Assisted Suicide

23-04-2015 06:05PM

Gongoozler wrote: »

It is the opinion of many people in that position that it is undignified.

Things such as having someone else change your colostomy bag, or wipe you, or feed you, or wash your hair. I can easily see how someone would feel they don't want to go through that.

Well that's a shame, since there's more to human dignity than being able to go to the loo unaided. Living with a colostomy bag might be difficult, but dignity is inherent in people, it's not something negated by needing help with anything. It's something I heard said in regard to my relative, people who didn't even know them declared their existence undignified when it certainly was not.

People might not want to go through difficulties associated with illness, but I still believe the word dignity has no place in end of life discussions, unless as electro-bitch says, it's in relation to the states interference with a persons right to make a decision for themselves.

4zn76tysfajdxp · 23-04-2015 06:07PM

libelula wrote: »

The day someone has to wipe my arse or I'm being fed with a spoon is the day I know it's time to check out.

I agree, we should euthanise infants.

Lollipops23 · 23-04-2015 06:12PM

As someone with MS in her family, I would absolutely want the option to get out on my own terms. I've see what it can do to people, and no way am I ending up like that.

If the person is of sound mind making the decision, and explicitly lays out the terms etc. I see no reason why it shouldn't be totally above board. It's their body, they should be permitted to do what they want and die with dignity.

folamh · 23-04-2015 06:15PM

Candie wrote: »

Well that's a shame, since there's more to human dignity than being able to go to the loo unaided. Living with a colostomy bag might be difficult, but dignity is inherent in people, it's not something negated by needing help with anything. It's something I heard said in regard to my relative, people who didn't even know them declared their existence undignified when it certainly was not.

People might not want to go through difficulties associated with illness, but I still believe the word dignity has no place in end of life discussions, unless as electro-bitch says, it's in relation to the states interference with a persons right to make a decision for themselves.

Fair point on the use of the word dignity. Do you think that the organization 'Dignitas' should rename themselves?

RosieLion · 23-04-2015 06:17PM

I agree with legalizing assisted suicide. As one poster already mentioned, we already put down animals such as dogs and horses. What makes humans so different? Because we imagine ourselves to be superior?
But there's always opposites. In a philosophy taster day I debated this with my teacher and she raised the point that children may use the legalization as a way to kill their elderly parents to inherit the wealth (not that I could imagine anyone wanting to kill their parents!). But surely the states would be super-duper careful in case this does happen, and they'd intervene if they could, wouldn't they?
But yes, I agree 100% that people just have the choice to end their lives.

23-04-2015 06:17PM

folamh wrote: »

Fair point on the use of the word dignity. Do you think that the organization 'Dignitas' should rename themselves?

I do. Have to unsubscribe from this thread now, it's too raw tbh.

Galwayguy35 · 23-04-2015 06:21PM

If I found out I had something that was going to leave me in a bad way or end up with no memory of who I was I would do it myself rather than ask someone else to do it.

No way would I want to end up like that.

Lollipops23 · 23-04-2015 06:22PM

Candie wrote: »

I do. Have to unsubscribe from this thread now, it's too raw tbh.

I'm very sorry for your loss.

I don't agree with you though. I know there's plenty of people who wouldn't have a massive problem requiring special care due to their condition, but it's the worst nightmare of others.

23-04-2015 06:31PM

I got suspended from school for writing a 1000 word essay on the subject.

It was fairly balanced but I concluded that it was cruel to force someone to keep alive a person in a condition that they were deeply unhappy/uncomfortable with.

If the shoe were on the other foot and all that.

folamh · 23-04-2015 06:36PM

circadian wrote: »

I got suspended from school for writing a 1000 word essay on the subject.

It was fairly balanced but I concluded that it was cruel to force someone to keep alive a person in a condition that they were deeply unhappy/uncomfortable with.

If the shoe were on the other foot and all that.

The f*ck? Was the topic of euthanasia given to you or did you choose the topic yourself?

Einhard · 23-04-2015 06:37PM

I'd be for assisted suicide as long as safeguards were in place to prevent abuse.

