UBB.classicTM 6.5.0
quote:I have plenty of sympathy with her. I would very much like to choose when and how to go - and, in her circumstances, would be more than happy to pop off to Dignitas to do so.
" Anne, of Sussex, had suffered with heart and lung disease in recent years and was concerned her condition could worsen, leaving her in a nursing home or enduring a lengthy hospital stay.
In her request to the clinic she said her lack of energy and declining health left her with “a life with no enviable future.”
![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
quote:I suspect that this weighed more heavily on her mind as she contemplated suicide than her failure to grasp the internet. Lots of people in this country manage to live without computer wizardry.
As she grew older, her health became increasingly poor and she suffered from heart and lung disease.
She described a recent 11-day stint in hospital as ‘unadulterated hell’ and lived in fear of ending up in a nursing home.
quote:Yes, but bringing a third party into it considerably changes the moral dynamic.
Originally posted by Caissa:
The last of the freedoms you can exercise is when to end your life on your terms.
quote:I see this as the problem. I suspect that killing people who ask to be killed has some sort of effect on the one who kills.
Originally posted by Stetson:
Yes, but bringing a third party into it considerably changes the moral dynamic.
quote:My mother was in that situation. For a couple of months she refused to eat more than a slice of bread every couple of days and constantly told us "I want to die". She's still alive two years later. I'd say she has been terrified for every minute of it despite and the experience has been the most awful imaginable for my stepfather who's stayed with her every day. He's watched her being incontinent, trying to drag herself out of bed, trying to hit and bite care staff, fighting and screaming when the staff come to clean her or feed her.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
How does all this sound to an elderly person in declining health about to go into hospital or care home? Will it be unadulterated hell? (no, it is the duty of the staff to ensure comfort, dignity, pain relief if required and meaningful activity to the limits possible). On the other hand, we can just all give IP and put the old dears to sleep, they're too much trouble and expense and they'll be so much happier dead.
quote:Yeah, and I'll even say that if you wanna go out and get yourself a copy of Final Exit and read up on some methodologies, it's your inalienable right to do so, as long as the methodolgies are self-admninistered.
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:I see this as the problem. I suspect that killing people who ask to be killed has some sort of effect on the one who kills.
Originally posted by Stetson:
Yes, but bringing a third party into it considerably changes the moral dynamic.
Unless someone is completely paralyzed, they can kill themselves. I have no problem with giving a suicidal person the means to kill themselves, but they should be the ones to do it.
Moo
quote:One of the downsides of not having such a facility in the UK is that UK residents who wish to take this route must do so whilst they are able to undertake the rigours of international travel. Were it possible to take a simple road journey to the final destination it would not be necessary to seek closure as early in one's decline as the fear of being too ill to reach Switzerland imposes.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
She was able to sightsee in Zurich with her niece a day or so before being killed. This does not sound like someone whose health was so poor that death was to be welcomed. I'm glad that assisted suicide is still illegal I'm the UK.
quote:What, by kiling old people?
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:My mother was in that situation. For a couple of months she refused to eat more than a slice of bread every couple of days and constantly told us "I want to die". She's still alive two years later. I'd say she has been terrified for every minute of it despite and the experience has been the most awful imaginable for my stepfather who's stayed with her every day. He's watched her being incontinent, trying to drag herself out of bed, trying to hit and bite care staff, fighting and screaming when the staff come to clean her or feed her.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
How does all this sound to an elderly person in declining health about to go into hospital or care home? Will it be unadulterated hell? (no, it is the duty of the staff to ensure comfort, dignity, pain relief if required and meaningful activity to the limits possible). On the other hand, we can just all give IP and put the old dears to sleep, they're too much trouble and expense and they'll be so much happier dead.
In the earlier stages, when she could talk, he had to put up with her telling him she had never loved him, that he had betrayed her, he disgusted her, he was pathetic. I got similar treatment: what an awful son I'd been, how I'd betrayed her etc - but at least I could go home to a loving wife.
I don't know what experience Tulfes has had of watching someone he/she loves turn into a vegetable, screaming and moaning incessantly, knowing there will be no remission, no respite, just continual decline.
I wouldn't put anyone though the experience of watching it happen to me. There are young people out there suffering because of NHS shortages and overload. I've had a good life, and when it stops being good I'd like not to divert medical resources from people with a life ahead of them. I can't think of a more desirable legacy than to make a better life possible for someone.
quote:No, by allowing those of us who, in some situations, value the lives of others more than the continuation of our own, to choose the time and manner of our own death.
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
What, by kiling old people?
quote:Good for her! What an excellent way to go - spend a happy day with your family then go to sleep holding their hands.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
She was able to sightsee in Zurich with her niece for a day or so.
quote:My Dad died six years ago. We were all with him. It was an awful death. The nurses kept trying to feed him and hydrate him. He drowned in his own fluids over 24 hours - they were so ignorant of the last stages of life it was simply appalling.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
How does all this sound to an elderly person in declining health about to go into hospital or care home? Will it be unadulterated hell? (no, it is the duty of the staff to ensure comfort, dignity, pain relief if required and meaningful activity to the limits possible).
quote:There is much concentrated wisdom in the first of those links especially, Boogie. I'd recommend anyone to read it.
