Rosary-chanting protesters force euthanasia talk to be abandoned

MatthewVII

CDfm wrote: »

You give a great description on what you wouldnt like for you and I accept that. But does that give you the right to make that decision for someone else, with or without their family(ies)agreement(s).

Righto, doctors wouldn't bring around a trolley of potassium on the ward rounds and tell patients they've decided dying is in their best interest and injecting them against their will. What's being debated is the option of euthanasia. For people in a persistent vegetative state, the decision would have to be made with families etc, and that's no different to any other decision that a family would have to make in lieu of their incapacitated relative. Coma is a blurrier one, since recovery is a possibility. It'd really have to be decided on an individual case basis, but again, the patient's families wishes would have preference over the doctor's wishes.

Euthanasia isn't murder. It's a choice, one which would not be taken lightly and one which would not be "the thin edge of the wedge" and drive society off a cliff.

If does happen where terminally ill patients try to commit suicide because of their pain and suffering. Their quality of life is not going to improve. It should definitely be an option.

Phototoxin

If it was legalised (as in Switzerland) would you be still against it from a religious one?

Dades you're presuming that I'm against it from a religous one when I'm against it from a moral one irregardless of my religous beliefs or lack thereof.
One can be an athiest / agnostic and be against suicide, be pro-life and like to rape sheep. They are not all mutally exclusive.

Dades

Apologies, Phototoxin, you are right in that I made the assumption (despite being vaguely aware that you're not Christian!)

I guess I can't picture a justification for denying someone the right to take their own life without some form of "faith-based guidance" for want of a better term.

Mickeroo

Phototoxin wrote: »

Dades you're presuming that I'm against it from a religous one when I'm against it from a moral one irregardless of my religous beliefs or lack thereof.
One can be an athiest / agnostic and be against suicide, be pro-life and like to rape sheep. They are not all mutally exclusive.

Do you consider all forms of euthanasia murder?

It's a pretty complex issue, I think in some cases i would agree with it and others I wouldn't, and I can honestly say I have no idea what i would do if i was put in the position of the decision maker.

I remember one time when i was a teenager, a friend and I were driving around and we ran over a Hare. When we got out of the car to look it was still fully concious,but only the top half of its body was moving, its back must have been completely broken. We both agreed we had to put it out of its misery,but when it came down to it neither of us could bring ourselves to kill it. If it happened now I still cant say if i'd be able to do it or not.Its not exactly the same thing i know but you get the idea.

Nodin

Mickeroo wrote: »

.

I remember one time when i was a teenager, a friend and I were driving around and we ran over a Hare. When we got out of the car to look it was still fully concious,but only the top half of its body was moving, its back must have been completely broken. We both agreed we had to put it out of its misery,but when it came down to it neither of us could bring ourselves to kill it. If it happened now I still cant say if i'd be able to do it or not.Its not exactly the same thing i know but you get the idea.

The thing that looks a bit like a rabbit now, not the fellas with the bald heads and the singing and chanting.....?

CDfm

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's a pretty complex issue, I think in some cases i would agree with it and others I wouldn't, and I can honestly say I have no idea what i would do if i was put in the position of the decision maker.

That puts it very eloquently. Thats how I think of it.

I would really hate to have to decide.

MatthewVII

I dunno, it's a fundamental human right that a person of sane mind has the right to decide what can be done to their own body. We see it all the time when patients refuse treatment for certain things even though it's their best option. People should be able to decide the course of their own lives and not have that power taken away from them.

Dades

Mickeroo wrote: »

It's a pretty complex issue, I think in some cases i would agree with it and others I wouldn't, and I can honestly say I have no idea what i would do if i was put in the position of the decision maker.

CDfm wrote: »

I would really hate to have to decide.

Am I missing something here, or are we not discussing the situations where the patient is the only one making the decision? i.e. They are the only decision maker.

studiorat

I suppose it boils down to what people actually describe as a life.

