Friday 7th November 2025
Blog Page 2214

Mumps cases in colleges

0

Oxford University is seeing an increase in the incidence of mumps. College doctors are believed to have diagnosed eleven cases in the last week, eight of which have been attributed to Oriel alone.

One Oriel student conmented, “It’s horrible. Everyone in my staircase is diseased.”

The viral illness can be spread through the saliva of an infected person. The Health Protection Agency offers oral fluid testing to confirm clinical diagnosis.

Whilst symptoms include a headache and fever one or two days before the swelling of the parotid glands, in some cases there are none.

 

Cherwell Star: Victoria Thwaites

0

In 1909, explorer, naturalist, philanthropist, soldier and art collector Robert Sterling Clark planned an epic voyage of 3700 miles across China’s northern regions. However, a combination of the murder of his interpreter, the slight distraction of the Boxer Rebellion and the constant potential for imminent robbery made the completion of this impossible.

Clark, an interesting fellow, went on to found an internationally significant art collection, (the Clark Art Institute near Boston) and breed racehorses, but his journey is recorded both in text and in photographs in ‘Through Shen-kan: the account of the Clark expedition in northern China 1908-9′.

And thus, in 2009, to celebrate the centennial of the Clark expedition, a troupe from the Oxford University Exploration Club set out to recreate the route, (thankfully with the aid of modern transportation). Victoria Thwaites, human scientist, redoubtable voyager and ‘medical officer’ was one of them seeking to emulate Clark’s mix of gung-ho and scientific observation.

“The journey itself, (no longer limited to pack mules and porters), was a fantastic experience”. Threading their way along the Yellow River and following the same route that Clark and his compatriots took, (deduced from photographs in his manuscript with the help of the Chinese guide companies in Shanghai), in a plethora of vehicles meant that Victoria and her fellow travelers saw a dimension of China that other tourists certainly missed; aided by having Robert Sterling Clark as a constant, slightly acerbic traveling companion.

“Traveling through China and the Tibetan hinterland in the midst of Olympic fever was also fascinating”, says Victoria, whose course of study allowed her to use the expedition as a means of observing China and its ethnic groups post-Cultural Revolution. These regions of northern China were far from the traditional tourist routes; the sight of a red-haired Westerner, or indeed any Caucasian, was enough to draw crowds of fascinated onlookers and multiple photographs.

However, despite warm welcomes into homes and the incredible friendliness of the people, there were periods of trial. “A particularly interesting moment was traveling through the ruins of an earthquake-shattered Chengdu on a crowded minibus, just before another tremor struck”, related Victoria in a typically relaxed fashion.

This is not the end for Victoria’s exploratory urge; “I’m planning on doing something properly adventurous next year; kayaking in the Himalayas seems like a pretty good idea”. What with Victoria plotting the conquering of the known world, it seems reassuring to know that Ranulph Fiennes has a nascent successor.

 

Interview: Vivien Duffield

0

Dame Vivien Duffield, arguably Britain’s leading philanthropist, is no stranger to the trials and tribulations of undergraduate life at Oxford. She herself began her degree in Modern and Medieval Languages at Lady Margaret Hall in 1963, when the presence of women in Oxford was still very much a novelty and 10 pm curfews were still very much enforced. Dame Vivien chuckles whilst reminiscing about her exploits playing backgammon into the early hours at Christchurch and then scaling the walls into LMH rather unsuccessfully, resulting in a broken arm, a 3 am hospital visit, and a very irate Jewish father (the entrepreneur Charles Clore who owned Selfridges).

Nevertheless, it is certainly fortunate for Oxford that Dame Vivien’s escapades left her intact to direct what she herself dubs ‘the campaign of campaigns’. This aims to deliver an almighty £1.25 billion to ‘sustain and enhance Oxford’, and to allow it to compete with the astronomical endowments of universities such as Harvard and Yale.

