Assisted dying

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121924900#Comment_121924900

Agreed - when my father passed, he went very quickly (I'd barely got home from the hospital when I got the call).

I did think perhaps he was given an additional dose of something - morphine etc ? His oxgyen sats were barely in the 70s and they had turned off the monitor alarm as it was upsetting him.

If the nurse/doctor did - bless you for your kind gesture and your humanity.

Redliketoast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121924900#Comment_121924900

As I said I have sympathy for your story. I know how it feels.

But you cant just give the story and try to excuse yourself form the debate by saying you are not interested in the politics of it. You have given your opinion and like my opinion, it is up for counterargument.

If you dont know the situation in Canada, it means you are asking for something without actually informing yourself on it.

Certain cancers were once upon a time death sentences. Now they are not. Aids was once a death sentence. Now it is not.

Dementia is a huge bone of contention right now. People calling for assisted suicide to be allowed for such. Yet there are signs of treatments that will soon make a huge difference in it.

I asked earlier if assisted suicide should be offered for children (obviously a parent would have top make the decision). A kid of 4 with Leukemia. The pain that child goes through until they die is like nothing you will ever feel (I hope). Yet people say "of course we shouldnt give it to kids". But why not? Either assisted suicide is good or its bad.

I am not trying to diminish your experience. As I said I have been there, I understand the pain. But I also KNOW that in MOST cases, you describe, we already have assisted suicide.

This is not a case of it being a no brainier. It certainly shouldnt be a choice made without looking at countries who have implemented it and what the pros and cons are.

GreeBo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121922622#Comment_121922622

Sorry, but that doesn't clarify anything!

But for wanting to kill themselves, people who commit suicide want to live.

Typically people who commit suicide have some sort of illness, if it wasn't for that, they would also want to live.

So again, how is suicide different from assisted dying?

Please note, I haven't given any indications of my thoughts for or against either, merely asking how you think they are different, so please don't try and convince me of the merits of either.

GreeBo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121922887#Comment_121922887

I suspect the question is more framed around how is it different for the person who is dead at the end.

Then you could also compare the pain and suffering of the train driver, to the pain and suffering of loved ones being forced to watch someone fade away, often in terrible pain, until they die "naturally".

Princess Calla

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121925781#Comment_121925781

I suppose for me it comes down to "could a person live a full life without medical intervention"

Suicide is usually mental illness, however physically that person is usually physically fine. They can dress/eat/go out without any help. Yes they are carrying a huge mental load but I suppose the hope is, it will pass, things will turn around, there's lots to live for etc. Also with suicide it doesn't always work and you might end up with physical problems or you end up dragging a third person into it i.e. the train driver.

Assisted dying helps people who can't lead a life without intervention, who are in pain, who knows their time is limited, there are no "hail Mary's" this is it, to exit stage left, on their terms in a dignified and painfree way.

However safeguards obviously need to be in place. I'd say the majority of us want to live as long as we can while being healthy. I certainly don't want to end up in a home, with no quality of life, no control of bodily functions, no memory... seriously what's the point.

Should there come a point I can stipulate in my will, should certain conditions be met then I want to head off on my terms, I'll definitely be availing of the option.

CalamariFritti

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121925707#Comment_121925707

I had recently a very specific experience to which I gave my opinion. For this very specific experience I think it would be a no-brainer. That doesn't mean I said free-for-all suicide is a no brainer or that relatives can decide whatever they like or that legislating for assisted dying would be easy. I spoke about a very specific scenario that I wouldnt wish on anyone.

It was endgame, no way back, the only variables were how many days precisely and how much suffering she had to experience. And she wanted to go but had to go all the way.

But for the sake of honesty in this discussion I must say she didnt die in Ireland but in another western European EU country. Maybe they already have rules here. They dont 'back home' apparently. But I think the debate and the arguments will be more or less the same in any European country so I thought it was valid to bring her case up.

I just gave this as an example of something why the discussion should be had. Must be had in my opinion.

In any case I dont know what you expect from me. Do you expect me to come up with fully fledged draft legislation to have a right in expression an opinion about what happened to my mum?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121924509#Comment_121924509

Reluctant to answer 🙄

State of decline, is a gradual,persistent deterioration.

Advanced is advanced.

