Euthanasia, your views

I'm tempted to suggest mandatory euthanasia for those involved in I Keano.

If done properly, it's not giving power to institutions at all. It's giving power to individuals to make their own end-of-life-care decisions in a respectful, legal and medically sound way. And I am 100% in favour of that.

Why are people so angry about euthanasia ?

Do you get angry if your dog is in unending terrible pain and is put to sleep peacefully ?

No, you are glad the option is there.

As a bonus we will have the option to continue the suffering or end it, if we have to make such a choice for ourselves.

It's amazing how these edge cases like the veteran who was inappropriately offered euthanasia are hugely publicised, largely by the same right wing press (Telegraph, Daily Mail, NY Post) that would consistently rail against improved building standards that would eliminate the need for a ramp in the first place. Absolute hypocrites.

In response to AndrewJRenko, hit reply instead of quote.

I'm not trying to downplay mental health issues, but once you allow them as a criteria where do you draw the line?

A 30 year old with a long history of depression? An 18 year old suffering from depression?

Rightly or wrongly once something is legalised it also tends to be legitimised. And I'd hate to see an uptick in people with mental issues choosing euthanasia. Mental health issues can make it seem like there's no point in going on, but I've yet to meet anyone whose made it through them who wishes they hadn't.

Admittedly our mental health services here need some serious investing in and aren't really fit for purpose.

They are talking about removing the three day wait which never had any justification to be there in the first place. The slippery slope argument doesn't stand up. If a law is introduced and found to be flawed then it's only correct that those flaws are rectified, and preferably as soon as possible instead of doing nothing for years for fear of offending the slippery-slopers. (Which incidentally is one very good reason why putting things into the constitution that don't absolutely have to be there is crazy.)

Ultimately we have a deeply conservative set of politicians as a whole, most of them were years behind public opinion on abortion. They are still pandering to the church/religious viewpoint in education like it's the 1950s, and they are doing the same on the issue of euthanasia too. They hate these sort of issues that require a stance to be taken which won't please everyone. So they do nothing unless overwhelming public opinion forces them to do something. It's hard to imagine the same bunch who practically have to be dragged kicking and screaming to make any sort of social change to suddenly then start liberalising a law they've just brought in, "because slippery slope".

Taking power away from institutions if anything

The doctor on PT was from a hospice with a religious ethos and it was totally clear that that was where her objections were coming from. Imagine you are dying and the only options open to you are suffer at home or go to an institution where some religion you're not even a member of is going to enforce its moral viewpoint on you and you just have to suck it up.

Do you really not take mental health issues as seriously as physical health? No one wants to see an uptake of deaths by suicide, but if people are suicidal, at least let them go out with a bit of dignity, and not in a way that traumatises those around them. And yes, some people make it through and do well, and some people will never make it through, even when they get the best of mental health supports around them.

I already have a loosely-formed plan in place. There's no way I'm going to be noble and stoic and suffer through a long and painful decline.

No real health problems at the moment but about a year ago I had an issue that, while minor and relatively short-lived, cost me my independence for just over six weeks.

I was counting on people to help me out for the most trivial little things. I wasn't in any real pain and I never considered the possibility that there might be something seriously wrong, but I was CONSUMED by the misery of it all nonetheless.

What I learned was that I do not cope being unable to take care of myself.

I tried to be an adult about it and organise some sort of counselling for myself so I would be able to get through the days without losing it but it didn't help. If, after the six weeks, the doctors had said "Yeah, we still don't know when you'll be able to drive/clean/make beds," I think I would have given serious thought to putting my plan into action. In the past I have had injuries, surgeries and illnesses that were a pain to get through but at least I had some sort of timeline for a return to normality. This was different because for a while it looked like this was how things were going to be for me for the foreseeable future.

When I was fully functional I discreetly began collecting what I need to have to hand if the situation calls for it.

I enjoy life too much to endure it rather than live it. If I can't take care of myself I want out. I'll take action six months early rather than leave it a day late.

I watched someone close to me die a slow death. Apart from the fact that I would do absolutely anything to avoid experiencing the same thing myself, I would take whatever drastic steps are necessary to save people around me from having to watch me suffer and diminish and rally and decline. The groaning, the gurgling in every breath, the sudden movement that might be involuntary, might be a response to pain, and might be a desperate attempt to escape. I don't want anybody to see me like that.