Having said that, I don't know if I could ever help someone through such a process. Hopefully I'll never have to find out.

I can understand why the state feels the need to prosecute this woman though. Like it or not, assisted suicide is a crime. The state can't simply decide not to apply the laws of the land on a whim. If the legislation isn't changed, then there's no other option but to prosecute.

Riddle101 · 23-04-2015 06:37PM

I'm a huge advocate for assisted suicide. To me, it's an act of mercy. At the end of the day, I'd rather go out on my own terms. If I had Alzheimer's disease, terminal cancer or some other terminal illness, then assisted suicide is the way to go for me.

I think every individual should at least have the right to choose assisted suicide. But obviously there needs to a certain criteria, so that it wouldn't get abused. But nonetheless, I would write it into my will that under the circumstances I listed above, I would go the route of assisted suicide.

Gongoozler · 23-04-2015 06:38PM

Candie wrote: »

Well that's a shame, since there's more to human dignity than being able to go to the loo unaided. Living with a colostomy bag might be difficult, but dignity is inherent in people, it's not something negated by needing help with anything. It's something I heard said in regard to my relative, people who didn't even know them declared their existence undignified when it certainly was not.

People might not want to go through difficulties associated with illness, but I still believe the word dignity has no place in end of life discussions, unless as electro-bitch says, it's in relation to the states interference with a persons right to make a decision for themselves.

But my point is that for lots of people actually going through it that's what's undignified about it. So, really, it's not for you to say it's not

K4t · 23-04-2015 06:41PM

circadian wrote: »

I got suspended from school for writing a 1000 word essay on the subject.

That's not a school, it's a sect.

WhatNowForUs? · 23-04-2015 06:44PM

circadian wrote: »

I got suspended from school for writing a 1000 word essay on the subject.

It was fairly balanced but I concluded that it was cruel to force someone to keep alive a person in a condition that they were deeply unhappy/uncomfortable with.

If the shoe were on the other foot and all that.

I can hardly believe that. What was the reason?

Hannibal Smith · 23-04-2015 06:58PM

Im all for it. I saw Terry Pratchetts program on assisted suicide and its a tough decision for all involved. The sad thing is the person themselves has to be able to take the concoction so its done when theyre still fairly healthy before whatever illness the person is trying to escape from has really taken hold. But its something i definitely support and i feel really sorry for people left behind under current laws.

Mesrine65 · 23-04-2015 07:03PM

I've been a member of Exit International for a number of years now & fully intend to go the route of euthanasia should the need arise.

http://exitinternational.net/

Duiske · 23-04-2015 07:08PM

I would agree that assisted end of life should be legalised, but a problem for many would be the nescessity to have stringent protections built into the legislation to protect the vunerable. This would almost certainly rule out assistance for those with even the most debilitating depression. In fact, it would most likely rule out assistance for anyone diagnosed with any cognitive impairment.

Gongoozler · 23-04-2015 07:30PM

But that's what part of the argument would be - that because you have a terminal illness you're not capable of making that decision.

MrWalsh · 24-04-2015 07:46AM

folamh wrote: »

If your parent, significant other or child were suicidal because of mental illness, would you want the state to assist them in killing themselves?

Yes I would.

24-04-2015 08:09AM

K4t wrote: »

That's not a school, it's a sect.

Exactly.

WhatNowForUs? wrote: »

I can hardly believe that. What was the reason?

We had the option to do a short 500 worder on either abortion or euthanasia, we were basically being steered in the direction that the were wrong etc.

Most of the class wrote guff that would keep the RE teachers happy. I however, found myself researching it and forming my own opinion. The teacher wasn't too happy and complained to the principal (who is now a high ranking member of the Church). He went on to tell me that kind of thought was against the school ethos and that it was evil to play god and "put down a human as if they were a sick dog".

Tools the lot of them.

folamh · 24-04-2015 08:13AM

RE class. That explains it.

One eyed Jack · 24-04-2015 08:16AM

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

I'm always left dumbfounded when I think about how the state thinks it can have a say in a person taking their life.

