We need humanitarians

I am not normally reduced to tears when listening to the world news in the mornings. But on Friday, listening to BBC World, tears flowed as I heard about a French mother's awful predicament after she put an overdose in her severely handicapped son's drip.

Vincent Humbert was left mute, blind and paralysed following an accident three years ago, when he was 19.

Mrs Humbert had announced her plans to the media and she put the overdose in the drip three years to the day Vincent had the accident.

Vincent had written to President Jacques Chirac to allow him to end his life, but the request was turned down.

"You have the right to pardon and I am asking you for the right to die," Vincent Humbert wrote.

I was immediately struck by the hypocrisy of politicians who accept the untimely death of healthy children and adults in wartorn zones and through preventable accidents, but will not accept that a severely handicapped young adult would want to end his life.

Although there is a school of thought which claims that watching violence on our screens every day makes us immune, I cannot say that it works for me.

Every morning as I zap the rounds of worldwide news, while I get ready for work, I am sickened by the pictures of children who know no other life than one of war and strife. They are lucky if they manage to stay alive, let alone get a decent education.

We see one world leader after another saying violence has to stop, yet the rhetoric and the endless summits do not seem to make a difference.

At least, the ensuing publicity ignited a fierce debate in France over whether the law forbidding assisted suicide should be changed.

Euthanasia is illegal in France and prosecutors are considering whether to charge Mrs Humbert with murder or manslaughter. She was briefly arrested on Wednesday after injecting him with barbiturates in the northern town of Berck-sur-Mer.

On Thursday, Vincent Humbert's book I Ask for the Right to Die was published in France, describing his intense frustration at what he called a "living death".

He wrote the book using his right thumb, the only part of his body he was able to move, to indicate the letter of the alphabet he wanted.

Although Marie Humbert, 47, is no longer under arrest, she has been released into psychiatric care. And I had thought that the days when uncompromising women were seen as needing psychiatric help were over. Obviously not!

French local prosecutor Gerald Lesigne said the investigation would continue "normally" - a post-mortem examination would be carried out to determine the cause of Vincent Humbert's death.

But Justice Minister Dominique Perben has urged "the greatest humanity in applying the law" in this case.

Vincent's brother Laurent was reported as saying: "I am happy that my brother is finally free, it's an enormous relief... he got what he wanted, and what he wanted is what counts". The case has sparked a nation-wide debate over euthanasia in France and opinion polls suggest that the majority of French people believe Marie Humbert was right to carry out her son's request.

Following this tragic case, more than 80 per cent of respondents say the law against voluntary euthanasia should now be changed, says the BBC's Caroline Wyatt.

Keith Reed, campaigns manager for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, says the "growing support" around the world for the legalisation of assisted suicide is in part due to people's attitudes to the medical profession.

"Individuals are no longer willing to be told what to do. Empowering the patient is the new driving force in regular medicine. People's attitudes have led that. They are trying to ensure they have fundamental rights," he told BBC News Online.

In places like Holland, Switzerland or Oregon in the US, laws already allow assisted suicides, and campaigners say there is a groundswell of public opinion in many other countries - particularly in Europe - which will force their governments to follow suit.

The Vatican remains deeply opposed to the idea, despite a speech by Pope John Paul II last March in which he argued against using extreme measures to keep terminally ill people alive.

But in Italy pro-euthanasia groups say polls suggest strong public support for the legalisation of euthanasia, said Matthew Davis on BBC Online.

I know that this subject engenders much emotion from both those who agree with the right to end one's life and those who do not. But many people are kept alive today with machinery created by man. When this machinery manages to keep someone alive and that person recovers enough to have 'a life', it is humanity succeeding.

But if the machinery only manages to keep someone barely 'alive' when they would be dead were it not for modern technology, and the person involved just wants to die with dignity, is that not humanity failing - and badly?

The recent spate of tragedies on local construction sites appalled me, mainly because it is not as though this is a first and we do not know what needs to be done to prevent these accidents.

It is obvious that casual workers are still being put to work on potentially dangerous jobs with no training or advice whatsoever. There seems to be astounding ignorance regarding use of heavy machinery and incredible insensitivity and machismo demonstrated by both the workers and their employers on building sites.

Ever since I got back to Malta, the lack of health and safety at work has been one of the topics I regularly return to. I therefore have a sizable file on the topic.

Perusing it, I came across a statement sent to me by the Chamber of Professional Engineers in December 1996, after yet another series of accidents on building sites.

The Chamber had expressed alarm at "recent increase of fatal accidents at work, especially on building sites". Four tower cranes had collapsed and crashed in 1996 on building sites.

"These alarming facts point towards urgent technical action to prevent any further tragic accidents", the statement had said.

At that time the Chamber had specified that employers were not obliged to hand in a certificate of compliance with health and safety regulations and that tower cranes being assembled on site "are never tested".

In January 1997 the Chamber issued another statement calling for "equipment certification and personnel training" saying that these would definitely help reduce the amount of accidents, and warned about the importation of sub-standard equipment.

In February 1997 the Chamber wrote: "It is with grief that we note the latest crane accident on February 18 where a crane with two workers toppled leaving one dead and another seriously injured.

The Chamber again pressed for proper regulations and inspection procedures for cranes. It further called for the introduction of "a licence for crane operators, crane mechanics, crane slingers and persons to direct crane operations. Even the best crane if used improperly can result in a tragic accident."

But it seems that all these warnings had fallen on deaf ears.

Only last June, under "Accidents we can prevent", I commented on the Employers Association's annual conference last May. I mentioned that I have been attending conferences on health and safety in Malta for the last ten years and we are still hearing the same rhetoric.

Michael Cassar from HSBC had made the interesting point that considering the 'safety' record within the construction industry the absence of any of their representatives was glaring. He said there were no records of incidents or "near misses". When I had asked whether any legislation was in place which makes the unreporting of accidents a serious offence liable to a substantial fine, Dr Mark Gauci, chief executive officer of the Occupational Health and Safety Authority, said that the law was rather vague on the issue. But surely, in that case, it is up to the authority to ensure the vagueness is clarified and made specific.

Nick Starling, the director of the Safety Policy Health and Safety Executive in the UK, gave Dr Gauci a few hot tips. The executive is an enforcing authority and its inspectors have more power than the police in some cases such as entering premises to inspect that health and safety regulations are adhered to. No vagueness there.

I did not stay for the last session for questions from the floor. Had I done so I would have asked whether the authority knows how many employers have health and safety policies, a health and safety officer and at the very least, an accident book. It probably does not!

The latest tragedies suggest that all the advice given by the Chamber of Engineers on cranes and construction sites in general, over the last seven years, has not been implemented.