I fully support euthanasia. Who would wish years of being bed ridden, in pain or discomfort, ending your days in a state of confusion and anxiety due to dementia or making repeated attempts to leave a world you no longer want to exist in.

It needs to be done properly and maybe when it does get to the stage where legislation will be considered perhaps our legislators need to see how successful countries do it instead of the half a$sed lame knee jerk laws that are passed here.

Plenty of doctors and medical professionals support people’s right to choose a legal and dignified death instead of enduring incurable suffering.

It’s not like there would be an overwhelming demand for such a service, because thankfully the situations that it would be appropriate for are actually relatively rare, and then it’s only a sub-set of those people that would make the choice, but no other country has had any issue in providing it once it’s been legalised, and I don’t see why Ireland would be any different.

I think that's a really thorny one to actually get any proper data on. Since you can't ask any follow up questions once someone is gone.

There have been some studies into it looking at people who survived jumping off bridges but the sample sizes are generally low.

There is a study called “Where Are They Now?: A Follow-up Study of Suicide Attempters from the Golden Gate Bridge.” by Dr Richard H. Seiden. Jumping off that bridge has a roughly 99% fatality rate, so this study was looking at people prevented from jumping as opposed to surviving a jump.

Of the 515 people who were stopped from jumping, 35 of them went on to complete suicide in a different location(study covered a roughly 35 year time period).

This has generally been backed up in other studies where roughly 9 out of 10 people who attempt suicide unsuccessfully will not complete it at a later date. Now if those people instead had chosen assisted suicide/euthanasia they'd all just be dead.

In general when people argue for euthanasia they generally do think in terms of dementia or horrible illnesses that end in death, but the trend in Europe has been once it's legalized the grounds under which it can be requested tend to just broaden and broaden. The guardian had a fairly balanced look into this back in 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jan/18/death-on-demand-has-euthanasia-gone-too-far-netherlands-assisted-dying

My condolences to your mother and her friend, truly horrible thing to go through.

Ridiculous logic. Are we pumping the poor and those who are a burden with Morphine at the minute? No.

The truth is at the moment we have a grey area in palliative care anyway where there's essentially a carte blanche prescription on the likes of morphine for the terminally ill. Take as needed and when you run out, it's renewed. As it's an acknowledgement that at that stage, whatever makes you comfortable and prepares you for the inevitable til you pass away, pumped with it.

Now, imagine an intervention before the constant pain, the gradual loss of the ability to walk, the growth of cancer to the rest of your body so for example it puts pressure on your bladder and makes you pee yourself at a moments notice. The fear, the constant wondering if when death will come.

Or, the loss of memory, the inability to cook, bathe oneself, remember how to use the toilet, becoming angry and frustrated and shouting abuse at loved ones who change your soiled sheets. I could go on.

I'm talking a matter of months making all the difference. If I had cancer (I don't, this is hypothetical) and chemo wasn't effective or I was too old/frail for chemo, why couldnt I choose to pass in July, having everything with family sorted, my goodbyes, my last memories and telling all how much I love them. When I know there's only months left.

You think it's okay to suffer on to December, losing my dignity, bodily functions and die gasping, incoherent and unable to communicate properly with loved ones, as I wheeze and groan and am in and out of sleep with morphine until one hour I'm finally gone?

How is that anyone else's choice but the person suffering.

Parallels with abortion again

• number of doctors opting out [although in this case specialists, not GPs], poor geographical access to service, will opted-out doctors refer a patient or just wash their hands of them? Will they be able to resist making their disapproval very clear also?
• Having to travel abroad
• Expense / commitment of having to travel abroad meaning that once a decision is made then having second thoughts, delaying a while, etc. is difficult.

Medical profession as a whole need to put their patients' wishes and interests first tbh instead of moralising like so many of its members do

That Swiss law is bad law tbh. It forces people to act sooner than they otherwise might out of fear they'll end up stuck. IMO it's those who have expressed their wishes but are unable physically to carry them out who are in most need.