...Here is an excellent article about the last stages of life, here is another.
Knowing what I know about this country and its need to prolong life for no reason whatsoever (except fear of death, which is a natural but unnecessary fear imo)I will be chosing the time and manner of mine - in many years to come, hopefully! It is hard for many healthy people to accept that a chronically or terminally ill person might choose to die rather than continue life, but it should be their right - absolutely imo.
quote:The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped. The reason they went to Switzerland was to have the illusion that what they were doing was OK because it's legal there.
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
[One of the downsides of not having such a facility in the UK is that UK residents who wish to take this route must do so whilst they are able to undertake the rigours of international travel. Were it possible to take a simple road journey to the final destination it would not be necessary to seek closure as early in one's decline as the fear of being too ill to reach Switzerland imposes.
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:In practice, the Belgian law is for those who are legally minors but have an adult mental capacity - basically teenagers, and only for those who are seriously terminally ill and in constant pain. It does seem unfair to expect a minor to put up with such suffering, but allow an adult a way out. Thorough counselling is provided to make sure the person in question has thought it through properly - no 10yo on a whim will be allowed to end their life.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped. The reason they went to Switzerland was to have the illusion that what they were doing was OK because it's legal there.
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
[One of the downsides of not having such a facility in the UK is that UK residents who wish to take this route must do so whilst they are able to undertake the rigours of international travel. Were it possible to take a simple road journey to the final destination it would not be necessary to seek closure as early in one's decline as the fear of being too ill to reach Switzerland imposes.
This is a slippery slope, not in theory but in practice. Already Belgium now allows euthanizing children. So we've gone from "ending the life of the suffering old dear, she's put up with enough" to 10 year olds now as well. How a child is capable of rationally deciding he or she wishes to die is beyond me, let alone that they are not being influenced by parental pressure in the direction of euthanasia. Many doctors in Belgium protested this law, so the health community is not in support of it either.
I heard a radio program about Hungary, which has a high suicide rate, and someone mentioned that older people feel obliged to kill themselves so as not to become a burden to their families. Make assisted suicide legal here and I can assure you many older and ill people will be victimized by family pressure. And that will put doctors who work in such facilities in such a terrible moral position that frankly we should not even consider legalizing it for one second.
Article on "Anne" in OP
quote:Absolutely!
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:Yes - having a comfortable death rather than a protracted, painful and undignified deterioration is the whole point of Dignitas.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
quote:Nonsense.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Teenagers with an adult mental capacity? At 13? At 15? At 16? When? Who decides? Surely it would be better to put them to sleep before the age of reason, say at 3,4 or 5, to save them mental distress of choosing their own death? After all, they are a burden and won't get better.
quote:There's already a process in the UK whereby a teenager can be declared competent to decide on their own medical treatment despite not being an adult.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Teenagers with an adult mental capacity? At 13? At 15? At 16? When? Who decides?
quote:Well yes, dying in pain is such a great thing, isn't it?
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:They cannot lawfully consent to sexual intercourse until 16. But they could be deemed capable of consenting to being killed? Also, deciding on one's medical treatment in conjunction with a doctor subject to the law and the hypocratic oath is not the same as choosing to be killed.
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:There's already a process in the UK whereby a teenager can be declared competent to decide on their own medical treatment despite not being an adult.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Teenagers with an adult mental capacity? At 13? At 15? At 16? When? Who decides?
quote:No-one is making any such suggestion. Why not stick to the facts, that in some cases, in Belgium, teenagers with incurable, terminal conditions that render them in constant pain can seek to end their lives slightly earlier than they would otherwise end? Your final sentence is absolutely risible; it's some kind of amalgam of Godwin's Law, Straw Manning and breaking that commandment about not bearing false witness.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Teenagers with an adult mental capacity? At 13? At 15? At 16? When? Who decides? Surely it would be better to put them to sleep before the age of reason, say at 3,4 or 5, to save them mental distress of choosing their own death? After all, they are a burden and won't get better. Before long, we'll be putting to death children of third generation unemployed. No chance that they will ever work or contribute.
quote:Why is it not technically accurate?
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You use "being killed", which, whilst not technically accurate, is an interesting choice of words. It's not for example the form of words that those seeking the services of Dignitas would be inclined to use. Why is that, do you think?
quote:But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:Well yes, dying in pain is such a great thing, isn't it?
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:Remove the "not". Typo
Originally posted by Tulfes:
quote:Why is it not technically accurate?