Launched in May, the campaign is backed by the Chancellor, Lord Patten of Barnes and Richard Dawkins among other notable alumni. With her characteristic chutzpah and impressive record there could be noone better suited for the job. ‘I’ve got one last big one in me,’ she says. ‘And this is the ultimate challenge. Oxford is everything rolled into one – it’s the British Library, it’s the National Gallery, it’s the Weizmann Institute. It’s got theatre.

It’s got everything. There is something for everybody.’ Her passion is infectious as she runs her fingers through her highlights in a theatrical way, becoming increasing vexed: ‘Why do middle-class English parents bleed themselves dry to send their children to private schools, and the moment they get to university, they won’t cough up?’ Without drawing a breath, she answers her own question: “It is this attitude we have that universities should be free. We have always taken them for granted. For a long time the colleges [at Oxford] didn’t even bother to raise money at all. It is a miracle that we have three or four universities among the world’s best. I don’t know how they do it.’ Refreshingly blunt, as always, she unabashedly proclaims: ‘I am a great elitist – for brains.’

Although of course committed to Oxford Dame Vivien has of course been engine behind a multiplicity of other noble causes, with tremendous success. She has been described my numerous people as ‘dangerous’ company, given her redoubtable reputation for conjuring money out of nowhere, and especially out of people’s own pockets. Her deep passion is, of course, opera, and she jokes that ‘Royal Opera House’ will be found engraved on her heart. It was she who was the driving force in the raising of around £100 million from private sources, most found within the pages of her own address book. Her money raising schemes included a gala performance of The Nutcracker in 1984 to raise money for the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. “I had this mad idea of charging £5,000 for two tickets. It was a fortune. And we sold out, and raised £1m.’ Her major current project is the Clore Leadership Programme to train future leaders in arts management, which is helping to train the future generations of art leaders, inspired, she says, by the fact that ‘everything seemed to be being run by Antipodeans a few years ago.’

It is certainly not difficult to see why Dame Vivien achieves such remarkable results. What she lacks in stature she certainly makes up for in sheer force of personality. Whilst she may lament her age: ‘I’ve got a bus pass,’ her boundless energy and stamina are frankly alarming. With a plethora of charitable interests under her watch, a myriad of social engagements and five homes, she rarely spends more than two nights in a place. Even more important, she is a veritable social chameleon. Looking around her Chelsea flat the walls are festooned with images of the Dame. From the most glitzy gala event at the Royal Opera House, dripping in diamonds and discussing the last act of Onegin with Prince Charles, to interrogating Tessa Jowell about London’s bizarre 13 minute stint at the closing ceremony of the Beijing Olympics, to lunching with Mick Jagger in St Tropez; with each she is in her element.

At the drop of a hat she can turn on the most disarming of charm, with her deep smoky voice no doubt a devastating tool for schmoozing. However, when her patience is frustrated she readily admits to her consummate skill in ‘nagging and bullying.’ She certainly does not suffer fools glady: ‘England’s quite rich, but rich people here think everybody wants them for their opinions, not their money.’

Perhaps even more striking than Dame Vivien’s fabled ability to raise money is her even greater enthusiasm for giving it away. She has parted with an estimated £176 million from her various foundations and is still distributing $6 million a year. After putting £5.5 million of her own money into the reconstruction of the Royal Opera House she purchased Constable’s The Opening of Waterloo Bridge as a gift to the nation and given £2.5 million each to the Tate Modern and British Museum. To her the philanthropy is not a chore, rather, a pleasure. ‘I’m always saying how lucky I am that I can actually make people happy and do what one wants to do. Its part of Jewish ethics that one always looks after others.’

Nevertheless, on the subject of money, especially, she is refreshingly brusque. Emblazoned on a pillow behind her is the unabashed motto: ‘Better to be nouveau riche than no riche at all.’ Certainly, her advice on money is simple. ‘The only word of advice my father ever gave me was when I was 21 and they were letting women into Lloyd’s. He forbade me to join and said: ‘Never join anything you don’t understand. There is always someone cleverer than you.’

