The Perfect Murder

The Perfect Murder The Perfect MurderSection 215 of the Criminal code clearly outlines restrictions regarding the withholding or withdrawal of medications to assist a suicide. This section states that, "every one is under a legal duty to provide necessaries of life to a person under his charge if that person is unable, by reason of (...) illness, mental disorder or other cause, to withdraw himself from that charge and is unable to provide himself with the necessaries of life." With these restrictions, many individuals feel their rights are being infringed upon. Doctors especially handle patients extremely cautiously when prescribing medication of any kind. Often a patient will not be administered an ample amount of medication, for fear that if the inevitable occurs, the doctor will be held criminally responsible.In Norway, one doctor has tried testing the laws of euthanasia and suffered the consequences. Dr. Christian Sandsdahlen, age 82, was convicted of first-degree murder by the Supreme Court of Nor way on April 14, 2000.Distributing copies of the Canadian Charter of Rig...Dr. Sandsdahlen was asked by Bodil Bjerkmann (age 42 and suffering from an incurable multiple sclerosis) to help end his agony by prescribing a lethal dose of morphine. The doctor complied and when Bodil Bjerkmann passed away peacefully, Dr. Sandsdahlen demanded to be tried for murder. He was convinced that ethical considerations would prevent him from a conviction and open the door to a judicial debate about the subject. Although the doctor appears to have failed, it is apparent that euthanasia laws in Europe are becoming less strict. Even in Canada it is apparent that euthanasia cannot be ignored.A Saskatchewan farmer, Robert Latimer, was tried for the mercy killing of his severely disabled daughter in October 1997. He was found guilty of second degree murder, which in Canada carries a minimum sentence of ten years, however,

FINDING TIME WITH TOO MUCH TO DO

FINDING TIME WITH TOO MUCH TO DO I find it amazing that the more I have on my plate, the more productive I become. People ask how I accomplish what I do, and I never have a good answer. This week, however, I seemed to have caught up to myself. No signings or conferences for the entire month of July. No immediate deadlines since the manuscript for book two of The Carolina Slade Mystery Series is in the hands of the publisher. And I caught myself piddling more than ever. Some psychologist types might say it was my schedule catching up to me, that I needed the down time to go into idle-mode for a spell. Maybe. The problem is, idle to me means getting outside to garden, weed, or create some new wing on a chicken coop, and its too friggin hot to do all that. So Im seated at my computer, finally, with time to breathe, and I slow down. Back in my day-job years (geez that sounds old), I ran wide-out with kids, writing, jogging, and serving as administrative director for a small federal agency, answering to a politician. I fell into bed and rose tired, but once I had my coffee, I counted the juggling balls and prioritized which ones to handle first. I firmly believe we perform relative to the degree in which we are challenged. And the first people to argue this are those who are seeking reasons for not being productive. Go ahead. Throw tomatoes. But just think about it before you do. Athletes who perform the same routine, without challenging their limits, do not excel. Intellects who quit challenging the status-quo, do not find break-throughs. Doctors who treat the norm instead of seeking answers to anomalies, turn their backs on patients. Its the challenged who make a difference. And when we stop to ponder that, we can reply in one of two ways: 1. We can complain about our limitations, or 2. We can keep fighting to make a difference. Really, it IS that simple.