Lying in a vegetative state where a patient can't even cough for themselves is not a life. Consider yourself lying in a hospital with no eye response, no verbal response or no motor response and the possibility of being locked into your own body, with maybe just eye movement, if you did make a recovery and then ask which would you prefer for you and your family.

I've seen it and I think anybody else who has would agree that euthanasia should be an option in palliative care. Removing life support etc will leave a person waste away for nearly a month. This leaves families with nothing to do but wait for the patient to die.

Selkies

Its unusual for a person with locked in syndrome to live for very long as I understand it. Its the people who are confined to a bed while they slowly and painfully die that the whole euthuanisia thing is popular with.

Fact is if someone begged me to kill them in that kind of state I'm not sure I would be able to refuse, particularly someone I cared about.

The thing is euthanasia is already happening in hospices where people are given as much morphine as they ask for. It speeds up the departure of terminal patients by quite a lot.

Rev Hellfire

Selkies wrote: »

The thing is euthanasia is already happening in hospices where people are given as much morphine as they ask for. It speeds up the departure of terminal patients by quite a lot.

I'm not sure you can classify palliative care as given in hospices as euthanasia, the primary focus is plainly very different.

Flamed Diving

PDN wrote: »

It's funny how when we are in agreement with protestors (eg anti-Iraq War) then they are simply exercising their democratic free speech. However, when we don't agree with the protestors then they are scumbags and zealots.

The tactics mentioned in that article certainly isn't a way I would choose to behave - but its been done a thousand times before for anti-apartheid, gay rights, Brits out, anti G-20, etc, etc. etc.

As a taxpayer I don't see why a publicly funded institution should be giving a platform to somebody advocating acts that are illegal. Our Constitution grants free speech, and that applies equally to Professor Doyal or Fred Phelps, but I would prefer them to use privately funded venues and facilities.

When people attempt to use coercion or indimidation to stop someone from speaking, then you are the biggest scumbag zealot there is.

I



M



O

CDfm

Dades wrote: »

Am I missing something here, or are we not discussing the situations where the patient is the only one making the decision? i.e. They are the only decision maker.

I think its split into 2 areas - consensual and non consensual. I think euthanasia is where no consent is given.

Some countries have living wills where a person indicates their preference in writing about what they would want to happen in those situations. So for example;a person who is Catholic might think that switching off life support is suicide( I dont) but others may do and would like their faith belief respected and others may have ideas on pain relief.

studiorat wrote: »

I suppose it boils down to what people actually describe as a life.

Lying in a vegetative state where a patient can't even cough for themselves is not a life. Consider yourself lying in a hospital with no eye response, no verbal response or no motor response and the possibility of being locked into your own body, with maybe just eye movement, if you did make a recovery and then ask which would you prefer for you and your family

I have seen Len Doyal write on this and its one of the situation he describes in a "we just don't know". These must ne rare situations and I have never heard of one in Ireland. Has anyone?

Laws made with the exceptions only in mind and applied as general principles are not good laws.

I've seen it and I think anybody else who has would agree that euthanasia should be an option in palliative care. Removing life support etc will leave a person waste away for nearly a month. This leaves families with nothing to do but wait for the patient to die.

EEK -where's me drugs.

Selkies wrote: »

Its unusual for a person with locked in syndrome to live for very long as I understand it. Its the people who are confined to a bed while they slowly and painfully die that the whole euthuanisia thing is popular with


Fact is if someone begged me to kill them in that kind of state I'm not sure I would be able to refuse, particularly someone I cared about.

Nice drugs too - the whole death by dehydration sounds really gross. I wouldnt do the begging thing.

The thing is euthanasia is already happening in hospices where people are given as much morphine as they ask for. It speeds up the departure of terminal patients by quite a lot.

I think this is the double affect. The drugs may hasten physical death but they are used for pain relief and management. This is something that I agree with. I wouldnt like a flippant nurse to administer my final dose in case she missed her last bus home though.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I'm not sure you can classify palliative care as given in hospices as euthanasia, the primary focus is plainly very different.

AS above I agree.