Perhaps the most striking feature about Dame Vivien is her total lack of self-righteousness, even given her own enormous personal generosity. Not once does she use the pious phrase ‘making a difference.’ All she does say, without a hint of sentimentality is: ‘It is the most wonderful gift in the world to be able to do things for other people.’ She repeats one of her favourite fundraising phrases: ‘Shrouds don’t have pockets.’ With this natural impresario at the helm, it certainly seems that Oxford’s future is in safe hands.

 

Radical harmony

0

When The Ordinary Boys sang about “Over the counter culture” in 2000, I don’t believe that they were referring to the emerging culture of self-medicating patients, thanks to pharmacies selling drugs without prescription. Nor do I believe that they were seriously trying “to be so different” with any sort of distinctive message: they were trying to launch a music career which, for a while, they managed well enough.

They also managed to reinsert the term “counter-culture” in to the mouths of teenyboppers and onto the airwaves of youth culture, where its absence had not been filled, and still isn’t, by the profusion of musicians trying to be “radical”. Music being radical politically is hardly a new idea, of course. In the 1930s Woody Guthrie carried a guitar with “This Machine Kills Fascists” inscribed on it and punk was born in the 70s as the first mass expression in fashion and music of social discontent and frustration. Yet artists with a political message have lost their voice in the intervening years, and where it has become cool to idolise Pete Docherty and for celebrities to take crack, it has become un-cool to care about the world, its problems and its politics. Once decorated with rips, zips, safety pins and slogans, artists and celebrity figures have moved from the counterculture and into the mainstream and being ‘radical’ now means something different.

John McClure, the preaching Reverend of indie rock band “Reverend and The Makers”, is (somewhat dramatically) “in love with the idea of it being cool to care about the world”. Whilst his Yorkshire accent delivers sharp and cynical lyrics on modern day society, he uses his regular presence in newspapers and interviews to continually question governmental policies and the silence of other British celebrities on serious issues when, given the influence of our celebrity estate, they have the voices that the public will listen to. He cites lad culture, anti-intellectualism and brand image as reasons for their gagged throats – yet I doubt whether he is truthfully causing a stir in any greater way than by proving that his depth of opinion is greater than his actual music.

His newspaper complaints against other celebrities and his urges for radicalism are unlikely to manifest in any real governmental questioning or cultural rebellion, and citing the celebrity endorsement of Barack Obama’s campaign as proof of their power is hardly ground-breaking when swinging a leg up onto the political bandwagon is as fashionable there as rehab and over-sized sunglasses. I do genuinely believe it to be a shame that more artists don’t express solid political affiliation in our country, but then again when our ‘celebrities’ include Kerry Katona and the ‘stars’ of Big Brother I don’t feel the loss quite so tragically. And indeed when some artists do make a show in their shows of “trying to be so different” (Preston’s words, not mine), their performances smack of being exactly that: performances, not sincerely felt political protests.

Entering handcuffed and in orange jumpsuits on to the stage at Reading this year, American rockers Rage Against the Machine (pictured above) screamed about Guantanamo and world leaders in between their swearwords, the noise being so great it was difficult to hear the words “recently reformed…first English show in eight years…”. Given that their rant against Tony Blair was over a year out of date and their abhorrence of Bush was hardly an original statement, they failed to provide the 70,000 synchronized moshers with anything seriously radical to headbang to.

Below the thud of the headbanging and McClure’s whines, some musicians’ notes ring out clear, to the tune of actually making a difference to instigate change in society. Can you ride a bike with no handlebars? The Flobots can. They can also show you how to do-si-do, how to scratch a record, and how to organise street teams across America to fight youth crime. Through their website “fightwithtools.com” the Denver sestet aim to prompt drastic social change in the regions visited by their street teams, with the ultimate goal of nationwide improvement. Their left-wing views are more accessible than extremist and they are currently focused on encouraging voters – naturally in favour of Obama – in the next US election, but simply because they are being drastically different from other musicians in actually having a social-improvement program they have become the radicals of an otherwise inert culture scene. One of their influences is Billy Bragg, the left-wing musician responsible for encouraging musicians to turn up the volume on their political voices by recording anti-BNP records and by becoming, like him, involved with schemes such as “Love Music Hate Racism”.

