Is assisted suicide right???
 

Quite a deep one, it seem to be in the news quite abit recently, iv just been reading on sky news about a 59 year old man Craig Ewart, who had suffered with motor neurone disease, and traveled to Switzerland to a private clinic to end his life. My personal view is mixed about this, theres is pros and cons. What is your views on this??

If I wanted to top myself, I can't see why others around me should be punished because of it.

Obviously I still think people involved should be investigated. As to ensure that the person committing suicide is not doing it under duress or because people around them think they should die.

I think if the law was changed to allow assisted suicide (or at least to allow it to happen in a country that performs these tasks). Then I believe the authorities should be informed in advance so they can evaluated and investigate in advance that the decision is solely made by the person who wants to die, and he is not being pressured into making that decision, and also to give counseling and advice to ensure that is what they really want to do.

If theyre still "all there" in the head and they make their own decision then fine. Why should anyone else decides whether they live or die?

if i wanted to end my life due to an illness or i could no longer cope with life, no law or government is going to stop me. I will live by the rules of this country but if/when i become a burden to my family or no longer enjoy life because i'm too frail it is my decision to end it. End Of.

I think when it comes down to you yourself, most people will say yes its your own choice .. ask them if someone else should have that choice and this is when the argument's start.

I would say if a doctor can give someone a clean bill of mental health, or the complete opposite, no chance of enjoying life again, then yes they should be able (as with animals) to be helped to die painlessly.

I think every hospital should have a 'board of euthanasia' where a case is presented by the persons doctor for consideration. If the person is terminal and reaching or passed the point where they have a reasonable quality of life and have requested to bring the end sooner then the case should be heard and a decision made. There would have to be some laws implemented and changed to cover things like insurances and financial matters, for example if a life insurance policy is in effect then a reasonable prognosis to evaluate how many more payments would/could have been made before natural death and that amount deducted from the settlement. They would have had to pay anyway, this might just mean it's sooner than expected.

As long as all people involved are made aware of the decision, and it is made for the correct reasons (as said above: terminal decline in its various guises) I can't see why it should be punishable.

I'd rather say goodbye to a loved one when they're still aware enough to know than watch someone fade, and end up wishing the suffering would end

I met a girl I knew from school a few years after leaving and she was then a nurse. She was in a right state that night as she'd been the one to turn off a life support machine for a patient earlier in the day. The conversation we had did cement my opinion regarding the difference between 'being alive' and 'living'.

Her act that day caused the man to 'die', but she allowed the family to start the grieving process which had been put on hold while the person lingered. The key word here is 'lingered', the man wasn't alive... there was no hope, the body was just being kept warm by the machine.

This is my view, if you chose it, it should be available to those that chose it. No question. No going back (Obviously).

As long as there is a proven terminal medical condition and quality of life is deteriorating. Otherwise you'd get depressed drunks and jilted lovers queuing up for the injection.

Every case needs to be taken on an individual basis obviously but none of the recent high profile cases could ever be deemed to be wrong.

What really gets me are these religious and pro life types who say how it should not be allowed under any circumstances. Who the hell are they to tell other people what they can and can not do. They really do deserve a bloody wake up call and get told to mind their own god damn business.

Legalised suicide would eventually lead to compulsory euthanasia.

Les

absolute rubbish, but i like your thinking, have you ever thought of running for government?;)

yes IMO

if somebody wants to die then they should be allowed to die with a bit of dignity, i read about this TV show in the paper and have nothing but respect for the bloke who did not want to be trapped in his "human tomb"

Somehow I look at your analogy and see it the wrong way round although we are both in agreeance. The man was technically alive but certainly not living. Existing is the term I use to describe this unfortunate type of life.

We have the right to live, but not the right to death........weird if you ask me.
Perhaps they should set up suicide booths which is kinda like a mini gas chamber.
At least the railways wouldn't get so many bodies holding them up.

This is what I posted a while back on another thread. I've not changed my mind.

Horrible situation, won't comment on the specifics as I don't know enough about the case.

I do believe that each of us has the right to choose what we would regard as a minimum acceptable quality of life and that our wishes should be respected if -god forbid- it ever gets to that stage. So, I certainly can't condemn euthanasia. BUT you'd have to be very myopic not to see the dangers associated with legalising it.

We may find it utterly distasteful, but there are individuals who would request that someone be allowed to die for reasons nothing whatsoever to do with a genuine concern for the well being of the poor soul concerned. There are also issues associated with informed consent etc...

I think this needs to be dealt with on a case by case basis, which is one good thing that occurs as a result of the law standing as it currently does. However, the problem is that this kind of discussion too often occurs on an adhoc basis after the event. This raises the question of whether it is fair to criminalise the loved ones of someone who is terminally ill, with no prospects of recovery and whose quality of life has diminished to the point where they have made a rational decision to want to die with dignity?

Personally I don't think to assist in a suicide should invariably be a crime (so in that respect, I'd argue for a change in the law), but I do think that whether euthanasia is to be an option should be decided by on a case by case basis within the legal system with the appropriate medical professionals BEFORE any action is not taken. It's not something that should have to be argued after the event when it's all too late.

