Euthanasia, Could you, Would you?

[Mike Oxlong]

I'm in favour. 

 

The right to die should exist alongside the right to life. 

 

I've seen someone suffer with the later stages of MND. 

 

I would not want to suffer in the way that they did, nor make my loved ones suffer watching me die in that way. 

 

A dignified death at the time of one's own choosing should be a basic human right.

[lifted*fox]

As long as you can prove that you are sound of mind in your decision then I think yes, you should be able to choose to die. 

 

I think that if you can go before a small panel of qualified people who agree in the majority that you know exactly what you're doing then it should stop abuse of the system.

 

Obviously can't just be asking your local GP to death-jab your slightly mental but rich mother-in-law at the drop of a hat.

[Strokes]

44 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

As long as you can prove that you are sound of mind in your decision then I think yes, you should be able to choose to die. 

 

I think that if you can go before a small panel of qualified people who agree in the majority that you know exactly what you're doing then it should stop abuse of the system.

 

Obviously can't just be asking your local GP to death-jab your slightly mental but rich mother-in-law at the drop of a hat.

I dont see why it cant be something we prepare for much earlier in life, like a will and testament. Whereby we state our basic intentions and principles and leave the final decision to be left to a specific person, should we no longer have the capacity. All legally drawn up. We are mostly talking about people who are terminal and suffering.

[lifted*fox]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

I dont see why it cant be something we prepare for much earlier in life, like a will and testament. Whereby we state our basic intentions and principles and leave the final decision to be left to a specific person, should we no longer have the capacity. All legally drawn up. We are mostly talking about people who are terminal and suffering.

 

yeah, that seems perfectly reasonable too. might still need a little bit of assessment at the other end though in case circumstances have changed since the original agreement was made and the ill party has been unable to amend. 

[Strokes]

Just now, lifted*fox said:

 

yeah, that seems perfectly reasonable too. might still need a little bit of assessment at the other end though in case circumstances have changed since the original agreement was made and the ill party has been unable to amend. 

True but you could say that at any time in a euthanasia process really, even the one you suggested if the condition deteriorates between consultation and D day.

Its never going to be perfect but people suffer who could be helped because of inaction and that just goes against human nature for me.

Whats worse, occasionly peoples lives (who are terminal) ending a bit earlier than they wished but still peacefully or this continuation of suffering? I know what i would choose.

[lifted*fox]

oh yeah, i'm all for it man - none of us choose to be here and for some it either doesn't work out or ends in suffering.

 

you should be able to choose to go out with dignity and in relative comfort if you want.

 

 

 

[Wymsey]

Life shouldn't make a person feel internal pain.

With diseases that are at the terminal point of no further cure available to improve their health, such as cancer, and is often an excruciating stage - feel it should be legalised, although this should be discussed with their lived ones first, before contacting their health professional advisor about the decision.

[Captain...]

13 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I guess the real problem is it being open to abuse, especially if the person being euthanized was rich and suffering from something like dementia.

 

Or someone uncaring, selfish and lazy, convincing someone else they were a 'burden' when in reality their affliction was little more than an inconvenience for most sufferers.

Most of my knowledge comes from a book, The Universe vs Alex Woods. It is a well researched fictional tale of a young man taking an elderly friend to Switzerland to die. The process is very thorough and it does require you to be of sound state of mind and be physically capable of drinking the poison (for that is how it is done) yourself with no help from anyone else. It can be prepared by a doctor but you must voluntarily drink it yourself.

 

The obvious paradox is that if you are still of sound mind and body then why would you want to kill yourself, but in this case it is a degenerative disease that will leave the old man in a vegetative state.

 

The other thing to consider is that suicide can be a messy business with collateral damage, I saw this yesterday and this thread made me think of it: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/woman-killed-12-year-old-boy-suicide-jump-car-fairfax-county-virginia-a8027211.html

 

There are many suicides that result in emotional and physical pain for innocent bystanders, jumping in front of trains, off motorway bridges etc. I appreciate that most of those are clinically depressed.

[Crinklyfox]

I feel that there has been some blurring of the word 'euthanasia' in this thread.  Euthanasia is the mercy killing of an individual by another.  If a person takes their own life that is suicide.

