After 54 years together, they decided to die together...
One of Britain's greatest conductors and his wife ended their lives in a Swiss clinic, watched by their weeping family
PA
Troubled by failing eyesight and hearing, Sir Edward Downes had become dependant on his wife, Joan ? herself diagnosed with terminal cancer
It was, said their family, a very civilised way to die. Sir Edward and Lady Downes, a shared lifetime of personal and professional triumphs behind them, held hands for their final moments together before climbing on to separate beds to drink the clear liquid containing a fatal dose of barbiturates. Within 10 minutes, watched by their weeping family, they were dead.
The decision of one of Britain's greatest conductors and his wife to end their own lives in a manner, time and place of their choosing has reignited the debate over assisted suicide in Britain. Yesterday, as their children were interviewed by Metropolitan Police officers over their role in facilitating their parents' death, the extraordinary finale to the life of Edward, 85, and Joan Downes, 74, began to emerge.
News of their suicide last Friday was released in a statement by their son Caractacus and daughter Boudicca. It said: "After 54 happy years together, they [our parents] 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, with the help of the Swiss organisation Dignitas in Zurich."
The reluctant choice of Britain's finest post-war conductor – who worked his way up from humble beginnings to lead the world's greatest orchestras, a roll-call of achievements which included taking the baton for the first performance at the newly built Sydney Opera House – was made after his wife of 44 years was diagnosed with terminal secondary cancer in the liver and pancreas earlier this year.
In recent times she had become not only his constant companion, accompanying him to dress rehearsals at the beloved Royal Opera – where they met more than half a century ago when she was an aspiring young ballet dancer and he an emerging conductor – but also his full-time carer.
Sir Edward, although not terminally ill, had had to cope with deteriorating eyesight for many years. By the end of his professional life, when he was well in to his eighties, he was forced to conduct only those pieces contained within his prodigious memory. A recent decline in his general condition, following a hip replacement, and for a musician the desperate blow of losing his hearing, had made the prospect of life without Lady Joan untenable. According to her British doctors, the couple had, at best, a few months left together, though Lady Joan might have only lived for a few more pain-racked weeks. Medication worked intermittently and a delay could have meant she would have been too ill to travel, the family said.
Research on the internet led them to contact the controversial Dignitas clinic, where more than 117 Britons have gone to take advantage of Switzerland's liberal laws on assisted suicide. "It was very calm and very civilised," explained Caractacus. "It is a very good way to go and you are under control. When faced with a situation like that, having control over your end is a very important thing, and my parents were very keen on that."
He added: "So while it was shocking when I found out, it seemed a completely reasonable thing to do and we had no trouble supporting what they did. I don't understand why the legal position in this country doesn't allow it."
Son and daughter had persuaded their parents to allow Caractacus to accompany them from their home in Greenwich, south-east London, to Zurich last Tuesday. Boudicca, 39, a UN worker based in Rome, met them there. Only a small group of close friends, one of whom is a solicitor, was privy to the decision. "In the end, they were relieved we were there," said Mr Downes, 41, an IT worker and part-time musician.
Sir Edward had remained active very late in life, still studying for a Russian degree to keep his brain "ticking over", but the ravages of old age were becoming intolerable. "It was frustration upon frustration for him," explained his son.
In order to be allowed to proceed, Sir Edward and Lady Joan had to provide evidence of their conditions and persuade doctors that they were fully aware of and committed to taking their own lives. "They both lived life to the full and considered themselves extremely lucky to have lived such rewarding lives both professionally and personally. Our parents had no religious beliefs and there will be no funeral," the couple's children said.
Those in the world of music in which the Downes – known to all as Ted and Joanie – had been leading figures for some six decades, expressed extreme shock at the sudden announcement of their deaths. Few appeared to know that Lady Joan, who gave up professional dancing to become a choreographer and later a TV producer before spending the final years of her life as Sir Edward's personal assistant, had been ill. Fewer still were aware that Sir Edward was losing his hearing.
His agent Jonathan Groves described their suicides as a "typically brave and courageous decision". He added: "None of us were aware this was going to happen until after they had died. It was very typical of the way [Sir Edward] lived his life. I do not think there is anyone anywhere who has lived his life with more self-determination than Ted did."
Antonio Pappano, music director of the Royal Opera, where Sir Edward spent much of his career first as a horn player, then as a répétiteur and prompter before becoming a conductor, paid tribute to his "overwhelming knowledge". He said: "Ted and Joanie Downes were the loveliest of people and incredibly supportive of my music directorship."