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You use "being killed", which, whilst not technically accurate, is an interesting choice of words. It's not for example the form of words that those seeking the services of Dignitas would be inclined to use. Why is that, do you think?
quote:I find the question about comfort rather strange. I don't think people committing suicide, outside of being in extreme pain with an incurable condition, should be doing so at all. I don't think comfort comes into it.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:Well yes, dying in pain is such a great thing, isn't it?
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:So we're not just talking about the right to die, it's the right to die as comfortably as possible.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Not with the appropriate drugs she couldn't. They are not available.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped.
quote:Depression is not a terminal illness.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
quote:But Anne wasn't terminally ill She was in declining health and fearing a future in care or hospital. Also, she felt that she couldn't adapt to modern life. My opening post wasn't meant to discuss the terminally ill and the issue of assisted suicide in such cases. I happen to be of the view that good palliative care is the solution, not the deliberate ending of life.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Depression is not a terminal illness.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Deciding to die in peaceful circumstances when one is already terminally ill is not the same as depressive suicide, nothing like it.
quote:The woman described in the OP, did not have a terminal illness, nor was she physically infirm. Take a look at the link in my post. She was old and depressed.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Depression is not a terminal illness.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Deciding to die in peaceful circumstances when one is already terminally ill is not the same as depressive suicide, nothing like it.
quote:But it can be fatal. It also is a quality of life-limiting illness, unpredictable and only sometimes treatable by medical intervention.
Originally posted by Boogie:
Depression is not a terminal illness.
quote:I'm calling it what it is. That's how the law, currently, in the UK would regard it.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:Remove the "not". Typo
Originally posted by Tulfes:
quote:Why is it not technically accurate?
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You use "being killed", which, whilst not technically accurate, is an interesting choice of words. It's not for example the form of words that those seeking the services of Dignitas would be inclined to use. Why is that, do you think?
quote:Alright - it's been established that Anne of this particular case was neither in extreme pain nor had an incurable condition. So either she herself, or her niece, could have ended her life. A pillow over the face or leaping off a building is much more horrific, but that is how most people who commit suicide do so. They don't get to roll into a doctor's office and get a few nice IV drips because they no longer wish to live. But apparently if you are depressed AND old, you can fly to Switzerland to commit suicide in a nice, safe, sanitized way. None of the messy, you know, death stuff.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I find the question about comfort rather strange. I don't think people committing suicide, outside of being in extreme pain with an incurable condition, should be doing so at all. I don't think comfort comes into it.
quote:But you seem to be suggesting that the pillow over the face would somehow outrage you less than the death at Dignitas - almost like you want to ensure that someone you don't approve of topping themselves doesn't have a pleasant time of it. That's what I don't understand.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:Alright - it's been established that Anne of this particular case was neither in extreme pain nor had an incurable condition. So either she herself, or her niece, could have ended her life. A pillow over the face or leaping off a building is much more horrific, but that is how most people who commit suicide do so. They don't get to roll into a doctor's office and get a few nice IV drips because they no longer wish to live. But apparently if you are depressed AND old, you can fly to Switzerland to commit suicide in a nice, safe, sanitized way. None of the messy, you know, death stuff.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I find the question about comfort rather strange. I don't think people committing suicide, outside of being in extreme pain with an incurable condition, should be doing so at all. I don't think comfort comes into it.
Which tells me that Dignitas is no longer (if it ever was) catering specifically to those to frail or feeble to end their own lives, those in constant pain and suffering, etc. as advertised. It is becoming an at-will suicide service.
quote:Fair point.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
But Anne wasn't terminally ill She was in declining health and fearing a future in care or hospital. Also, she felt that she couldn't adapt to modern life. My opening post wasn't meant to discuss the terminally ill and the issue of assisted suicide in such cases. I happen to be of the view that good palliative care is the solution, not the deliberate ending of life.
quote:Not often I agree with Anglican't but I think he's on the money here. I don't think this story is really "woman kills herself because she couldn't copy with retirement of Windows XP"
Originally posted by Anglican't:
I'm a little suspicious of the emphasis in this story. The Daily Mail reports:
quote:I suspect that this weighed more heavily on her mind as she contemplated suicide than her failure to grasp the internet. Lots of people in this country manage to live without computer wizardry.
As she grew older, her health became increasingly poor and she suffered from heart and lung disease.
She described a recent 11-day stint in hospital as ‘unadulterated hell’ and lived in fear of ending up in a nursing home.
quote:Offering a service to help kill people, including those who are not infirm or terminally ill (and charging money for it - apparently it costs €4,000) is morally repugnant to me on every level.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But you seem to be suggesting that the pillow over the face would somehow outrage you less than the death at Dignitas - almost like you want to ensure that someone you don't approve of topping themselves doesn't have a pleasant time of it. That's what I don't understand.
quote:Everyone at age 89 is in declining health. That's not the same as being infirm. My grandmother-in-law is 90 and bedridden. She cannot take a sightseeing trip anywhere, like Anne did the day before she went into Dignitas. She can't even walk across the room. And she would not be able to take her own life if she wanted to. Anne was able, and by paying someone to help her do it she has made that person a party to her death. I think that is wrong.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You make it sound as if the woman in this case was fine but a bit fed up. What is "declining health" if not "infirmity?"
quote:I am completely willing to let them make their own decisions. I'm not willing to be part of a society where we turn ending one's life into a service. If you want to do it, do it yourself. If someone wants to do it for you, let them answer for it to the police or in court. The person still gets to die in any case.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Personally, I'm quite willing to let other people make their own decisions about their lives. And despite language like "put to death", in the OP, which we usually use of executions, no-one forced anyone into anything here.
quote:This!