The State doesn't have a say in how a person chooses to take their own life. Suicide was decriminalised in 1993 and is therefore no longer a crime. It's the 'assisted' part is problematic, as that involves someone else taking a person's life.

Surely if we live in a supposedly civilised society then people who are in a constant state of pain and suffering should be allowed to die with some dignity rather than just wasting away in front of their loved ones?

I mean, your dog gets sick and you put it too sleep, A fecking horse can break its leg and will get put down.

It's because we live in a civilized society that we don't allow for people to take another person's life simply because that person wants them to, and I don't think your argument is helped by comparing human beings to animals.

Now, please I'm only referring here to people with long-term fatal/degenerative illnesses.

What say you boards posters? Am I stark raving bonkers to hold such an opinion?

TLDR; Assisted suicide for people will fatal/degenerative illnesses?
Yay or Nay.

I support euthanasia, but obviously with checks and balances in place to prevent people from being able to suggest that the person wanted to die. There would have to be some authority in place that would be able to make that call rather than leaving it in the hands of either the person themselves or their relatives or friends who couldn't be trusted to do the job properly.

Discodog · 24-04-2015 08:53AM

Mesrine65 wrote: »

I've been a member of Exit International for a number of years now & fully intend to go the route of euthanasia should the need arise.

http://exitinternational.net/

I have too. I am going to die. It's inevitable. So why should I suffer life once I no longer enjoy it ?

folamh · 28-04-2015 05:36PM

Gail O'Rourke has been found not guilty: http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0428/697292-gail-ororke-court/

Judge McCartan said Ms Forde had wanted someone to be with her in the end to hold her hand and that Ms O'Rorke was "an honest decent woman faced with a huge dilemma".

However, he said this trial was not about emotion and if the jurors were driven by emotion they could not do their job.

Judge McCartan said this was the first prosecution under the Criminal Law Suicide Act of 1993 but told the jury that did not affect the law.

"There is a first time for everything," he said.

28-04-2015 05:38PM

I find it pretty hard to understand how she was found not guilty with the law as it is.

nathang20 · 28-04-2015 05:43PM

I think the Jury was probably comprised of normal, decent people. They understand the age we live in. We all lose so many rights, one right shouldn't be wether or not the choice to live or die.

folamh · 28-04-2015 05:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I find it pretty hard to understand how she was found not guilty with the law as it is.

Section 2(2) of the Criminal Law (Suicide) Act 1993 says that:

"A person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the suicide of another, or an attempt by another to commit suicide, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years."

Within this is room for interpretation as to what constitutes aiding, abetting and counseling. Consider that Ms. O'Rorke wasn't with Ms. Forde on the night that she killed herself, she didn't administer the drug, etc. The defense even has Ms. Forde's testimony on their side (rare in these cases). Although the evidence that Ms. O'Rorke aided the suicide is strong, it was probably deemed insufficient.

28-04-2015 05:54PM

folamh wrote: »

Section 2(2) of the Criminal Law (Suicide) Act 1993 says that:

"A person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the suicide of another, or an attempt by another to commit suicide, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years."

Within this is room for interpretation as to what constitutes aiding, abetting and counseling. Consider that Ms. O'Rorke wasn't with Ms. Forde on the night that she killed herself, she didn't administer the drug, etc. The defense even has Ms. Forde's testimony on their side (rare in these cases). Although the evidence that Ms. O'Rorke aided the suicide is strong, it was probably deemed insufficient.

Was it not the attempt to get her to Switzerland that she was eventually tried for? The actual death and procurement of chemicals charges were dropped last week.

RDM_83 again · 28-04-2015 05:56PM

People keep talking about the Devil being in the details but its something thats impossible to work out adequately.
Take the Belgian brothers who were going blind (on mobile so no link), that occurred in a system with plenty of checks and balances and was a condition that many have to live through.
Just because people may be judged mentally competent doesn't mean they have in anyway typical priorities and judgements.

IMO easiest ethical way through this, in case of physical pain let medical professionals medicate without concern for patient death, we don't just rely on 19th century opiates

Assisted Suicide

Comments