Roger Wright, controller of BBC Radio 3 and director of BBC Proms, said Sir Edward would be remembered for creating "unforgettable" music events over 40 years. "He was a wonderful musician and will be warmly remembered by audiences and musicians alike," he said.
Suicide is no longer a crime in England and Wales, but aiding and abetting a person's self-inflicted death remains a criminal offence, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Attempts to change the law have proved unsuccessful. Lord Falconer's Lords amendment to the Coroners and Justice Bill fell last Tuesday, the same day that Sir Edward and Lady Joan left for Zurich.
Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying, which campaigns for a change in the law, said this latest high-profile case showed there was a need for urgent action. "This problem is clearly not going to go away; we are descending down a slippery slope towards unregulated assisted dying abroad, at a rapid pace," she said.
But for the Downes family, the law had nothing to do with it. "It would not make any difference," insisted Mr Downes. "Even if they arrest us and send us to prison, it would make no difference because it was what our parents wanted."
Dignitas: British deaths
* At 23, injured rugby player Daniel James, became the youngest Briton to be assisted in his suicide. He suffered a collapsed spine in a scrum which left him paralysed from the chest down. He travelled to the Dignitas clinic on 12 September 2008 and died in the presence of his parents.
* Former docker Reg Crew, 74, took his life in January 2003 in front of TV cameras. He had suffered from motor neurone disease for over four years. Before drinking water laced with barbiturates, he told broadcasters that he'd "enjoyed a good innings".
* In 2004 Gordon Hurst's family called for the clinic to be closed. Mr Hurst, 76, of Hitchin, Hertfordshire, had Parkinson's disease. Relatives only heard of his suicide plans through letters that reached them after his death. One finished: "Be happy for me because now I am free of all pain."
The maestro: The life and musical times of Sir Edward Downes
17 June, 1924: Born in Birmingham. He took up the piano and violin aged five.
1952: Joins the Royal Opera to become an assistant to the Czech conductor and composer Rafael Kubelik.
1955: Meets his future wife Joan, a dancer.
1970: Becomes Australian Opera's music director, conducting the first performance at the Sydney Opera House, Prokofiev's War and Peace.
1980: Principal conductor of the BBC Philharmonic.
1983: Chief conductor of the Netherlands Radio Orchestra.
1991: Knighted; becomes associate music director at the Royal Opera.
2005: Final appearance at Royal Opera.
2009: Commits suicide at Dignitas clinic.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited


Comments
I note that the unelected, cult, deluded religious types in the House of 'Lords' helped kill Falconer's Bill.
Leave us alone to make individual decisions.
--a composer and fellow conductor
"Life is precious and we need to see that the sanctity of this gift is upheld in a God fearing society."
I think we are all agreed that life is precious. But the remainder of that sentence - the 'sanctity' and 'gift' and 'God' bits - only has 'meaning' to those who subscribe to your belief in an Invisible Magic Friend (i.e. a god). To those of us who do not, it is utterly devoid of meaningful content, and is merely vacuous liturgical waffle.
"Now there lies the catch, that if we remove God out of our thinking and life we can then do what ever we feel, we cast off restraint and do what is right in our own eyes."
Ah, that old chestnut again - that a life without belief in God must *necessarily* be a life without moral constraint. Pompous, patronizing, delusional rot! There is nothing intrinsically wicked about a 'godless' life; there *is*, however, something intrinsically wicked in the hearts and minds of those people who claim that there is, just so that they can have something to feel morally superior to the rest of humanity about. Have you never stopped to consider how *deeply insulting* non-believers find such an arrogant, arbitrary and sweeping condemnation of their morality, rev_dr_alex? Where is your sense of 'Christian' charity (hahaha - an empty concept), or, indeed, your sense of shame?
"Its not that suicide in itself is wrong, the greater sin is dying without Jesus,"
Once again, you are using liturgical waffle - i.e. 'sin', 'dying without Jesus' - as if non-believers invested these things with the same significance that you do, or cared about them as much. Both are false assumptions, arising out of the apparent complete inability of god-believers like yourself to imagine what it is like to *not* believe in your god. 'Sin' is an abstract concept, about causing offence to a supernatural being that, as far as non-believers are concerned, is just a figment of the - deranged - imagination of believers. Why should we care about offending a non-existent entity? And 'Jesus'? Oh yes, the supposed 'son' of this non-existent entity, who also, in all likelihood, never existed (at least, not as the actual son of an actual deity). Ditto previous remark.
"that means that when you stand before Him he will say I never knew you and then it is too late."
More vacuous liturgical waffle.