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well yes, dying in pain is such a great thing, isn't it?
quote:We're crossing categories here. "Validly suicidal" is not a medical or psychological judgement; it is a moral one. And as such, it will be based on the moral standards and values of the person making the judgement. Which means that doctors and psychiatrists have no special expertise in this field, anymore than the rest of us. There are no moral experts (except God, I suppose).
Originally posted by seekingsister:
Even psychiatrists are not fully capable to determine in every case if someone is "validly" suicidal or not.
quote:The present situation - which you appear to support - means that on top of every other stress and fear that people have to face when they have a relative in pain, begging to die, is the thought that if they do act in accordance with that person's wishes, albeit out of compassion, they may face a jail term. I'm not sure that that helps anyone.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:Everyone at age 89 is in declining health. That's not the same as being infirm. My grandmother-in-law is 90 and bedridden. She cannot take a sightseeing trip anywhere, like Anne did the day before she went into Dignitas. She can't even walk across the room. And she would not be able to take her own life if she wanted to. Anne was able, and by paying someone to help her do it she has made that person a party to her death. I think that is wrong.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
You make it sound as if the woman in this case was fine but a bit fed up. What is "declining health" if not "infirmity?"
quote:I am completely willing to let them make their own decisions. I'm not willing to be part of a society where we turn ending one's life into a service. If you want to do it, do it yourself. If someone wants to do it for you, let them answer for it to the police or in court. The person still gets to die in any case.
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Personally, I'm quite willing to let other people make their own decisions about their lives. And despite language like "put to death", in the OP, which we usually use of executions, no-one forced anyone into anything here.
quote:From all accounts, it's fear of ending up in a similar position that led the woman in the OP to end her life while she was still able to do so.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
My grandmother-in-law is 90 and bedridden. She cannot take a sightseeing trip anywhere, like Anne did the day before she went into Dignitas. She can't even walk across the room. And she would not be able to take her own life if she wanted to.
quote:So you think fear of death or fear of infirmity, is a justifiable reason to offer an end-of-life service to someone? Is that what you understood the point of Dignitas to be? The point of the euthanasia movement to be? It's barely legal in a handful of places in Europe and already we see people who aren't sick, who aren't infirm, and now children, being considered acceptable candidates.
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
From all accounts, it's fear of ending up in a similar position that led the woman in the OP to end her life while she was still able to do so.
quote:When someone with depression commits suicide, that is the depression reaching the terminal stage. Depression can absolutely be as fatal as cancer.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Depression is not a terminal illness.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Deciding to die in peaceful circumstances when one is already terminally ill is not the same as depressive suicide, nothing like it.
quote:I'm not seeing why a child in terrible pain and suffering deserves to endure that more than an adult.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:So you think fear of death or fear of infirmity, is a justifiable reason to offer an end-of-life service to someone? Is that what you understood the point of Dignitas to be? The point of the euthanasia movement to be? It's barely legal in a handful of places in Europe and already we see people who aren't sick, who aren't infirm, and now children, being considered acceptable candidates.
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
From all accounts, it's fear of ending up in a similar position that led the woman in the OP to end her life while she was still able to do so.
If someone genuinely thought that killing sick and old and depressed people was morally right, then they would have no problem saying so in court. And as I've already said, prosecutions and convictions on this in the UK are rare anyway. Legalizing it opens the floodgates.
quote:Correct me if I'm wrong, Boogie, but I think what Boogie means is that depression should not be a terminal illness. We should give sufferers what they need to improve their lives. Science and medicine have a long way to go in this regard, but I suspect that is because society doesn't tend to take mental illness nearly seriously enough. (Husband felt the need to remind someone on fb just today that yes depression is a real illness. I would have thought that was obvious.)
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:When someone with depression commits suicide, that is the depression reaching the terminal stage. Depression can absolutely be as fatal as cancer.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Depression is not a terminal illness.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
But if I'm depressed, suicidal, and not ill or old, I don't get the cocktail of drugs available to the people at Dignitas, do I. Unless you think everyone wanting to commit suicide deserves to be able to do it as comfortably as possible regardless of the reason?
Deciding to die in peaceful circumstances when one is already terminally ill is not the same as depressive suicide, nothing like it.
quote:I'm not sure how to respond to the idea of "deserving to suffer." It's surely part of the human condition. We age, we get sick, we feel pain, we die. It happens to the good and the bad. It seems however irrelevant to this particular topic.
