This message came from a member of “Very Much Alive” about the Panorama programme on Diane Pretty on 12^th May 2002.

I had a busy weekend, enjoying myself (in my beloved wheelchair!) in the sun, with friends, on a canal viaduct over a river.  I taped Panorama.  Watching it yesterday I was absolutely horrified by the absolute (to me contrived) negativity in their portrayal of Diane Pretty's life.  Typical.  It is so easy for camera crews to make us look like sad, pathetic, suffering disabled individuals, and to reinforce the frightening view that it is not worth living unless you can run around in perfect health.

I was dumbfounded in fact.  Angered / frustrated.  I had to wait till today till I was calm enough to write:

This is the message the member sent to Panorama: (the email address is panorama@bbc.co.uk if you want to add your thoughts)

Dear Panorama,

Regarding BBC1's Panorama this Sunday (12/5) at 10-15 pm on Diane Pretty:

Points I feel able to comment on (as I feel they are within my experience).

The exaggeration of the problem of being doubly incontinent; in the disgusted words of her mother "she can't pee herself or mess herself"... I too am doubly incontinent and paralysed. I have an organised daily bowel routine and have had bladder bypass surgery that makes life perfectly manageable and stable as regards to toilet. My dignity is observed, and though the procedure was initially embarrassing, it is now just routine and a small part of everyday life.

Waking nights. I have to be turned after 5-6 hours of sleep, and sometimes am disturbed by needing to empty my bladder. Still, turning side to side with leg raised on a pillow gives me a reasonably comfortable sleeping position. How Diane was ever supposed to rest sitting in a reclining chair all night with the TV on, I do not know... This aspect was also painted in a bleak light which is totally false and exaggerated by my experience.

Constant pain is manageable. Bladders are dampened and spasms relaxed by anti-spasmodic drugs that I have taken continuously since leaving a spinal injuries unit. The background 'root' pain of paralysis is perfectly bearable and more often than not does not affect day to day function. If you allow yourself to dwell on it it can be a problem, but there are so many ways to distract one’s mind and thereby detract from pain: music, Internet, reading, film, to name some. You portrayed a quality of life that I KNOW could have easily been improved.

The painting of terrible pressure on Diane's ever suffering martyr of a husband. Surely Diane would qualify for funding for carers like me, to remove the burden from her family, and to enable her to manage her own care package. She seemed perfectly able to direct him in her care needs and the care in the community packages are readily available to structure your life positively with the aid of personal care assistants.

I cannot comment on the inability to communicate Diane suffered, although she seemed pretty quick with her speech machine - I was bemused by her eagerness to tell the court to 'f' itself'. I feel the court’s decision was 100% the right one, for the protection of us more vulnerable individuals of all disabilities.  No-one else should judge the quality of life of another.

If they changed the law people could feel obliged to kill themselves to not be a burden on others. Depression could lead to many individuals opting out when they are down when all they need is more support.

As a disabled individual I get extremely upset by the whole issue and followed Diane's case in real fear of a different outcome.

The woman was a contradiction, fearing death from respiratory breakdown yet smoking till the last - wanting to die but not by natural means, her choices to prolong her life by taking antibiotics and keeping her feeding tube in place were odd. She only wanted to die by another’s hand, it seems to me.

Death is not pleasant for anyone, but we should meet our maker when our time comes. I'm sure her death was as peaceful as it could be in the care of the hospice and expect it was more pleasant than most. I was relieved her death came swiftly after her case was turned down as I believe her vigorous campaign for euthanasia was an horrific catalyst. Her obvious anger at her situation and misuse of failing energies were misspent - trying to change the law in her last months when she could have been improving her situation for the better.

Your reporting was unbelievably sad, and not at all contrasted with someone else in Diane's state who DOESN'T want to die.  I have joined the group called “Very Much Alive” because of this propaganda VES is propagating.

We really want the right to live. Please respect us.

Yours,