"... the good news is that through Jesus Christ Death has Lost its Sting."
Death has no sting, because with it comes the end of all awareness and sensation. Only *dying* can have a sting, and for those suffering from the pain, indignity and debility of a terminal illness, it can be a terrible one to bear.
(cont)
"So what is the alternative -- choose life not death,"
Even if this means choosing pain, indignity and debility? To subject oneself to needless suffering, when the alternative is the release of a peaceful and painless death, is not a sign of spiritual virtue and piety, but of masochism and stupidity.
"...thank Him for healing you, making you whole, then you can go to sleep in peace, there will be those who will be immediately healed and those who are not. "
If your god is all-loving and all-powerful, why must people die before he 'heals' them? And if he can heal them while they are alive, why doesn't he? And no, sorry to disabuse you of your delusion - there is *absolutely no convincing medical evidence whatsoever* that anyone has ever been healed by your god. If you doctorate is in medicine, then you should know that. Of course, it's probably in theology, isn't it - the most worthless and pointless academic qualification imaginable; a PhD in flower-arranging would have more value to the human race.
"I personally have seen God heal hopeless cases..."
Then where was your loving, healing god when Sir Edward was losing his eyesight? Or did he want him to go blind?
And where was your loving, healing god when Sir Edward was losing his hearing? Or did he want him to go deaf?
And where was your loving, healing god when Lady Downes developed terminal cancer? Or did he want her to suffer in terrible pain?
If I may borrow from Epicurus (his original had 'evil' in place of 'suffering', but the logic is still irrefutable):
Is God willing to prevent suffering, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh suffering?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
Why indeed, rev_dr_alex? Why do you worship such a worthless entity, when he is either callous or incompetent, or both? Perhaps it is because he reflects your own callous insensitivity to the suffering of others, which you have amply demonstrated by posting your sanctimonious witterings to this thread, showing pious disdain for the bravery of Sir Edward and Lady Downse in choosing to end their lives with dignity.
Shame on you, your silly religion and your infernal Church!
Save you vacuous blatherings for your church magazine in future.
Of course it is possible to suffer an illness with 'dignity', meaning to suffer it with courage, patience and a determination to conceal one's suffering from loved one's in order to avoid distressing them. But sometimes the nature of the illness, and the suffering that it inflicts, mean that this is simply not possible - as many people who have watched a friend or relative dying of a painful, debilitating illness will tell you; conditions such as dementia or cancer have a terrible capacity to rob people of their dignity, reducing them to the helplessness of newborn babies who are utterly dependent on others for their feeding, washing, mobility and toilet needs.
And to accidentally confuse, or deliberately conflate, *voluntary* euthanasia - as pertains in this case - with the Nazi's *involuntary" euthanasia - i.e. cold-blooded murder - of the mentally and physically infirm is either incredibly crass and fatuous, or, if knowing and deliberate, a quite shameful and deceitful attempt to smeer a compassionate and humane medical procedure with the stigma of Nazie eugenics. Either way, you really should know better (though I would be completely unsurprised if you do not, sadly).
And it really is quite pointless introducing yet more vacuous liturgical waffle - 'Life Eternal', 'God is merciful' (merciful? - see above remarks on your 'merciful' god) - because none of it is supported by factual evidence or logic, and the only people who understand you (or think they do) and share your metaphysical concerns are people who also share your religious beliefs, and I'm afraid that means they are equally deluded and irrational in their thinking, and so have nothing to contribute to this debate that will be of any value or relevance to non-believers.
As I said to rev_dr_alex, you should save such theological witterings for your church magazine; this is neither the place nor the audience for them.
So atheism equals communism for you, does it? What a strange, simple-minded, black-and-white world you live in.
For you information, I am not a communist, a socialist, a conservative, a fascist, a Green, a liberal democrat or any other political denomination. I do not ally myself with any political ideology because I can think for myself and make up my own mind about things - apparently, as a god-botherer, you cannot.
"pointing that this is neither the place nor the audience for them - BECAUSE THE NAME OF THIS PAPER IS "INDEPENDENT" - have you ever asked yourselve - independant from whom?"