Set up in 2002 in response to the BNP’s election success and rising levels of racist crime, LMHR plays on from the success of the Rock Against Racism movement in the late 70s and 80s. They organise nationwide music events – club nights and outdoor festivals, small gigs and large concerts with big name acts with the specific goal of inspiring the crowd to become actively engaged in anti-racism and anti-fascism movements. Through LMHR, I found out the personal opinions of one their most ardent supporters and one of England’s most recognised female rappers, Miss Dynamite:

She got involved with LMHR to campaign against the “immoral and disgusting” BNP and to use “music, as one of the most powerful creative tools in life [to] take a stand”. She believes in freedom of speech – but only to an extent:

“people might not agree with what I’m saying but the difference is that I’m not saying I dislike someone because of the colour of their skin or their sexual preference. As a black woman I feel completely insulted that they [the BNP] are even allowed to exist.” The power that music holds means that it must be, she explains, “positive and expressive. There are lots of artists who’ve inspired me, the legends like Bob Marley and Marvin Gaye. I feel that the music of their era had many artists who were saying something, without them being seen as “conscious” as such.

Music seemed to mean something different through that whole era – like within Soul, people were going through the civil rights movement and that was expressed so much in the music. Only recently I was listening to an old tape my Dad made, and I realised that all these songs I never thought much about before, listening to them now they’re really socially conscious – I’m like ‘oh my god – is that what they meant?’ – they’re talking about racism, they’re talking about civil rights.” Yet like McClure she feels that today’s musicians are failing to speak out in their music for certain issues and campaigns. “I can’t understand”, she exclaims, “how if you feel passionately about things why you don’t say that in your songs. For me, its part of life, its how I feel.”

So, on the decibel scale of political music, it seems that some voices sing out louder than others, and when the political chord is struck, the note is heard. Yet the Flobots and the LMHR artists are the ones whose tunes are what matters, what make a difference. They don’t sing for their voices to be praised, they sing to make people sit up and listen and make a change. Because of that, they have been shifted to the left: they are the radicals, they are the counterculture.

 

OUSU election difficulties continue

0

OUSU has come under criticism for incompetence and inefficiency this week following the delay of the presidential elections.

The OUSU elections have been delayed after a candidate’s manifesto was omitted from the Joint Manifesto Booklet (JMB).

Students were due to choose this week between presidential candidates Stefan Baskerville, John Maher, Luke Tryl and Aidan Simpson.

But the manifesto of John Maher was not printed in the JMB that was distributed with last week’s issue of The Oxford Student.

This broke OUSU’s standing orders, which mandates that all manifestos be distributed in the 5th week edition of the paper.

Madeline Stanley, OUSU’s Returning Officer in charge of organising the election, said in a letter sent to all Oxford students, “Unfortunately, due to an error at the printers, the JMB wasn’t printed in full.

“As soon as we became aware of the problems with the JMB we took all possible steps to recall any OxStus that had already been distributed and to clear the remainder before they could be sent out.

“Given that the point of the JMB is to help students make a fully informed decision we reasoned that the best course, out of a lot of bad options, was to postpone the election by a week.

“Obviously this is enormously frustrating for everyone involved, but we decided as an elections committee that it was better for the election to be free and fair, with a fully informed electorate, than to press ahead despite the problem.”

Stanley told Cherwell that OUSU’s efforts to remove the OxStus had been largely successful.

“Inevitably there will be some copies of the incomplete JMB out there, but we’ve accounted for roughly 95% of them,” she said.

