share
POST

Married 54 Years, They Chose to Die Together

What attracts us to the British couple whose joint assisted suicide has set off a firestorm of criticism?

Sir Edward Downes was a  British conductor; his wife, Lady Joan, was a former ballerina, choreographer and TV producer. They were educated and prominent--but last week they chose to end their lives, hand in hand, via assisted suicide at a Zurich clinic. They left no explanation; what's known is that, at 85, Sir Edward was almost blind and increasingly deaf; Lady Joan, at 74, may have received a diagnosis of terminal cancer. Their adult children issued a statement: "After 54 happy years together, they decided to end their own lives rather than continue to struggle with serious health problems. They died peacefully, and under circumstances of their own choosing...." Since the double death, a firestorm of criticism has raged and most of it is very reasonable. But at the center of it all are a husband and wife--and what draws us to them may not be reasonable but it's real.

Ethicists worry that stories like this could make it fashionable to decide to die alongside one's life partner, or that one spouse could pressure another to make that choice. (Women are seen as particularly susceptible to this bullying, although historically, wives haven't exactly raced to throw themselves on the suttee.) One professor noted that while some see a beautiful love story in the Downses, others would describe their marriage as "a pathologically enmeshed relationship."  Well, maybe--but that could also arguably describe Romeo and Juliet, Robert and Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Mary Wollstonecraft and Percy Bysshe Shelley, Eleanor and Franklin, Jackie and JFK, and let's not even start on Elizabeth Taylor and her Middle Period husbands.  Of these, only Juliet chose to end her own life rather than go it alone, but all these couples were passionate, extreme and, admit it, much more fascinating than sensible, healthy relationships.

Another critic objected that the Downes story "makes death a lifestyle choice."  No, it's a deathstyle choice, and most of us will not, in fact, ever make it. (Even Heathcliff didn't, for all his carrying on.) But lying down together, willingly, after half a century of marriage, and linking hands one last time--say it's sad, even say it's crazy, but don't ever say it's not romantic. 







15 readers liked this story.
Mor_ad_602x100_fab_2
Comments
07.23.2009
Toopie
I don't see why people feel the need to chime in and try to dictate how people live (or end) their lives. How do you know what's best for me? Because you have a PhD in ethics? Who cares. It means nothing. Peoples lives (and subsequent deaths) are not of your concern. "Ethics" are a fabrication of how society thinks you should react. Congratulations, you achieved a master's degree in the school of public opinion. Mind your business.
07.22.2009
elcurioso
Here's the thing: we all die. Once you really, really wrap your head around that fact, then you can focus on living here and now. Today. These people obviously loved each other, and chose to face the world as a couple, together. And that's how they chose to go out...as a couple that loved each other. Anyone who is "outraged" is just peddling religious dogma. People are, or should be, in control of their lives.
07.22.2009
Barking Unicorn
I practice Buddhism, and foreswear killing including suicide. Yet all life must kill (or have others kill) to survive, so I do. It not wrong, it is natural. The purpose of this Vow is to grant every living thing the right to live out its destiny in full. It is not to preserve life at any cost, regardless of circumstances; that is clinging, which Buddhism teaches is the source of all suffering. The full destiny of every life includes death. I must die to full my destiny. It is only a question of who shall decide when I die: - a drunk driver? - a disease-causing agent? - a government? - a jury of my peers? - a stranger who calls himself an "ethicist"? - a person who has Loved me for 54 years? - me?
07.22.2009
susan see
Analyzing their relationship doesn't seem to be very productive as relationship are as varied as leaves on a tree. I'm getting older and given the miserable state of affairs for most older people in any country, really, for example, living your life out in an assisted living facility or nursing home, who wouldn't want to just go peacefully while you stillhave the ability to make the choice yourself. and before the do-gooders step in and try to stop you legally? The only people that butt in on these very pesonal decisions are those who are stillyoung and have absolutely no idea what getting old is all about. They are blind to what the old can foresee. I say stay the hell out of this decision and just because something happens once doesn't mean millions are going to follow. That is flawed reasoning and for me, just represents ignorance and a lack of moral character on their part.
07.22.2009
Khannea Suntzu
I am *DEEPLY* offended by the prejudicial tone of the article. "...whose joint assisted suicide has set off a firestorm of criticism?" And so what? I cant shake a tail feather these days without "a firestorm of criticism". People will have to come to terms with the fact as the more our planet gets pathologically overpopulated, and the more people have distinct existential preferences, the more we will be faced with contingencies that will come as a shock to someone's sensibilities. At least seven things I have done today will be severe crimes somewhere in the world. I could have been sentenced to death for at least three in Iran and China. And what would or should I gave a damn about what people think or are "morally outraged" ? And why would an article even return to that concern up to three times, treading around the hot potato like a hungry dog scared to swallow? It is TRIPE, sensationalizing a sensitive topic in this manner, and shameless, exploitative, impolite and rude. BAH!
Mor_ad_300x150_fab_b
most liked
Loader_buff
Other topics you might appreciate