Euthanasia

#3
Sad indeed.

But is the right to take one's own life a basic human right?
 
#6
PTP, is it not better going like that than being a selfish t#at and hanging/shooting themselves?

The guy was suffering badly, and him and his family took the decision.

Right or wrong, I would rather do that than let a loved one suffer.
 
#7
I doubt I'd want t live on if I was suffering and had exhausted all hope, but at the same time I can see the anti argument. The frail and elderly could easily feel themselves pressured to go before they wanted. I think on the whole an emotional response based on pity would make bad law and could easily be abused. The right to life has to be sacrosanct and the right to control the direction or duration of life necessarily second.
 
#8
I don't disagree with you Heid.

But doesn't current EU law specifically prohibit going out in this fashion? Should the right to take your own life, albeit in assisted and humane fashion, be a part of the HRA?
 
#9
It is something that I would wish be available when I consider I need or want it. I can understand all the debate. Why not leave it as now - make it available in those countries that permit it and check the motives and actions of anyone who assists, Have a very high level of criminal activity as a decision factor as to whether anyone assisting should be prosecuted.
 
#10
Its a hard one to call. I think the fact it has been in all the papers and all over the news is a bad thing, it just opens the floodgates for everyone as someone has previously mentioned.

I think EU law does forbid it, but there must be a loophole somewhere.

I personally think they shouldn't have been allowed to film it.
 
#11
PTP I would agree if a person is healthy and decides to do this as an escape from pressure or a depressing situation.
However this person would not be able to live were it not for technology, and what form of life can technology offer him? Breathing and eating through a tube is not my idea of living, no wind in your face, no feeling the rain and sun, no biting into an apple.
He can't share fully with his family, they have to suffer watching him suffer, and he knows this and cares about them. The family have done all they can, what do you want them to do now, simply prolong the inevitable? Now the family can mourn and get on with their lives. The wife said 'Safe Journey', now whether you or I or the dog believe in an afterlife is not important, they obviously do and so death is not the horror that it is for other people. The family have talked it out, it is not his decision alone.
What right do we have to impose our beliefs over theirs simply because we believe that life is all there is?

Healers used to learn to cure where you can but let the dying spirit go. His body can't maintain him, science can't cure him, let him go.

Heidtheba sums it up well, I fcukin' would as well, nae probs.
 
#12
[Healers used to learn to cure where you can but let the dying spirit go. His body can't maintain him, science can't cure him, let him go.


Very well put.
 
#13
It resonates with me, because my father , having had one stroke and a 94% recovery was terrified of another one reducing him to a vegetative state, and dependant for survival on his family.

He was a brilliant mind , and had spoken about it to us, that if he had another one that disabled him, we were to make absolutely sure if offered a choice, the machine was to be turned off.

Whether we could have 'assisted' Dignitas style, is a question I would rather not dwell on.
 
#14
My father in law suffered from a condition classed as Cerebellar ataxia, which is a blanket term that covers a number of possible casues. There are common features such as it being progressive slowly and can take years to get to a bad stake, so it creeps up.

Walking becomes increasingly difficult, eventually leading to mobilty scooters and wheelchairs. Incontinence follows and then difficulties with swallowing and slurred speech. General motor functions get crappy and sight and hearing also be affected but through all this intellectual faculties not affected. There is no cure.

So the net result was over a period of four years he went from being fully active to bedridden, virtually unable to move let alone walk, unable to talk, became quite deaf and his vision poor and had to be fed via a tube. Quality of life: zero.

He communicated via a touchpad using the very limited finger movement he had left and to tap out a few words would take ages. One of the last things he managed to spell out before he became really bad was to the effect that if he had even guessed how bad it would get he would have topped himself years before but by the time he sussed that out he no longer had the ability to do so by himself.

In the end heart failure did for him after a pretty vile period where he needed 24 hour care, was in constant pain and was incapable of doing anything apart from existing.

No thanks. I am resolved to head for the exit by myself if anything like that looks likely.
 
#15
PartTimePongo said:
It resonates with me, because my father , having had one stroke and a 94% recovery was terrified of another one reducing him to a vegetative state, and dependant for survival on his family.

He was a brilliant mind , and had spoken about it to us, that if he had another one that disabled him, we were to make absolutely sure if offered a choice, the machine was to be turned off.

Whether we could have 'assisted' Dignitas style, is a question I would rather not dwell on.
I understand what you say, but if you truly love a person then how can you not help them avoid pain or loss of personality, which is what a vegetative state is?
My own father was a doctor, who like many of his generation hit the bottle heavily at nights and ended up with cirhosis and eventually unconscious on a life-support system. Mum agreed to a transplant which the medical team said was possible though not normal for a man just turned seventy.
(My brother and I were not sure that this was the best option for more than one reason.)
Two tears later the liver began to fail and after a week in hospital getting jabbed every day and no propspect of any change Dad asked to be taken home. I will never forget the look on his face when he said "Just get me out of here I want to go home", with pain and desperation in his voice.
I never had any doubts, we took him home filled him with rum, shaved him, hugged him, and watched him drift away in his own house surrounded by his family with his dog at his side. - Better than being blown apart by a bomb in Bagdad leaving dependant wife and kids.
The doctors couldn't do anything for Dad, they let us take him home without demur. We helped my Dad when he needed it, and didn't submit him to a life of pain simply because we were terrified of death, and of that I am pleased and wouldn't change my decision in any way.

PTP, when someone you love is suffering, and there is no way forward you find the strength.
 