John Maher has not personally received an apology for the omission of his manifesto, although Stanley did confirm that a general apology was made to OUSU Council and to the candidates as a whole.

OUSU’s general email to the students expressed their hope that “the extra week’s publicity will hopefully drive turnout up beyond our original hopes.”

However, not everybody agrees. Xanthippi Choraitis, a second-year biologist, said, “This doesn’t help portray OUSU as the professional or efficient student union that we are always promised by the Presidential candidates every year.

“So few people vote in these elections anyway. Nobody knows when they are, nobody knows who the candidates are, and I think even fewer will bother voting after this.”

Richard Hardiman, OUSU’s financial administration manager in charge of printing The OxStu said: “I checked the files and ftp upload records and I’m satisfied that the correct files were sent through.

“Whether they weren’t properly received, or whether an earlier version of the filename wasn’t properly purged from the machine before the paper was plated up and sent to press I don’t know, although I’m working with the printers to find out.

“It’s true that we have had some pretty bad luck with the paper this term. The earlier incident to which you refer was due to one of the presses breaking down. Obviously that’s annoying, but it would be unfair to blame it on the printers – I’m sure they didn’t go to the trouble and expense of breaking their own press just to cause problems for the OxStu.

“Likewise, there was another edition which had to be pulled and reprinted at the last moment because new information emerged about a story which could potentially have had an adverse effect on the paper, the business, and the Student Union. In that case the printers made every possible effort to squeeze us into their schedule and we got the paper reprinted at very short notice – so it’s far from all bad news that we’ve had from that quarter.

“The problems we have had with printing this term are regrettable, but it would be both inappropriate and pointless to start throwing blame around without having all the facts – regardless of whether that makes it a more interesting story.”

Trinity Mirror Printing, who print the OxStu, refused to comment on the specific problem, saying only that “What we print is what we’re given. We can’t change it. If there was an obvious error in the template they sent, we would have referred it back to them.”

Although OUSU will put out general publicity for the election in the extra week, Stanley will not allow an increase in advertising budgets for the candidates.

“The campaign expenditure budgets are limited to ensure all candidates have the same budgets and to ensure that no candidate has an advantage by having more money than another,” she said.

Last week, Cherwell found that fewer than 18% of students knew when the elections were originally scheduled.

Only 36% of students intended to vote in the elections, despite their being online for the first time, although even this may be an optimistic estimate. Last year, Lewis Iwu was elected President on a turnout of less than 19% of Oxford’s 18,000 strong student body.

OUSU have come under further scrutiny this week as the manifesto of Aidan Simpson, another Presidential candidate, was somehow lost on their website.

OUSU’s website hosts each candidates’ campaign literature, but the link to Simpson’s manifesto showed only a poster with a picture of him on it, and no writing, meaning anyone wanting to see his manifesto must go to his Facebook group.

A friend of Simpson, who wished to remain anonymous, said that he was upset with the mistake.

The blank manifesto has been up for over a week, despite Simpson repeatedly requesting it be replaced.

However the OUSU RO blamed Simpson, saying, “he sent it to us without putting it into a PDF correctly. We are attempting to remedy the situation and put one up so you can read it.”

 

Tony Benn joins animal lab protest

0

Former Labour politician Tony Benn has spoken out this week against the new animal laboratory in Oxford.

Benn met with fellow Oxford alumni Sir David Madden, and the Voice for Ethical Research group in Oxford (VERO) on Monday to express his concerns about the lab.

Benn, who studied PPE at New College, told VERO, “I have always been a believer in animal rights. There is now a lot of strong evidence that animal testing is not necessary, and could be done in a different way.”

Benn has spoken out against animal testing saying, “the tide is turning fast against those who still cling on to the view that experimentation and testing of drugs on animals is valid and necessary.”

Animal campaigners at the event on Monday wore academic dress to highlight the existence of what they believe is a large anti-laboratory sentiment within the University itself.