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I'm not seeing why a child in terrible pain and suffering deserves to endure that more than an adult.
quote:Not fear of death, no. That would be the stupidest reason to kill yourself ever.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
So you think fear of death or fear of infirmity, is a justifiable reason to offer an end-of-life service to someone? Is that what you understood the point of Dignitas to be? The point of the euthanasia movement to be?
quote:So then every very old person is justified in turning up at Dignitas with €4,000 to get help in suicide. Because they are all close to death, and death rather often comes with pain, and suffering, and loss of dignity. And we know Dignitas will take the money and do it, they did it to this woman who was just frankly suicidal and it seems to have nothing to do with any actual ailment.
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:quote:Not fear of death, no. That would be the stupidest reason to kill yourself ever.
Originally posted by seekingsister
So you think fear of death or fear of infirmity, is a justifiable reason to offer an end-of-life service to someone? Is that what you understood the point of Dignitas to be? The point of the euthanasia movement to be?
But a justified fear of imminent pain, helplessness, infirmity, mental degradation and loss of dignity? Yes, that's what I think it's about. Yes, I think it's a justifiable service to offer, because I can envisage circumstances in which I would want that service to be available to me. And yes, I do think that's what the point of the euthanasia movement is.
quote:How do we know that her situation is far from typical? She sought publicity in the UK before her death to explain her actions, presumably to be published only after the deed. We simply don't know the circumstances of those killed daily behind the doors of the Dignatas clinic.
Originally posted by Dubious Thomas:
quote:This!
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well yes, dying in pain is such a great thing, isn't it?
I am far less afraid of being unwillingly euthanized than I am of being forced to endure terrible pain and powerlessness because someone thinks he/she is defending my "right to life."
It sickens me that we are far more merciful to our pets than to our loved ones. Most people would be horrified at forcing a beloved cat or dog to endure what opponents of the right-to-die movement want to make people endure.
If someone believes that suicide is a "sin," fine. Don't commit suicide. But, for God's sake (and I mean that literally!), don't impose your convictions on other people. Their life is not your life to manage and control. They're not accountable to you. They're accountable to God. Let them work it out with Him. For my part, I don't believe in a God who requires people to endure unspeakable agony, and I see the folks at Dignitas as serving God's will, not thwarting it.
[Yes, the situation of the poor lady of the OP is a complex and ambiguous one. But hers is far from the typical situation.]
quote:Of course it can - see my story about my Mum, above.
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
We will all die, but I am convinced that it can be pain-free with good palliative care and that this and sufficient provision of dignity in old age are what we should all be calling for rather than assisted suicide.
quote:Have you got a citation for an article NOT from a explictly biased source?
Originally posted by dv:
A push for voluntary euthanasia often ends up in lots of people being involuntarily euthanased as we have seen in the Netherlands and Belgium.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/07/04/thousands-in-netherlands-die-without-consent-since-euthanasia-ok/
No thanks. It's alright for the articulate and assertive, perhaps. What about others?
quote:
LifeNews.com is an independent news agency devoted to reporting news that affects the pro-life community.
quote:The reason people go to Dignitas is because of a significant prospect of pain, suffering and loss of dignity for an extended period before their death.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
So then every very old person is justified in turning up at Dignitas with €4,000 to get help in suicide. Because they are all close to death, and death rather often comes with pain, and suffering, and loss of dignity.
quote:Who is going to determine this? The organization that is taking money to provide the service? Am I supposed to trust them to make a fair and honest assessment of the situation?
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The reason people go to Dignitas is because of a significant prospect of pain, suffering and loss of dignity for an extended period before their death.
quote:Bloomberg News
Penney Lewis, a law professor at King’s College London, said the Belgian provision defines terminal illnesses as those in which death is expected within “days, weeks, months,” or probably less than one year. In the U.S. state of Oregon, adult euthanasia law specifies a time period of six months.
“It’s never perfect, there’s always uncertainty,” said Lewis, who is co-director of the college’s Centre for Medical Law and Ethics. “We know there are patients who received a prescription in Oregon and are still alive six months later.”
quote:NIH
The present paper provides evidence that these laws and safeguards are regularly ignored and transgressed in all the jurisdictions and that transgressions are not prosecuted. For example, about 900 people annually are administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent, and in one jurisdiction, almost 50% of cases of euthanasia are not reported. Increased tolerance of transgressions in societies with such laws represents a social “slippery slope,” as do changes to the laws and criteria that followed legalization. Although the initial intent was to limit euthanasia and assisted suicide to a last-resort option for a very small number of terminally ill people, some jurisdictions now extend the practice to newborns, children, and people with dementia. A terminal illness is no longer a prerequisite. In the Netherlands, euthanasia for anyone over the age of 70 who is “tired of living” is now being considered. Legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide therefore places many people at risk, affects the values of society over time, and does not provide controls and safeguards.
quote:I don't think it's about choice. I think it's about provision, which means it's about money and education.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:Of course it can - see my story about my Mum, above.