Now I'm sure you will be willing to walk us through the mental gymnastics you needed to claim being in a wheelchair would qualify.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121922528#Comment_121922528

The unwilling participation of the train driver, people that have to pick up the pieces. You know this already

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121921409#Comment_121921409

The pension issue , isn't the conspiracy part 🙄

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121924459#Comment_121924459

We have referendums if there's a requirement for a constitutional amendment. In this case, from what I gather there isn't a need for an amendment. Even for abortion, the Constitution effectively leaves it to the legislature to decide legal limitations etc.

So personally speaking,I think this should be legislation. I don't favour a scenario where dying people or severely incapacitated are forced to explain why they'd like to go on their own terms in TV debates. I'd view it to be actively cruel tbh.

As a democracy, you're still free to elect politicians that oppose such legislation btw. It not getting a referendum, does not make it undemocratic.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121927442#Comment_121927442

Losing the use of your limbs as a consequence of a progressive disease is a decline, and losing the use of them to a point where you are permanently in a wheelchair is an advanced decline. Seriously, this isn't hard to grasp. I can't for the life of me imagine why you wouldn't think that was an advanced decline, or why you would think nobody else would see it that way. And you're making no attempt to persuade me.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121932942#Comment_121932942

Except you were talking about being in a wheelchair.

A progressive disease is separate to that

This isn't difficult to grasp, yet you struggle

I am not trying to persuade you. I can't argue you out of a belief you didn't use logic to arrive at

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936052#Comment_121936052

Well, a progressive disease might be one reason why someone is in a wheelchair.

But as I've already pointed out in this thread you don't have to have a disease at all to qualify for MAID; having a disability is sufficient. That's explicit in the legislation.

Is the argument that you're having such difficulty in articulating basically this; if you've always had a disability and have always been wheelchair-bound because of it, your level of capability has never changed and therefore can't be said to be in a "state of decline"?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936159#Comment_121936159

I haven't had any difficulty articulating, it's others comprehension skills that seem to be lacking.

Again, just having a disability isn't sufficient to meet the requirements for MAID, just as being in a wheelchair alone isn't sufficient.

I have already got explained to you what state of decline means. It doesn't mean that your capability has never changed. There has to be a gradual and continuous deterioration to an advanced stage

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121920459#Comment_121920459

That's some leap to take being in a wheelchair as an advanced irreversible state of decline.

It’s really not, considering you’re choosing to ignore the context in which the hypothetical scenario was presented:

So, if you have a disability (first criterion) that means you are permanently wheelchair-bound (second criterion) and being in a wheelchair causes you unbearable mental suffering, you've ticked all the boxes, if your mental suffering can't be relieved.

The criteria for MAiD in Canada are as follows:

To be considered as having a grievous and irremediable medical condition, you must meet all of the following criteria. You must:

• have a serious illness, disease or disability
• be in an advanced state of decline that cannot be reversed
• experience unbearable physical or mental suffering from your illness, disease, disability or state of decline that cannot be relieved under conditions that you consider acceptable

You do not need to have a fatal or terminal condition to be eligible for medical assistance in dying.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-services-benefits/medical-assistance-dying.html#

Being a wheelchair user causes, in and of itself, an advanced state of decline, and will become progressively worse if the person does not have sufficient support available to relieve the issues caused by being a wheelchair user (some people have issues with commonly used terminology - https://www.diversitystyleguide.com/glossary/wheelchairwheelchair-boundconfined-to-a-wheelchair/ ), which can cause a person to experience unbearable physical and mental suffering, which may lead to circumstances where the person is of the opinion that their suffering cannot be relieved under conditions they consider acceptable.

The person doesn’t wish to die, but the alternative as they see their condition progressing, is an outcome they wish to avoid. It shouldn’t be the case that people with disabilities aren’t being given every necessary support to ensure they have an adequate standard of quality of life, but it’s because the supports don’t exist, that they are choosing to apply for MAiD, is the point that was being made:

https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6868917

That’s not suggesting that every individual applicant who uses a wheelchair will qualify for MAiD, it’s recognising that having a disability which means the person requires the use of a wheelchair and the supports that are needed alongside it, and not receiving those supports, means they are very likely to meet all the criteria for MAiD.

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936409#Comment_121936409

Thank you for that - put my view better than I could.

If I was to be injured tomorrow and confined to a wheelchair I know I wouldn’t want to continue on. That is of course not to say disabled people of varying degrees can live amazing lives - but I personally wouldn’t wish to.

