life. We create home-care spaces, do battle with assisted living and nursing homes, hospitals, and the byzantine beaurocracy that is Medicaid, all in an effort to keep our parents safe and comfortable. Watching a beloved parent or spouse disappear while their body keeps going --- and suffering---is emotional hell. None of us want to go through what they are going through. None of us want our children someday to have to be in the same situation on our behalf. We strongly support the right to die with dignity, at the time of one's own choosing. And many of us have plans in place to exercise that right for ourselves, whether it's legal or not.

I suppose it varies from state to state and hospital-hospice to hospital-hospice, but I worry about whether these advance directives and "do not resuscitate," or feed, directions are always being followed. I have read many accounts where nursing home or hospital personnel took it upon themselves to ignore clear directives, sometimes out of personal philosophy or sometimes out of more mercenary motives. Are there any safeguards in place that prevent doctors, nurses, rescue workers, etc., from overriding a person's written wishes?

Advanced directives should include a legal choice for clear cut euthanasia. Of course, for that to happen, physician assisted self-euthanasia needs to be legalized. A study about physician assisted "suicide" in Oregon suggests that many people who apply for and obtain the needed drugs never use it. Autonomy and self-regulation is a big factor in how one feels about one's life.

I have spent over 500 consecutive days (average 9 hours per day) visiting my mother who resides in a "higher end" skilled nursing facility. I serve as her companion and advocate. If I was not there, she would be left to vegetate. These for profit facilities are nothing more than revenue generating "warehouses for the aged" - the fragile aged. While there are all kinds of legal protections in the law, few visitors are there long enough to see what really goes on, and many children are grateful to be unburdened and able to shut their eyes. That is, who is going to speak up? And who is going to enforce the law? Egregious issues - sure. But, issues related to quality of life - not a chance. Why is it acceptable to WAREHOUSE the AGED, but not to respect their desire to die? Where is the compassion? I actually support people having the right to choose their death - under any circumstance. Why not?

In the end, there is little difference between this case and the agonizing decision families have to make to turn off a ventilator or other mechanisms keeping someone alive; especially where the wishes of the person are known and documented before hand. As the baby boomer generation ages, I believe we'll continue to see a shift in attitudes towards compassionate assisted dying. The likelihood of the US having a federal policy around this is next to nil, ditto for the church. Those that have lived through similar situations with family members know exactly what to do to ensure they can die on their own terms.

What an amazing, brilliant, vivacious lady! I would have loved to have spent a day with her. My sincere condolences to her family. My heart hurts thinking of what they must have been going through these past months/years. May she Rest In Peace.

This should never happen. We all need an advance directive or living well that includes instructions for what we wish to happen if suffering from severe dementia, not just from a disease like cancer. For example, if you are no longer communicative and cannot eat or drink by yourself, you can state that you do not want food or liquids. Your named representative on the directive, most often spouse or child, will be certain to see that your wishes are followed. Such planning could relieve you and your family of years of horrible physical, emotional and financial stress. There are models for such directives online right now. A simple Google search.

In the United States, at least, the issue of assisted dying or, if we must, euthanasia, should be viewed through the First Amendment lens of religious liberty. The *only* argument against helping an all-but-insensate, infirm person whose life has taken them far beyond what they would have wished, who no longer receive any real enjoyment from life, is theological in nature: it is considered a "crime" against a theoretical deity or other supernatural entity to "take" a life that has been purportedly "given" by such an entity. But given that there is simply no proof that would stand in a court of law that such an entity does indeed exist, much less that it has granted life to anyone, any argument against euthanasia must inevitably pit theological belief against individual liberty.

The problem is, all over the world, is that the people who make the laws are far removed from the living and caring day to day. This is barbaric, and devoid of all compassion. The previous commentator is quite correct, there needs to be a way for people with dementia to put in place rules for how they want to end their life early on. Always so much easier to judge a circumstance when it isn't happening to one personally.

It's just cruel how so much of the world treats the end of life. Government should not be a forcing hand delivering terrible pain and suffering. Old people should be allowed to make their own decisions regard their end -- not the government. And every time this is brought up, predictably the response is that allowing assisted dying for the old (which, of course, would include the terminally ill) would bring about horrible abuses. Well, having to put a loved one into a nursing home is abuse. The costs are enough to drain a lifetime of labour and saving, and the treatment in such places, even the better ones, is abusive. Of course, one can speculate that the nursing home industry is a major contributor to the campaigns of most politicians, and that's why the laws haven't changed. It's the same old damn story. Here is a daughter who courageously assisted her mother's end, trying best to give her dignity, and she is charged with murder! Who is abusing whom?