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
We will all die, but I am convinced that it can be pain-free with good palliative care and that this and sufficient provision of dignity in old age are what we should all be calling for rather than assisted suicide.
But it often isn't - see my story about my Dad, above.
It's all about choice imo.
quote:
... patients who request help in dying are in psychological turmoil and in physical pain. However, in his 30 years of palliative care practice, he says he's rarely encountered a case where a patient's pain cannot be relieved.
"Once you relieve the pain, once you get a supportive relationship — you have nurses, doctors coming [into their home] they don't want the lethal injection anymore."
He said by some estimates, only 10 or 20 per cent of terminally ill Quebecers have access to that kind of high quality palliative care.
"So there are a lot of people suffering, in pain," Van Gurp said. "But the solution is not to introduce euthanasia, it's to introduce high quality palliative care...."
quote:I don't know about Belgian laws regarding compulsory school attendance or moving out, but would imagine that under very special circumstances, a 10yo could choose to stop attending school or choose to leave home (in very extreme situations). Being ill enough for euthanasia to be a seriously considered idea is an extreme situation for anyone, let alone a 10yo, so there would be a proportionate amount of hoops to jump through there too. It's not like a young person can decide to die on a whim. The situation is properly considered with medical assessments etc.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:I'm not sure how to respond to the idea of "deserving to suffer." It's surely part of the human condition. We age, we get sick, we feel pain, we die. It happens to the good and the bad. It seems however irrelevant to this particular topic.
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I'm not seeing why a child in terrible pain and suffering deserves to endure that more than an adult.
I am concerned for the child whose parents start subtly suggesting or pushing for euthanasia, because they find dealing with the illness too hard, or the medical costs are mounting up, or it's causing stress to the other siblings who aren't getting as much attention, or it's causing strain on the marriage, or many of the other emotional issues that surround such a situation. I also do not accept that a 10 year old cannot choose to stop attending school or to move out of their home, but can choose to end their life. It is preposterous.
The cases of people being unfairly pushed into "choosing" to die, however rare they might be, are serious enough for me to have a problem with euthanasia being legal full stop. It is the same reason I am against the death penalty.
As I've said - if a parent puts a pillow over the face of a sleeping terminally ill child because they think it is right, then that parent can explain themselves to the court. I do not see why we need to legalize this type of behavior when it is so obviously open to potential abuse.
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I am personally against, and generally hostile, to active euthanasia. No problem with withdrawal of life support. But death has to be obvious and immanent for that. I have been present and watched as two of my best friends died of cancer, and three family members. Palliative sedation was the process for 2 of them. I suspect that most of the posters to this thread are unaware of palliative sedation frm what I have read on the thread, the far more reasonable and preferable option.
quote:It might well have been, later. As it was, she unambiguously committed suicide, and to call it euthanasia is misleading.
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I am personally against, and generally hostile, to active euthanasia. No problem with withdrawal of life support. But death has to be obvious and immanent for that. I have been present and watched as two of my best friends died of cancer, and three family members. Palliative sedation was the process for 2 of them. I suspect that most of the posters to this thread are unaware of palliative sedation frm what I have read on the thread, the far more reasonable and preferable option.
This certainly would not have been an option for the woman in the OP.
quote:Animals are 'put down' for all kinds of reasons. Their lives are considered to be at our disposal. When a pet is old, it is often killed rather than given medication to reduce costs. Sometimes a pet is killed to remove the suffering of the owner more than that of the pet.
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
We put animals out of their suffering, why should humans be denied that mercy?
quote:Mercy and compassion and love allow us to end the suffering of animals, it surely should allow us to end the suffering of each other. Sometimes, the only end to suffering is death.
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:Animals are 'put down' for all kinds of reasons. Their lives are considered to be at our disposal. When a pet is old, it is often killed rather than given medication to reduce costs. Sometimes a pet is killed to remove the suffering of the owner more than that of the pet.
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
We put animals out of their suffering, why should humans be denied that mercy?
Mercy and compassion and love allow us to care for each other until we die, not to treat each other as disposable belongings.
quote:According to the NIH (see my post above) the checks don't work. People are being euthanized beyond the scope of the laws' original intentions.
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Yes, there is the danger of abuse, but that's why checks and balances are put in place. Lots of things can be abused but that doesn't mean they should automatically be banned.
quote:There are plenty more articles in similar vein. Google is your friend. Of course they tend to be found on pro-life sites; pro-killing sites tend to emphasize how consensual everything is. The mainstream media (as with abortion) usually follows the latter narrative. All roses and apple pie.
Originally posted by Siegfried:
Have you got a citation for an article NOT from a explictly biased source?