Ns04

It only seem write to me for people who are terminally ill to decide they go, when my father RIP was dieing of cancer he went through some awful pain, luckily it was only for a short time, I'd hate to think what it must be like for people who suffer it for longer. As mentioned before, if there was a proper procedure in place with the correct professional people to asses mental capacity etc at the time, people appointed by the patient, then why not?

Personally I think its very wrong that peoples naive opinions means other people have to suffer pain and humiliation before dieing, if someone is going to die eventually anyway what write do others have to make them suffer.

If I was terminally ill and in either great pain or trapped inside a lifeless body, then I would like the option of terminating my life.

I don't want some Civil/human rights activist insisting I live the rest of my life in excruciating pain. Who are they to decide if I want to die or not? We put down animals in pain, so why not humans?

If someone wants terminate their life due to illness, then so be it. Good on them. They have my support, as one day it might be me.

It's the same lunatics that want everything they don't like banned.

Tobacco
Cars
Lads mags
Porn
Alcohol

etc etc.

Les,

With respect, I can't see the link to the extreme of compulsory euthanasia. Possibly like the arguement that one canabis joint will have you hooked on crack cocaine?

It is a tricky subject. Having seen my grandmother spiral painfully downwards over 3 years with alzheimer's disease I thought I would be all for legalised assisted suicide but what would be the case say, if a year after an assisted suicide a cure was discovered?

I only know that I would rather go on my own terms when I'm ready.

If your pet is suffering the "most humane" thing to do is have it put down (kill it). Therefore it seems odd that the most humane thing to do for a human is to let them continue to suffer.
If a person reaches the stage of terminal illness where the suffering is unbearable then they should have the right to assisted suicide.

Yep and if you're not humane to animals you can got to....jail:wonder: ...wait a minuet:wonder: ...so if you allow an animal to suffer you can go to jail, yet if you want to help end the suffering of a family member, you can go to jail:wonder: ....bit fecked up that....:freak3:

better choice of word :) thanks.

Had to have one oy my cats put to sleep a couple of weeks ago - Diabetes finally got the better of him. Vet said he could probably keep him going for a couple of days but prognosis was very poor.

Best thing we could do for the poor little sod.

At the same time one of my Pals had to watch her Dad die in hospital in Agony and gasping for breath wondering wtf was happening to him.

I was happy I didn't have to let Will suffer and I hope my Mum / Dad go under a bus when their time's up cos I can't put them out of their misery !

I have never understood why we don't allow suicide for the terminally Ill and never will.

ps My Brother also died of cancer - And that wasn't much fun either !

For those who wish to end their life due to a terminal/debilitating illness/injury it is right (very aggressive terminal cancer, parkinsons, maybe altzheimers. paralysis that kind of thing).

Ask yourself this. Say worst case scenario you were out driving the scoob, crashed into by a drink driver, you were left paralysed form the neck down, had to rely on your wife/carer for everything, had to crap into a bag/nappy, have to be spoon fed. Your children cry every time they see you.

Before the accident you were a healthy, happy, life living soul.

Would you like the option to end your own life saving a little dignity and self respect with those who love you and you love back around you. Do you think you, and your family should be at risk of prosecution because of that choice??

I don't think suicide/euthanasia is right in every case and if Laws were to change regulation would be the toughest thing to regulate against abuse of over eager kids looking to cash in on inheritances. Part of the reason I think the current law kind of works (over 100 assisted suicides in the last year or 2, not 1 prosecution)

Those who makes the laws never think of the suffering involved for the families it affects and I hope they never do. But they should also never judge those who take the toughest decision of their lives, one that leads to the end of it.

Day by day I have less and less use of my body. Over the last few years I have gone from being a fit and active fellow to being a wheelchair bound lump. I have 2 children the youngest of whom is 4 and I have never been able to lift him up let alone kick a ball with him. I need assistance with every aspect of my life. The more time that passes the more I become less of a person and more a sack of entrails. Even now I know that I will choose death at some point in the future. It will be my choice, why should anyone be punished for assisting my will.

I feel that the decision to seek assistance needs to be approved by an independent party, the patient's GP being an obvious choice.

For people under say 50 then two parties must approve.

With such approval granted then the patient can call upon who he/she wishes and no one will fear prosecution.

Clearly there would need to be rapid appeal procedures in place if there is disagreement. dl

===========

Magepaster. So sorry to read your sombre post but many thanks for contributing. david

Sheeesh man, leave the cr4pping into a bag for those that have been unfortunate to have some form of bowel problem. A colostomy bag isn't required directly from becoming a tetraplegic. :D

If I remember reading your post some time ago didn't you mention you had a bad back?

A little more than a bad back at the time but I see your point.:D
I spent a little time during my illness trying to convince myself and others everything was going to be fine - or at least be constant. Since then things have moved rapidly and I am reduced to using voice control to use my PC when having to post text. I have no use left in my legs and limited neck and arm movement. This too will diminish to nothing. I have a beautiful and loving family that face an ugly future caring for me. I am not willing to let that caring become a chore.