I've had a good life. Now I'm old and I plan on a good death. But, like all things in my life, I know I will have to work for it. This story reminds me dying ain't easy.

What I'm wondering is who authorized an autopsy on a 92-year old, incapacitated dementia patient. I mean, really???

Mary White recognized her cognitive decline early on. There should be a way for people in early stages of dementia to legally put into place some ground rules for determining when its time to say I’m ready to go.

"Darkling I listen; and, for many a time I have been half in love with easeful Death, Call'd him soft names in many a mused rhyme, To take into the air my quiet breath; Now more than ever seems it rich to die, To cease upon the midnight with no pain..." John Keats 1795 - 1821

My mother had one request which was not honored. To serve her as we serve our pets, when the quality of life is no longer there we ease their pain by euthanising them. My mother was comatose and her body stunk as it degraded, why she needed to be put through that is insane when there is an alternative. The hospice home we were in, my sister and I stayed for the full 3 weeks, would not consider my request, they just stopped most of their care because they knew it was the end.

Watching my mother-in-law fade until she died of pneumonia - most likely aspiration pneumonia - demonstrated the terrible nature of progressive dementia. Eventually you warehouse the body that the mind has left. It is a horrible thing to watch; and we project - because we cannot know - that it is a horrible thing to experience. For caretakers who are watching someone they love die by inches -each day a little less of them there as the body survives - stress and grief are a constant companion. Imagine Mary White's daughter acting as if under PTSD and the issue is different from the big moral questions surrounding euthanasia. We don't have solutions that ease the suffering of dementia, nor do we have solutions that ease the suffering of the caretakers. And that is the bottom line. It is all suffering and no ease in sight. There is ample room in the law for compassion.

I think it is cruel to continue to feed someone who cannot feed themselves, cannot communicate any of their needs and can no longer recognize anyone. There is no quality of life, there is no nothing, just endless days of feeding and cleaning them up. It is often done with compassion and care and love but if we really loved them we would stop feeding them and allow them to die peacefully on the fentanyl express. We can’t make this choice for everyone but we should allow those that want it to get it.

When we do not have the right to assisted death we are left at the mercy of others. Faced with inevitable decline others will decide how much suffering we should endure, how long we should endure that suffering, how we will die, when we will die and to add to the insult not consider our own wishes. No family should be forced to seek mercy for loved ones and face potential legal repercussions. We can develop laws and protocols that protect the vulnerable and allow us to be masters of our own lives.

'Research going on' doesn't help today, in this moment. Ref. my mother and grandmother.

So Mary White did that! During summer holidays my mother sent us to the Australian Museum to hang out and watch movies and listen to talks. What an amazing place it was. And Mrs White was conserving forests while developers could not build fast enough. I love that a decade ago the town where she died voted to ban bottled water. If only we had such foresight in New Jersey. What a wonderful life. I wonder if she made a request to her daughter to end her life when her brain no longer processed information?

My condolences to the family. I know it can be very hard to see a loved one in such a profound decline. There should be a process through which both doctors and the court system can make the decision to euthanize a suffering person, without needing any family member to go to jail for doing the right thing. We euthanize pets who are in decline and it is considered the humane thing to do for an ailing pet. So why not do the same for an ailing human? Advanced directives can be put in place before you become incapacitated, but it doesn't do much for a person with a long-term devastating illness like Alzheimer's, or Parkinsons Disease or any of the other major ailments out there where your mind goes first before the body. Or even for extremely painful illnesses that can be torture to have to continue living through. This needs some serious thought by physicians, court systems and lawmakers alike.

Ms. White lived a full live until dementia took over - she was no longer recognizable and apparently there was no joy left for her or her family. What is the point of continuing in such a state? There is no possible cure, no possible improvement. There was a clear, objective, lack of quality of life. Our society needs to make death with dignity available and in cases when dignity is no longer feasible to allow families to stop the unending hardship and pain of seeing a once vibrant person waste away to nothing.