abc.net.au/news/2026-02-11/lovβ¦
i aspire to sensitivity here, not just ride roughshod over the grieving "survivors", but nonetheless feel somewhat irritated at the overarching tone of this article.
his final moments with his partner before voluntary assisted dying (VAD) were peaceful and at times even jovial, knowing that her wishes were being fulfilled.
compare that to hitherto "traditional" options, whereby his partner would have been either in excruciating agony, or medicated into comatosity to avoid the former, for days if not weeks before... ergo, no matter how upset he might feel now, the alternative seems infinitely worse. before, he would have "lost" her far earlier, wrt being able to share their love right to the last.
"It wasn't until I got home and walked into an empty house β¦ that it affected [me] β¦ it was quite daunting, then the realisation came."
ofc it is terrible, this is undeniable, as everyone who has lost a loved one, then later returns to the ever-changed home, well knows. however...
"The VAD team has been out two or three times to see me and just have a bit of talk to me, which has been really good," he said.
this is infinitely more than anyone ever got, or gets, after their loved one dies a "non-VAD" way. so sure, ok, a "post-VAD counselling service" might be able to be made better, but my point is, & thus why this article sits badly with me, from the perspective of the survivors, VAD is so much better than the alternatives, & for that reason this article IMO lacks proper perspective & proportion.
#VAD #counselling #grief #death #dying