CDfm

CDfm wrote: »

like these radicals quouted in the Irish Times

“The HSE will make us out to be religious zealots but we are not. We are all individual protesters here,” said anti-euthanasia protester Margaret Hurley, from Bishopstown in Cork.

Outside the hospital entrance, protester Moira O’Regan, from Cork, said she was present as a voice for elderly people: “This lecture has nothing to do with providing care for people.”

Flamed Diving wrote: »

When people attempt to use coercion or indimidation to stop someone from speaking, then you are the biggest scumbag zealot there is.

I



M



O

:DLOL does your Ma know about your housewife bashing ways

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

:DLOL does your Ma know about your housewife bashing ways

She would agree with me.

Mickeroo

Dades wrote: »

Am I missing something here, or are we not discussing the situations where the patient is the only one making the decision? i.e. They are the only decision maker.

Apologies. I thought we were discussing euthanasia in general, sometimes the family/friends have to decide?

When it's the patient themselves that decides, if theres zero chance of recovery and its ONLY the choice between a slow painful death or a quick peaceful one then they should be allowed the option i think.

Mickeroo

Nodin wrote: »

The thing that looks a bit like a rabbit now, not the fellas with the bald heads and the singing and chanting.....?

Flamed Diving

Mickeroo wrote: »

Apologies. I thought we were discussing euthanasia in general, sometimes the family/friends have to decide?

When it's the patient themselves that decides, if theres zero chance of recovery and its ONLY the choice between a slow painful death or a quick peaceful one then they should be allowed the option i think.

Won't someone think of the mythical psychopath in the sky?

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Won't someone think of the mythical psychopath in the sky?

Or the fabled Crusade on CUH by the forces of Chrisendom which has now passed into Cork folklore as the day the Housewives of Court Stopped the Ritual Slaughter of the Elderly by the HSE.

Flamed Diving

CDfm wrote: »

Or the fabled Crusade on CUH by the forces of Chrisendom which has now passed into Cork folklore as the day the Housewives of Court Stopped the Ritual Slaughter of the Elderly by the HSE.

Equally farcical.

No, wait. At least we know that CUHgate actually happened.

Still looking for the mythical psychopath...

I'm sure he'll turn up, don't worry.

CDfm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Apologies. I thought we were discussing euthanasia in general, sometimes the family/friends have to decide?

So this is where friends and family and/or the doctor decides.

When it's the patient themselves that decides, if theres zero chance of recovery and its ONLY the choice between a slow painful death or a quick peaceful one then they should be allowed the option i think.

We are always being told modern medicine is well able to handle this.So slow painful deaths are the exceptions and pallative care covers most situations.

Can you think of an example?

Isn't that assisted suicide situation?Thats not really euthenasia but from a doctors perspective it may have ethical implications if he/she administers the coup de grace.

marco_polo

CDfm wrote: »

I think its split into 2 areas - consensual and non consensual. I think euthanasia is where no consent is given.

I think any reasonable debate on the issue would involve voluntary euthanasia, assisted and non assisted. I would imagine that non consentual advocates are pretty thin on the ground.

Some countries have living wills where a person indicates their preference in writing about what they would want to happen in those situations. So for example;a person who is Catholic might think that switching off life support is suicide( I dont) but others may do and would like their faith belief respected and others may have ideas on pain relief.

I think people who wish to go on living in such circumstances are entitled to have their will respected (ie no one can turn off the machine), but should you not extend the same rights to those who wish to die?

I have seen Len Doyal write on this and its one of the situation he describes in a "we just don't know". These must ne rare situations and I have never heard of one in Ireland. Has anyone?

Laws made with the exceptions only in mind and applied as general principles are not good laws.



EEK -where's me drugs.




Nice drugs too - the whole death by dehydration sounds really gross. I wouldnt do the begging thing.



I think this is the double affect. The drugs may hasten physical death but they are used for pain relief and management. This is something that I agree with. I wouldnt like a flippant nurse to administer my final dose in case she missed her last bus home though.

No disagreement with any of that.

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Equally farcical.

