The film follows retired university professor Craig Ewert during the last four days of his life in 2006, when he visited a Swiss clinic with his wife, Mary, in order to die.
The 59-year-old suffered from motor neurone disease (MND), which deprived him of the use of his arms and legs and caused him to be on a ventilator, Mary Ewert told The Independent.
Naturally the film was controversial. Some felt it was a macabre attempt on the part of the television network to boost ratings, others felt it was a great opportunity to take "death" out of the closet, to make the subject less taboo. What's your opinion?
The man himself was quoted as having said:
"I truly expect that death is the end, that there is no everlasting soul, no afterlife," Ewert says. "This is a journey that we all must make at some time. I would hope that this is not a cause of major distress to those who love me and I expect that my dear sweet wife will have the greatest loss, as we have been together for 37 years in the deepest intimacy."
Does that mean it's easier for an atheist to commit suicide? But, if death is the end, what "journey" is he talking about? He said, "This is a journey that we all must make at some time." This statement makes me wonder about his mental state.
I would think the deeply religious person who is sure of going to his or her everlasting reward would be able to do it easier than the atheist convinced that this is the end. What do you think?
Another consideration is that the Ewerts must be wealthy people to be able to afford this whole thing. What about the poor folks? Is it like abortion in places where it's illegal? Do the poor people have to make due with homemade solutions or clandestine operations? What do you think? Is the need or desire for euthanasia wide spread enough to even worry about?