From the "About Us" link on that source--
quote:
LifeNews.com is an independent news agency devoted to reporting news that affects the pro-life community.
quote:I understand the poor care and mishandling of specific situations. The key is 'mishandling' and poor palliative care. I would tend to move the discussion from oxymorons like 'death with dignity' to 'proper palliative care' .
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I am personally against, and generally hostile, to active euthanasia. No problem with withdrawal of life support. But death has to be obvious and immanent for that. I have been present and watched as two of my best friends died of cancer, and three family members. Palliative sedation was the process for 2 of them. I suspect that most of the posters to this thread are unaware of palliative sedation frm what I have read on the thread, the far more reasonable and preferable option.
This certainly would not have been an option for the woman in the OP.
quote:One of the problems bedevilling this thread is the issue of what euthanasia actually is. It means "a good death". A majority of the people who present themselves at Dignitas do so - by Dignitas's own report - because of that fear, though not necessarily imminent. The majority (I think the figure is around 70%) go away after their first counselling session and are never seen again. But the euthanasia movement is not about just them - they are the most obvious clients for such a service, but over 20% of all cases taken to completion (i.e. death) are not suffering from any such symptoms but are simply wanting out. They just don't want to live any more. No doubt there are many background stories to be heard there.
But a justified fear of imminent pain, helplessness, infirmity, mental degradation and loss of dignity? Yes, that's what I think it's about. Yes, I think it's a justifiable service to offer, because I can envisage circumstances in which I would want that service to be available to me. And yes, I do think that's what the point of the euthanasia movement is.
quote:
I deeply resent the manipulative phrase ‘medically assisted dying’ when referring to legalizing euthanasia,” he said. “Medically assisted dying is what I have been concerned with for 40 years. It has no relationship to intentionally ending my patient’s life. Instead, the goal is quality of life.
quote:Why were heroic measures used? Wasn't she allowed to sign a 'Do not resuscitate' order, and wasn't she free to refuse treatment?
Originally posted by Porridge
When her final illness arrived, heroic measures were used to keep her alive, despite her urgings to leave her alone and let her die.
quote:How can you be so sure that you will not be killed by a drunk driver next week?
Originally posted by Boogie:
I will be chosing the time and manner of [my death] - in many years to come, hopefully!
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
quote:Why not? Do you mean that if she decided to stop eating, she would be force-fed against her will?
Originally posted by seekingsister:
My grandmother-in-law is 90 and bedridden. ... And she would not be able to take her own life if she wanted to.
quote:Guardianship is not easy to establish in this state; it would likely not have been granted anyway. As to heroic measure, she had form with the hospital staff. I suspect they were trying to forestall a lawsuit, given her propensity for threatening to file complaints (she might, after all, have pulled through).
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:Why were heroic measures used? Wasn't she allowed to sign a 'Do not resuscitate' order, and wasn't she free to refuse treatment?
Originally posted by Porridge
When her final illness arrived, heroic measures were used to keep her alive, despite her urgings to leave her alone and let her die.
If she was not because she was considered mentally incompetent, there should have been a court-appointed guardian who had the power to make such decisions for her.
Moo
quote:I understand your response - it opposes my point without invalidating it. The lack of a facility in the UK means that some UK residents who wish to avail themselves of Dignitas-like facilities do so weeks/months earlier than they would do if they didn't have to travel to Switzerland.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:The niece could have facilitated her aunt's death in the UK, and faced the appropriate consequences for it, or the woman could have done it herself as she is not even terminally ill or handicapped. The reason they went to Switzerland was to have the illusion that what they were doing was OK because it's legal there.
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
[One of the downsides of not having such a facility in the UK is that UK residents who wish to take this route must do so whilst they are able to undertake the rigours of international travel. Were it possible to take a simple road journey to the final destination it would not be necessary to seek closure as early in one's decline as the fear of being too ill to reach Switzerland imposes.
This is a slippery slope, not in theory but in practice. Already Belgium now allows euthanizing children. So we've gone from "ending the life of the suffering old dear, she's put up with enough" to 10 year olds now as well. How a child is capable of rationally deciding he or she wishes to die is beyond me, let alone that they are not being influenced by parental pressure in the direction of euthanasia. Many doctors in Belgium protested this law, so the health community is not in support of it either.
I heard a radio program about Hungary, which has a high suicide rate, and someone mentioned that older people feel obliged to kill themselves so as not to become a burden to their families. Make assisted suicide legal here and I can assure you many older and ill people will be victimized by family pressure. And that will put doctors who work in such facilities in such a terrible moral position that frankly we should not even consider legalizing it for one second.
Article on "Anne" in OP
quote:seekingsister: You are making statements intended to mislead and to falsely appeal to authority.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
According to the NIH (see my post above) the checks don't work. People are being euthanized beyond the scope of the laws' original intentions.
quote:Assuming I live to do so, obviously.
Originally posted by JoannaP:
quote:How can you be so sure that you will not be killed by a drunk driver next week?