 

One problem with the legalising of euthanasia is the pressure it can put on the aged and infirm to end their life prematurely so as not to be a burden.  Another problem is the misuse of euthanasia and its potential to become the accepted norm in a society.

 

Many people contemplating suicide do so not because they wish to die but because they wish to end their suffering.  The two may be synonymous but not necessarily so.  A potential suicide can often change their mind when faced with imminent death, that option may not be available to a person who has consented to euthanasia.

 

Personally I would always want the option to end my own life or to have another person do it for me if I were no longer physically capable but to legalise the process may cause more problems than it solves.

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, Crinklyfox said:

I feel that there has been some blurring of the word 'euthanasia' in this thread.  Euthanasia is the mercy killing of an individual by another.  If a person takes their own life that is suicide.

 

One problem with the legalising of euthanasia is the pressure it can put on the aged and infirm to end their life prematurely so as not to be a burden.  Another problem is the misuse of euthanasia and its potential to become the accepted norm in a society.

 

Many people contemplating suicide do so not because they wish to die but because they wish to end their suffering.  The two may be synonymous but not necessarily so.  A potential suicide can often change their mind when faced with imminent death, that option may not be available to a person who has consented to euthanasia.

 

Personally I would always want the option to end my own life or to have another person do it for me if I were no longer physically capable but to legalise the process may cause more problems than it solves.

Good point, I read the original post to be talking about assisted suicide, Euthanasia is a very different thing and one that is much harder to contemplate.

 

My parents have both said that they don't want to end up like my gran did, basically a vegetable in a care home with no quality of life. Should they want to go to Switzerland and die peacefully I would support them, but if the decision was on me to kill them then I don't think I could do that, even allowing a do not resuscitate instruction would be hard. Dignitas and what I think should be available in the UK is the right to assisted suicide. A place where people can go and end their own lives painlessly, but under their own volition. It  seems like a small thing but I found it reassuring to know how it operates and the fact that the patient has to perform the final act themselves. It isn't a doctor or a nurse or a loved one. The assistance is in providing the drink and somewhere comfortable to drink it. The patient drinks it themselves and slips away.

[deep blue]

I'm encouraged that so many on here take the humane view that an individual should be able to opt to have his life ended by painless, clinical means.

 

Surveys consistently show that about 80% of the populace support this view, yet attempts to pass legislation to enable this are repeatedly baulked in Parliament by bodies with their own narrow-minded agendas, who think they should deprive other individuals of the right to decide for themselves.

 

Anyone who feels strongly about this and wishes to see the law change should support the campaign group "Dignity in Dying".  I would not like to see anyone who, at some time in the future, is desperate to avail themselves of a service to end their lives and can only regret that they did not do more to help such a service become available.

[thebartonfox]

I feel very passionately about this, in the right circumstances euthanasia should 100% be allowed.

 

A few years back we lost my Grandad to Alzheimers, and at any point in the final months (but particularly the last week) I would have done anything for him to end his suffering. A man who had lived 79 years with dignity and composure spent the end of his time on this earth unable to move, dribbling, and unable to eat or drink. When he was officially moved to end of life care, his food and water were withdrawn and he slowly starved and dehydrated to death over a period of nearly a week. At the point where he was clearly unaware of what was happening any more or who anyone was, probably around 3 months before he died, he should have been allowed to die in a quick and controlled way with as little pain as possible.

 

If, for example, a dog was unable to move and eat it would be considered cruel to the dog to artificially keep it alive and suffering and, heartbreaking as it is, the humane decision to put the dog to sleep is usually made. Yet for our fellow humans, we continue to pump them full of drugs to keep their body alive, even when their life is clearly over and all they now know is suffering. It's wrong, every life, be it a dog or a person, should be treated with dignity and respect, and not forced to suffer. It seems so screwed up to me that if an animal is suffering with no chance of recovery we humanely end their suffering, but with humans we don't.

 

It shouldn't be a decision taken likely, and I think I only support it in terminal conditions where it is very clear what the ordinary path towards death will be. It shouldn't be forced on anyone, but if a family and the patient (while of sound mind) feel it would be better to not let the person suffer, and not let the family suffer watching, they should be allowed to take control themselves. I know my mum still has vivid nightmares about my Grandad's final week, over 5 years after he died. It's as unfair on the family as it is the patient in many ways.

 

Blimey, this ended up being more of a rant than I expected at 9am!