Idiot. I meant that *this thread*, on *this topic*, is not the right place or audience for you or your god-bothering friends to seize yet another opportunity to parade your fatuous, delusional piety in front of us and lecture to us about the supposed moral implications of assisted suicide (as if you knew anything about morality to begin with, other than what a 3,000 year old book of myths tells you). Hijacking this thread, given that it concerns a story of deeply personal tragedy for all those involved, just so that you can - once again - bang your drum for you precious superstitious beliefs, is quite staggeringly insensitive and crass. Why don't you just come right and say that you think Sir Edward and Lady Downes have committed an unforgivable 'sin' by taking their own lives (or maybe just by being atheist in the first place), and they are therefore going to burn in Hell for all eternity? Because that what your smug, sanctimonious preaching always boils down to, isn't it? If you believe in God and choose to endure the suffering of a painful, debilitating terminal illness, you're a good and virtuous person, and will go to Heaven; but if you don't believe in God, and choose to end your suffering by taking your own life, then you're a wicked and immoral person, and will go to Hell. That's your message, isn't it?
People like you make me sick; you are constantly demanding that everyone should respect your religious beliefs, but you never reciprocate by respecting the beliefs of the non-religious, do you? Well, I'm sorry , but neither you nor your silly, stupid, ignorant, superstitious twaddle are worthy of any respect at all.
"...It is rediculous also to read your "theological" ignorance - as if you never read the Bible and don't know what Christianity says about WHY we, extradicted from the Paradise because of Adam and Eva sin (whatever literally or abstractly you may understand it), so WHY we expirience all those sufferings which are not a trap masterminded for us by the God, but natural way of wild nature lives and suffers and dies in contrast to what the mankind in the persons of Adam and Eva rejected in the Paradise..Those images are ABC - any child have always known it - looks like not anymore..."
More vacuous litrugical gibberish. Get this through your thick head, god-botherer - *we don't care* what your precious Bible says about 'why' we suffer in this life; its absurdly convoluted and illogical 'explanations' involving *mythical people* - Adam and Eve - and a *mythical supernatural being* - God - are just *childish fairy tales* from mankind's primitive and ignorant past; they explain *nothing*, they mean *nothing*, and they have no relevance whatsoever to the topic of this thread or to anything else that should concern intelligent, rational, educated people living in the 21st century - a section of humanity from which all god-botherers have wilfully excluded themselves.
You need to *grow up*, intellectually and emotionally, throw away your Bible, abandon your silly superstition and start living in the *real world*!
There is nothing wrong with being old (I am) but to be chronically or terminally ill and continue living for the sake of some unproven theory that there is life after death and unless the suffer continues suffering is an absurdity. When a person loses control over his or her faculties and bodily functions, life is no longer worth having. I am a baptised, confirmed, and ordained person and fully support the individual's right to determine the destiny of his or her body and its functions and life itself.
Whereas you are already dead, rex123 - you are dead in the *head*; it's a miracle (praise the Lord!) that the residual nervous activity in your spinal chord is sufficient for you to be able to type your god-bothering gibberish on this thread. But that must nevertheless be the case, because your posts certainly weren't written by anyone with a functioning cerebrum.
" so do watever you want but don't incite others here to follow you..."
Oh no, relentless proselytizing is the right of the religious alone, isn't it? Only god-botherers are allowed to incite others to follow them, eh?
Anencaphalic prat!
I definitely am not "gona [that word actually refers to my testicles, I assume you meant "going to"] die forever" as there is no "forever" and death is ultimately within an instant. What is "die natural way"--a bullet or bomb in a war? and explosion of a furnace or other device in a home? a knifing in a dark alley?--there is no "natural way" of dying--just the reality of death regardless of how it comes.
A good grammar book would help your compositions. And look, also, at a few sources on spelling. Otherwise, I wish you well, and if you would prefer the unscientific concepts of theology, that is your choice. But all tyrants from Mussolini to Hitler to Bush to Blair called on their phantom gods to justify their attrocities and like the Taliban (a word that means "theological student") they offer the "reward" of an afterlife--much like Pope Innocent III did at Claremont in 1095 when he had the assembled warriors scream "Deus veulte"--so similar to Hitler's "Gott mit unus" and Bush/Blair's "god is on our side."
Having clinically died once (for five minutes) I can assure you there is no bright light, no singing naked angels, no harps, nothing--just black. I have no fear of death, for it is part of the evolution of all things until the time comes for our solar system to explode and be absorbed in a dark black hole.
You are also a racist as I see...I am not surprised.
No god is necessary as all gods past and present have done more harm to mortals and freedom than all the tyrants that led nations into battle in the name of these gods and goddesses.
Can any one of the regligious types out there answer me this question: Is the refusal to continue with medical treatment suicide ? God gave us the ability to provide this medical treatment so the refusal of a God give treatment surely goes against his wishes and so is a sin right or wrong ?
Hear hear!