Originally posted by Boogie:
I will be chosing the time and manner of [my death] - in many years to come, hopefully!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
quote:Having seen these processes from the inside, in the death of my grandmother and my father, the truth is that the dividing line between alleviation of great pain and execution become very fine indeed. Giving morphine to the dying makes the boundary very blurred, such is the nature of the medication and the ability of the dying to build up tolerance of what might otherwise be legal doses. The truth is that nobody really knows when enough for one purpose has become the means of achieving the other.
Originally posted by bib:
I feel disturbed that doctors are now being pressured to euthanase their patients which is contrary to the traditional way doctors care for their patients. My own GP has said that he could not participate and would give up the practice of medicine if push came to shove. Many doctors of my acquaintance have used their skills to ease pain of dying patients, but to ask them to act as executioners is immoral in my opinion.
quote:Apologies as that was not my intention.
Originally posted by Leaf:
seekingsister: You are making statements intended to mislead and to falsely appeal to authority.
quote:ISTM that your entire argument is based on the fact that the laws do not work - do you wish to make it illegal for UK citizens to visit Switzerland?
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:Apologies as that was not my intention.
Originally posted by Leaf:
seekingsister: You are making statements intended to mislead and to falsely appeal to authority.
However I quoted from a Bloomberg article that cites a Belgian doctor and two medical ethics professors, which I failed to link to and do so here:
Bloomberg
There seems to be on the side of those in favour of euthanasia a desire to focus on emotions. Why do that, when there are facts available? It is a fact that people who are not terminal and not in constant pain are being euthanized. It is a fact that doctors in places where euthanasia is legal are opposing it in many cases. It is also a fact that we have the ability to manage end-of-life pain and discomfort without actively causing death.
The Daily Beast
I haven't had a single response that explains why keeping it illegal and allowing doctors and loved ones who wish to conduct it, to answer for their behavior to within the legal system, is so untenable given the low rate of actual convictions in this area. I don't see why the state has an interest in making it particular easy for the suicidal to kill themselves - regardless of the reason for that suicide. However it has a clear interest in determining whether or not someone has pushed their grandmother into an earlier than normal death through malice or greed - which does happen - and so the laws as they exist can at least protect those people.
quote:Strictly speaking, yes. I'm not sure that the real intention can always be proved, but I am sure that on many an occasion it is wise not to examine it.
Originally posted by Tulfes:
Barnabas, forgive me if this is not an answer to your point, but isn't it about intention rather than outcome? If the intention in giving the drug is to hasten death, it is illegal. If the intention is to alleviate pain, it is okay, even if another outcome (in addition to alleviating pain) is that death is hastened. A mixed intention (intending to alleviate pain and intending to hasten death) is probably illegal.
t
quote:The laws do work, the justice system is set up to take mitigating factors into account. A terminally ill cancer patient of 80 years old being smothered by a loved one is a clear case where those circumstances come into play. That's why people are rarely locked up for it. That is not a failure, it's how things are meant to function.
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
ISTM that your entire argument is based on the fact that the laws do not work - do you wish to make it illegal for UK citizens to visit Switzerland?
quote:There is no way I could ever ask a loved one to smother me. What an awful thing for them to have to do and for me to have to suffer! An drink to simply go to sleep and not wake up is another story entirely. Firstly, you take it yourself so, although loved ones can be present, they are not killing you. Secondly, it's a kind and painless way to die.
Originally posted by seekingsister:
The laws do work, the justice system is set up to take mitigating factors into account. A terminally ill cancer patient of 80 years old being smothered by a loved one is a clear case where those circumstances come into play. That's why people are rarely locked up for it. That is not a failure, it's how things are meant to function.
quote:Sorry--you made a claim. You shouldn't expect us to do your research for you. Either pony up something from a neutral source (There must be something out there if your claim is true), or expect your argument to be discounted.
Originally posted by dv:
quote:There are plenty more articles in similar vein. Google is your friend. Of course they tend to be found on pro-life sites; pro-killing sites tend to emphasize how consensual everything is. The mainstream media (as with abortion) usually follows the latter narrative. All roses and apple pie.
Originally posted by Siegfried:
Have you got a citation for an article NOT from a explictly biased source?
From the "About Us" link on that source--
quote:
LifeNews.com is an independent news agency devoted to reporting news that affects the pro-life community.
quote:Latimer is not relevant at all. In this case, a helpless child was murdered. Latimer freely admitted this, but claimed extenuating circumstances. He served time, and the Parole Board granted him parole on the grounds that he was unlikely to reoffend.
Originally posted by no prophet:
Oh, but I think the worries of disabled people are part of this. Thus Latimer is relevant. And those who cannot speak for themselves cannot be excluded. Would someone be persuaded that they should end their life and then not so freely choose to do so? I think it is probable. How far away is the idea of making the most humane decision for someone who cannot make the decision for themselves. Not far in my view.