Thank you.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936283#Comment_121936283

There's nothing in the ordinary meaning of the word "decline" to require a gradual and continuous deteroriation. You can have a sudden decline, a dramatic decline, etc. If you assert that in the context of MAID "decline" means "gradual and continuous decline" the onus is on you to show that. So far you've just asserted it, and insulted anyone who doesn't bow to your authority.

Apart from anything else, this interpretation makes no sense. Somebody who has by a gradual development arrived at a particular state state of incapacity can avail of MAID, but someone who arrives at exactly the same state of incapacity as a sudden development, or who has always been in that state of incapacity can not? That would be bizarre. Why would anybody design an assisted dying regime that worked like that?

beeker1

What's the argument ? Our progressive Republic euphemistically terminates the lives of those who have no voice , it was world down syndrome day this week , the swedes puff their chests out at how they've " eradicated " down syndrome ! I'm sure they'd view denying a person who's lived a full life the right to die barbaric , so come on Ireland, let's get hip & get on with riding ourselves what's an inconvenience !

Mr. CooL ICE

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121939892#Comment_121939892

I know what you're trying to get at and it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121939892#Comment_121939892

What has that to do with death with dignity ?

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121936409#Comment_121936409

I see we have another that doesn't understand advanced state of decline.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121939815#Comment_121939815

Again, it's advanced state of decline. I have repeatedly explained this to you. You don't get to keep ignoring the parts you don't like.

And again an incapacity alone isn't sufficient grounds.

uptherebels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121939892#Comment_121939892

What people have no voice?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121943622#Comment_121943622

I understand it just fine. I have no interest in understanding how you choose to define it.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121943635#Comment_121943635

You haven't repeatedly explained it to me. You've just parrotted the words of the legislation and asserted, without argument or explanation, that they mean what you want them to mean, rather than what those words ordinarily mean. This is deeply unconvincing.

Redliketoast

People keep saying "This is not Canada" but it is imperative that we look at where things went wrong.

I have every sympathy for people suffering. BUT I also see how something can start out as a no brainier because "what can go wrong". But we can see actual case studies of it going wrong.

The fact is if this law kills a single person that would have otherwise had a significant amount of time to live, that is unacceptable.

Oscar_Madison

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121920428#Comment_121920428

Yeah - it practically encourages you to kill your elderly parents and relatives at the first sign of wrinkles 😀

Vote4Squirrels

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121948809#Comment_121948809

You’re missing the point - people are dying earlier than they need to as currently they need to go to Switzerland to end their life under completely their own steam.

If physician assisted death was legal here then we could have months longer with family rather than having to make a heartbreaking decision before time.

Canada is interesting as a cautionary tale for a lot of reasons - but one of the reason I would choose to die with dignity is a mental illness - Alzheimer’s/dementia. If someone with a mental illness is assessed by a psychiatrist and during a period of lucidity is assessed as being able to make the decision to die, how dare we question that ?

Redliketoast

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121948825#Comment_121948825

How dare we question it? Alzheimer’s/dementia is not that far from having a treatment that will improve expected life. We should ALWAYS questions someone wanting to die. If someone is standing on a bridge should we also not question that? Maybe they are "suffering".

You ask someone 20 years ago how they feel about having Aids. That was a death sentence. Now its not.

Assisted Suicide is a death sentence. There is no coming back from that. Even if a cure is found the next day for the illness.

Doing nothing doesnt kill. Doing something does.

Canada yes should be used as a warning. In less than 10 years they went from a very similar mindset to what we want, to almost death on tap.

Oscar_Madison

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121948858#Comment_121948858

I reckon if it comes into Ireland it will be very limited circumstances - ie less than one year to live diagnosis and signed off by a medical team along with a number of other caveats - ironically this is probably the once instance where most would wish to live out that year and spend the last few months with loved ones.

I don’t think this will satisfy the growing desire of many on this island to have a clear alternative to long term illness - even here on boards, I couldn’t count the number of times over the years, people expressed a dread of getting some form of dememtia for example in later life and wishing they had an “out” when the time came - dementia sufferers can live up to 6-10 years after diagnosis in my experience. “Just shoot me, is not an uncommon remark made by many posters”

Besides dementia there are other illnesses that can be equally debilitating and can last many years longer - I’d like to see a greater range of choice other than just for conditions that will predictably end life in a short timeframe - that’s not going to be of any use