The University has insisted that the new lab will improve the welfare of lab animals. The new building will rehouse animals that were previously scattered around various buildings and to “set a gold star for animal care.”

John Hood said, “Where animals are needed in research, we are committed to the highest standards of care. That is why we have built this new facility.

“The fact that we have completed it in difficult circumstances reflects the depth of our commitment both to life-saving research and to animal care.”

The first mice have been moved into the laboratory on South Parks Road and it will become fully operational in 2009.
Yet the university has insisted that testing will not take place.

Animals will be bred, trained to complete computer-based tasks, receive medication, undergo MRI scans and some will be operated on.

The issue divides students and staff across the University. One student, who wishes to remain anonymous said, “I’m completely against the lab and outraged that Oxford would partake in such controversial activities.”

However another student admitted, “sentiment needs to be outweighed at some point, overall, finding a cure for something like HIV is too important.”

Oxford claim they support peaceful protest and discussion, but find the “intimidation, threats, damage to property, and arson” the University has been subjected to “entirely unacceptable.”

Some students have expressed anger at noisy and possibly dangerous protests, with one saying, “These protests are futile. Let’s face it, no one wants to do it, no one says ‘Let’s torture animals.’ Scientists want to help us.”

 

Restaurant Review: Mario’s

0

103 Cowley Rd.

On a boring Monday night in Oxford when work is never the appealing option, I found myself debating with 4 friends about where to go for dinner to liven up what was otherwise a day that had really nothing to be said for it. The discussion about where to have supper was protracted as options were vetoed as too expensive (Fishers), too boring (Pizza Express/Wagamamas/Ask) and too far (Cafe Rouge/Strada).

After much discussion it was concluded that Mario’s Italian restaurant in Cowley was to be the destination of our evening out. Having decided to make the trek into Cowley it was pleasant to discover that it really isn’t that far, although this may not be the case if you live at the opposite end of the high street to Magdalen Bridge.

However, having braved the pretty dubious British weather and arrived at Mario’s only slightly wet from that staple of the English climate – freezing drizzle – it was suitably welcoming and warm in the Italian that was to be our destination for the evening. Having been quickly seated, by an only relatively stroppy waitress, the menu was perused at length.

Once decisions had been made there was time to consider the atmosphere and our other diners. The latter were in fact sadly lacking. Undoubtedly Monday night is not the liveliest night of the week, however, one might have expected to see more people at what is essentially an unostentatious, local restaurant. However those that were there seemed to be enjoying themselves and there was just enough people to ensure that there wasn’t that awkward atmosphere in a restaurant when it is completely silent except for your party.

The interior of Mario’s is by no means particularly luxurious, but it is perfectly pleasant and in keeping with its niche in the market. In fact it is just what you would expect from you local Italian, and as a result is rather pleasing.

As for the food, the starters arrived speedily. Garlic bread, calamari fritti and prawn cocktail were all simple, but still delicious. Our choice of main courses may not have been the most sensible. Pasta carbonnara and pasta with meatballs were both perfectly pleasant but rather unexciting. The large quantities that were served were no doubt a very good thing and you had the feeling that you knew what you were going to get, no dubious surprises there.

The pizzas on the other hand were fantastic. Very thin crispy bases, lots of mozzarella – I sincerely wished I had chosen one of them. Overall, this restaurant seemed to be exactly what it set out to be, a cheap and cheerful local Italian with exceptionally good pizza.

Half a starter and a main course came in at under £10, and one left with the contented feeling that one had eaten lots of genuinely nice food. However, I’m not sure I would recommend it as a date destination on the basis of its slightly unexciting ambience. In spite (or perhaps because) of this, the downstairs room can be hired by a group and it would be excellent for not-too-boisterous socials.

PRICE  £10 a head including starters
IN A WORD  Cheerful

 

5 Minute Tute: The right to die

0

WHY SHOULD WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DIE?