That is your opinion, and you are - unfortunately - entitled to declare it. By the same token, non-believers are entitled to tell you that they don't give a fig for your opinion - based as it is on ancient mythology and primitive superstition, as opposed to evidence, logic and objective reality - and that you are a deluded fool for holding it.
You are also entitled to suggest (as you clearly do) that your faith makes you a better, more moral and more virtuous person than those who do not share it, however delusional that belief is. And non-believers are entitled to give you a verbal lynching for your arrogance and conceit.
"Nobody can force anybody to believe in God,"
Not any more, thanks goodness. But let's not forget that there was a time when atheism, heresy, blasphemy and apostasy were punishable by imprisonment, torture or death (and in some cultures - e.g. in some Islamic countries - they still are).
"but I think you have the right to be reminded about dangers of commiting a suicide from a religious prospective...."
But your religion is delusional nonsense, and so its 'perspective' is worthless.
"Thank you also for calling me an IDIOT "
You're welcome. It was in response to your - thinly disguised - assertion that non-believers are immoral, and that assisted suicide is a 'sin' in the eyes of your (imaginary) god, and therefore a wicked and evil thing. Both assertions are clearly idiotic, and just I called a spade a spade. You can always rely on *rationalist* to speak the *truth* when he sees it, becuase we are as devoted to the truth as you are to your god. :o)
"- since I am Russian, I understand this word as it is interpreted in the famous novel by Dostoyevsky - "Idiot" - the main charackter of it -prince Mishkin is probably one of the most attractive herous in Russian literature and yes, he is the most famous Idiot I ever heard about. "
This is the second time you have made reference to your country of origin. What possible relevance does it have to this debate? And I assure you that my use of the term 'idiot' was not an attempt at some clever literary allusion to an 'attractive hero' of 19th century Russian fiction; it was not meant to be complimentary...
"I think you should read more of Russian classics from the 19 century - it will improve your attitude to Christianity (once even Bible doesn't help) - all is translated in your language and avalable."
And you should read more *scientific writing* from 20th and 21st centuries; it might - just possibly - increase your understanding and appreciation of the world around you, and help you to see the extraordinary power of human rationality - a gift which you squander so shamelessly with your tragic devotion to ancient myth and supersition. It might even lead you to realize that science - with its rational, scientific worldview - is the greatest cultural and intellectual achievement of mankind, and the polar opposite of religion, which, when stripped of all its flowery liturgy, psuedointellectual theology and devotional ritual, is nothing but a testament to the ignorance and stupidty of our primitive ancestors.
Oh and by the way you said and I quote 'but since your partner is a believer and so you are not so hateful to religion as some others here', it is terribly presumptuous that you consider anyone that questions religion is hateful. As someone who tries to live by moral values, I try not to hate anyone or anything regardless of differences in opinion. Please don't patronise me and say I am 'not yet lost forever' I am VERY happy with my views and don't yearn for the day that God/Jesus finds me and redeems me for life eternal, I do not need his help to find some point in my own, the worlds and the universes existance. If you wish to support yourself emotionally and spiritually by a belief in a mystical diety that is your decision, please do not try and convert me, please do not try and educate me and finally PLEASE do not look down your morally superior nose at me.
Who told you I think I am superior then you in moral aspect? - I am a sinner and I am afraid I am more sinner then majority of Christians...Patronising you? - OK, excuse me...but I would like frankly some more people in my life try to patronise me in a way that wishing me smth. good and giving a hand of help, sometimes I want to be patronised, but people just don't care...interesting how different we are...Your pointing that the church persicuted unbelivers in the past and blaming contemporary church for it is the same as me saying that those were hunam beings who persicuted and once you yourself is also a human being - you are guilty of those persicutions - absurdity...As for your question why The God of Christians, Jews and Muslims is real and pagan beliefs about Moon is a Dragon are false - try to understand that if the God is ALMIGHTY and LOVING it means that there is only one GOD (I hope there is no need to explain why ALMIGHTY can be only ONE? and if he is LOVING there is no need to explain that He wants for us eternal life in love) - you may call him different names but it doesn't change his main charackteristics - while analising religious texts in unknown language you'll realise wether it is about the God or it is just pagan beliefs in spirits or smth. like that - both you and me we don't speak lets say swahili, and we don't know what's the swahili for the God, but if smbdy will translate the text for us - we will understand wether word "mungu"(swahili for "god") is used regarding the God of Christians, Muslims and Jews, or about local pagan deety. I think you don't want me to retell hear the Bible and volumes of Christian literature - you asked why do I think my (Biblical) God is superior - I think I explain it as far as it is possible in such a place as this thread - thank you for reading.