No, wait. At least we know that CUHgate actually happened.

Still looking for the mythical psychopath...

I'm sure he'll turn up, don't worry.

It was quite funny - CUHgate was a HSE PR/Media disaster. IRL it was housewives.:D:D

CDfm

marco_polo wrote: »

I think any reasonable debate on the issue would involve voluntary euthanasia, assisted and non assisted. I would imagine that non consentual advocates are pretty thin on the ground

Is thus voluntary euthanasia assisted suicide?

Do living wills have any legal force in Ireland?

The big UK case was the Motor Neurone Disease sufferer Diane Petty who suffered a degenerative illness that left her parilysed from the neck down.

That was a very sad case and highlighted the ethics for me. Even so the circumstances were exceptional and rare.

I think people who wish to go on living in such circumstances are entitled to have their will respected (ie no one can turn off the machine), but should you not extend the same rights to those who wish to die?



No disagreement with any of that.

Are you a believer or atheist ? I've seen you post before but cant remember.

marco_polo

CDfm wrote: »

Is thus voluntary euthanasia assisted suicide?

That is the term I was looking for there, although I do think the use of the term is often used by some primarly to attach the stigma of suicide to the euthanasia debate (Even though yes it technically is )

Do living wills have any legal force in Ireland?

Not sure on the legal status of living wills here, I would guess probably not.

The big UK case was the Motor Neurone Disease sufferer Diane Petty who suffered a degenerative illness that left her parilysed from the neck down.

That was a very sad case and highlighted the ethics for me. Even so the circumstances were exceptional and rare.

For me those serious and rare cases highlight exactly why there should be at a much more open debate a very complicated issue.

Are you a believer or atheist ? I've seen you post before but cant remember.

If you must label me, atheist For me if you are of sound mind and have a serious and terminal illness you should be entitled to make your own decision about when to die (Yes even if you need help). To me this is a seperate issue to any scenarios involving third parties in the decision making process.

CDfm

marco_polo wrote: »

That is the term I was looking for there, although I do think the use of the term is often used by some primarly to attach the stigma of suicide to the euthanasia debate (Even though yes it technically is )



Not sure on the legal status of living wills here, I would guess probably not.



For me those serious and rare cases highlight exactly why there should be at a much more open debate a very complicated issue.




If you must label me, atheist For me if you are of sound mind and have a serious and terminal illness you should be entitled to make your own decision about when to die (Yes even if you need help). To me this is a seperate issue to any scenarios involving third parties in the decision making process.

Yes I agree with everything you say and I am a Catholic and thanks for emphasising the suicide issue.

Rev Hellfire

marco_polo wrote: »

Not sure on the legal status of living wills here, I would guess probably not.

BEHOLD THE POWER OF THE INTERWEB !

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/health/legal-matters-and-health/advance-care-directives

CDfm

Flamed Diving wrote: »

She would agree with me.

Here is a link for Moms who dont quite trust their kids

http://www.bonsecoursireland.org/hospitals/default.asp

Mickeroo

CDfm wrote: »

We are always being told modern medicine is well able to handle this.So slow painful deaths are the exceptions and pallative care covers most situations.

Can you think of an example?

Isn't that assisted suicide situation?Thats not really euthenasia but from a doctors perspective it may have ethical implications if he/she administers the coup de grace.

I see what you're saying,with pain killers and such sufferig would be minimal anyway. I guess the other side to it is if the patient is coherant enough to actually ask for death then it is assisted suicide pretty much. My understanding of uethanasia was always that the patient was in a deep coma and basically just kept alive by machines.

CDfm

Mickeroo wrote: »

I see what you're saying,with pain killers and such sufferig would be minimal anyway. I guess the other side to it is if the patient is coherant enough to actually ask for death then it is assisted suicide pretty much.

It makes you think. If I go to hospital I will be asking what the deal is & while I am not the suicide type but if you gonna go that way well I want the happy stuff:)

No CD - Matthew is your Doctor not your dealer and its what time is my medication not when am I gone to score