Savulescu’s explanation is threefold. Firstly, because some lives become so painful due to illness that they are no longer worth living. Secondly, humans should have the right to determine our own lives, including how we die. This is a matter of free will and self-determination. Lastly, one of things that matters most to people is how and when they die. The state has no right to compel us to anything, when we are not harming other people, including continuing to live.

WHO OPPOSES CHANGE, AND WHY?

Opposition to change in the law is led by religious groups who subscribe to the sanctity of life at all costs, says Savulescu. He is of the opinion that religious views are being imposed on those who have different, non-religious values. Some view this as a new form of discrimination against the non-religious. The issue is particularly divisive and provocative because it involves killing human beings, including, those who are frail and sick.

WHAT ARE THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST?

Pro-life groups such as the Medical Ethics Alliance affirm the unique value of all human life, its God given dignity as giving rise to a consequent right to protection in law. They argue that all persons are of inestimable worth, irrespective of illness or disability. Furthermore, another fear is that a right to die could lead to pressure on those who are vulnerable, such as the elderly and dependent, to take their own lives to avoid being a burden on others. Savulescu argues however that such anxieties are better addressed by proper legislation than forcing those with terrible lives to live against their will.

IS THERE SUPPORT FOR A RIGHT TO DIE?

Savulescu says he is one of a growing number that believe rational people wish to control the circumstances of the end of their lives. “It is only a matter of time before assisted suicide and euthanasia are permitted, if we are a sane, humanitarian society. It is “playing God” to compel people to live, to deny people the means to end their lives in a dignified and compassionate way. It should and will be that each of us decides for his or her own life how and when we die.” This view was reflected in the 1996 British Social Attitudes Survey which, found that 82% of the public believe people suffering from painful, incurable diseases should have the right to ask their doctors for help to die. Every opinion poll since then has produced similar results. There are a number of groups such as Dignity in Dying who devote themselve to canvassing for a change in the law.

WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH THE LAW?

Dignity in Dying, a group at the forefront of those campaigning for a right to die claim that the current law is uncertain and arbitrary. Changing attitudes and the sensitive nature of the issue mean there is a dicrepancy between what the law says and what the law does. The current law, they say, inflicts a terrible ethical dilemnia on patients, families and doctors resulting in covert euthanasia, mercy killings and premature suicides. Furthemore, an increasing number of UK citizens are travelling to Dignitas, an organisation in Switzerland that helps people to die. About 30 UK citizens have died there. Family members who accompany them can be prosecuted under the Suicide Act 1961. Dignitas has however come under criticism for assisting the suicides of people who are not terminally ill and not mentally competent.

HOW HAS THIS WORKED IN PRACTICE?

In October 2008, MS sufferer Diane Purdy lost a high court case in which her legal team argued the right to respect for her private and personal life, enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, was being breached because of lack of clarity in the law. At the case Lord Justice Scott Baker expressed, “great sympathy for Ms Purdy, her husband and others in a similar position who wish to know in advance whether they will face prosecution for doing what many would regard as something that the law should permit, namely to help a loved one go abroad to end their suffering when they are unable to do it on their own. This would involve a change in the law. The offence of assisted suicide is very widely drawn to cover all manner of different circumstances; only Parliament can change it.”

 

Bagpipe busker silenced by ban

0

Cornmarket’s bagpiping busker is flying back to his native Australia after the council banned him from playing in Oxford City centre.

The bagpiper, Heath Richardson, had breached the rules of his contract by playing for too long at his favourite Cornmarket pitch.

Richardson, 33, who has been busking in Oxford for 14 years, sparked a petition war last year after 400 traders signed a petition to have him expelled from the street. He returned the challenge with his own petition of over 1000 names.

The Council compromised by allowing Richardson to remain, but restricting all buskers to playing for only one hour in one place.

Richardson has protested against the ban, saying, “I was following the rules but the people complaining kept complaining. The council interprets everything I say like its a lie.”