#16
PartTimePongo said:
Sad indeed.

But is the right to take one's own life a basic human right?
Edited to take out somones dribbling.

So you think no. Well thats us told then.

One of my grandparents is layed in hospital now and has been for the last 6 months.

She has to breath via a ventilator, cannot eat or drink, control her bodily functions, or recognise any of the family.

Last year she had a breast removed because she had cancer, at the age of 93!

So, does she have any quality of life? No. Is she suffering? We cant tell, and she cant tell us.

My own father and my uncle and aunts, genuinely would like her to pass away peacefully, and she is their mother.

She has a been a rock all her life, and do you think she would like her great grandchildren to remember her as a shell of her former self? No, me neither, we dont even have the opition to take her home and have one final goodbye.

Would I help her go if she had the opportunity to ask me? As above, fcuking right I would.

So lashes, just call me god.
 
#17
Horrendous situation. Utterly horrendous. I have been fortunate never to have had a long-term issue of this sort. I have no answers, and if the truth be known, I don't really want to confront the issue until I'm forced to. We would be jailed if we allowed a pet to suffer in the way we allow humans to suffer; and yet who would want to make that sort of decision? I think most people would wish to be allowed to die at a time of their own choosing, but then we go round and round the obvious caveats and pressures.
 
#18
lashes said:
PartTimePongo said:
Sad indeed.

But is the right to take one's own life a basic human right?
I personally i think no because i feel that if you have some medical problems and you dont fit in too society because you hava a disability or that you feel that you are a burden on your family/ people because they are providing you with personal care you feel preasurised in to going along with assisted sucide
We are forever hearing about the campaign to assist people to die with dignity, for example, but what about the equally compelling campaign to assist people to live with dignity?
We must protect life and cannot be allowed to play God; deciding who lives or not vis a vis the burden they are or will become to society.

Chubb. You are a perfect case and reason why enforced euthanasia should exist. In your pointless 35 years of life, you have wasted the potential for a group of cells to achieve something useful. For example; Your DNA could have been used to make a perfectly good pair of walking shoes.
 

Fugly

ADC
DirtyBAT
#19
lashes said:
PartTimePongo said:
Sad indeed.

But is the right to take one's own life a basic human right?
I personally i think no because i feel that if you have some medical problems and you dont fit in too society because you hava a disability or that you feel that you are a burden on your family/ people because they are providing you with personal care you feel preasurised in to going along with assisted sucide
We are forever hearing about the campaign to assist people to die with dignity, for example, but what about the equally compelling campaign to assist people to live with dignity?
We must protect life and cannot be allowed to play God; deciding who lives or not vis a vis the burden they are or will become to society.
What a pile of dribble - but what else can you expect from the Chubb? If anyone needed a forward assist into the afterlife, it's you, you gopping welsh shit-thick cretin.
 
#20
heidtheba said:
lashes said:
PartTimePongo said:
Sad indeed.

But is the right to take one's own life a basic human right?
I personally i think no because i feel that if you have some medical problems and you dont fit in too society because you hava a disability or that you feel that you are a burden on your family/ people because they are providing you with personal care you feel preasurised in to going along with assisted sucide
We are forever hearing about the campaign to assist people to die with dignity, for example, but what about the equally compelling campaign to assist people to live with dignity?
We must protect life and cannot be allowed to play God; deciding who lives or not vis a vis the burden they are or will become to society.
So you think no. Well thats us told then.

One of my grandparents is layed in hospital now and has been for the last 6 months.

She has to breath via a ventilator, cannot eat or drink, control her bodily functions, or recognise any of the family.

Last year she had a breast removed because she had cancer, at the age of 93!

So, does she have any quality of life? No. Is she suffering? We cant tell, and she cant tell us.

My own father and my uncle and aunts, genuinely would like her to pass away peacefully, and she is their mother.

She has a been a rock all her life, and do you think she would like her great grandchildren to remember her as a shell of her former self? No, me neither, we dont even have the opition to take her home and have one final goodbye.

Would I help her go if she had the opportunity to ask me? As above, fcuking right I would.

So lashes, just call me god.
So sorry to hear this Heidtheba.

We have an old lady who is not physically viable, meaning if you take her off the machines she will die, as has happened throughout history until only very recently.
So we keep the body alive because to decide otherwise is to go down the slippery slope of disposing of the old 'uns and disabled as society sees fit. Or to allow familes to put down old folk when they can't cope or be bothered or just want them out of the way. But we aren't making the decision to keep them alive, the state and system is, individual choice has been removed from the equation.

Where is Heidtheba's grandmother now? The spark that made her the loved mother and grandmother isn't there and probably isn't coming back, she would be horrified to know what is happening to her. And the family cannot say goodbye as my family managed to. Who has the right to overide that?
Yes I can see that the system needs control, rigour, and definitions, but I can't see that it is more important than the individual's rights, especially when the end result is only to prolong (or cause) pain for the individual and the family concerned. That to me is simply cruelty in the name of PC.

What happened in the years before all this technology, and what happens in most of the world still? Cruelty is generally frowned on, why is it tolerated here? Because death isn't necessarily bad, it happens to us all. Helping someone to die with love is a positive act, nothing to do with playing God. (And that is paraphrasing a British Army doctor in the Japanese POW camps).

Personally I want to go aged 94 either by a heart attack while running my ten miles or shot by a jealous husband. Why should someone else make the decision to keep me tied to a shell, in pain, with no life and a suffering family as they watch all this, who has that right?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top