But local traders have expressed their joy at the news that Richardson will be leaving at the end of the month.

One manager of a Cornmarket shop said, “I am very very pleased he is leaving because the noise is so overwhelming and so loud we have to keep the doors closed.

“When the doors are closed, it looks like the shop is closed and so customers don’t come in”, she remarked that while she enjoys listening to other buskers play, he “wasn’t making music, but making noise”.

She added, “he corrupted sales with his incessant noise and gave the shopkeepers horrible headaches.”

On top of this, the manager argued that “the most frustrating thing is that the council won’t regulate it”.

She explains that after Mr. Richardson had his licence revoked, he continued to play and traders were told, on reporting this to the Environmental Health department, that he does not actually need a licence to play and so the department were unable to do anything.

A shop assistant at Moss Bros commented that the bagpipes are “really annoying” as Mr. Richardson would play them “all the time” and continued to say that though his playing has in no way affected customers, he and his colleagues are “happy he’s leaving”.

A spokesman for Oxford City Council, said, “Oxford City Council welcomes most street entertainers and feels they add to the street scene in Oxford. Mr Richardson has had his busking permit revoked as a result of persistent breaches of the voluntary code of practice.”

The Busker’s Code of Practice states that the council must intervene if the busking becomes “intrusive, annoying or disturbing.”

Richardson said it will be a relief to be rid of the Council’s interference, “it’s needless stress and there’s no reason for them to do it.”

Richardson complained that despite the fact that he had told the council he was going home to Australia, they have continued to harrass him.

Richardson also hit out at the new busking restrictions. He said, “They’ve killed off busking in Oxford. They’ve run the buskers out of town.”

Some students have expressed regret that the piper will be leaving. Olivia Wakefield at St. Anne’s college said, “I’m really disappointed, I thought his music was individual and unusual.”

However, students at Jesus College living in college accommodation on Ship Lane had previously complained about the noise made by Richardson’s bagpipe playing, saying that his busking made it impossible for them to work in their rooms.

 

Organ Honesty

0

After nine months of deliberation, the Organ Donation Taskforce recommended to the government this week not to change the law to presume all organs are a donation upon death unless instructed otherwise. Ostensibly, this would seem like an admirable solution to the clear problem concerning organ donation. The lack of donors in the UK is a major issue; we currently have the lowest donor rates per capita within Europe. More than 1,000 people have died in the past year while waiting for a new organ, despite more than one million new donors registering.

The issue of trust has emerged to be at the crux of the debate surrounding presumed consent. Fears abound that the Prime Minister is attempting to nationalise our bodies.

There are also concerns surrounding government’s habit of losing data, particularly given the sensitive nature of donor records. But the primary concern regarding trust lies with doctors and medical officials. The image of doctors wheeling patients off to die in an operating theatre, scalpels at the ready, pertains. This is underlined by the belief that doctors will place a higher value on the life of those patients requiring life-saving organs, rather than fairly distributing their efforts to all of those in need. Although unlikely, the fear that a doctor could defend the life of a potential donor with less passion is a potent argument against any organ donation, but particularly against presumed consent.

The idea that a lack of opposition equals ‘informed consent’ is a key problem with ‘presumed consent’. While organ donation is widely publicised, the socially disadvantaged are less likely to be aware of their rights, and less confident in defending them if their organs are assumed to be a donation. Of greater concern are those who choose to opt out. Would they be a lower priority to receive organs should they need them? While we think of organ donation as morally upstanding, many prefer not to, and should not be judged on this matter of conscience.

The real issue is that we don’t talk about this problem enough. Our families rarely know our wishes and so could not enact them, should they need to. The head of the British Medical Association, a supporter of presumed consent, has highlighted the need to discuss organ donation with friends and family, as education alone has not raised the issue prominently enough. Undoubtedly further publicity, education and openness regarding organ donation will help; presumed consent is not the answer we’re searching for.