jamesmark Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 After reading that Debbie Purdy has lost her court battle to get reassurance that her husband would not be charged on his return from Switzerland for aiding Euthanasia. What is your opinion on it? Personally (and it is hard to tell) I think that if a person is in good mind then they should be allowed to go for assisted euthanasia. Also a nominated relative should be allowed to assist if it is the wish of the person who is suffering and it is done correctly i.e. through the courts/medical board. Opinions on this, is it right or wrong for assisted euthanasia? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I think it's right, as you say if someone is in a good frame of mind and is truly suffering, why force them to live the rest of there life when they just want to go with whatever dignity they have left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ark Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Controversial topic, but if someone wants to die, I think they should be allowed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustGav Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Firm supporter! Mel works in a dementia unit and some of the people really don't have a clue on life anymore and it is really sad, they have come from all works of life. One of them was a boxer and now he just sits around. According to Mel he comments more on his lack of ability to do anything more than his concern at the dementia. I've always said to Mel that if I have a serious accident or I'm not all there (more so than usual), to simply put a bottle of pills by the bed with a glass of milk. I don't see why it is so controversial... at the end of the day people don't think twice of putting an ill animal down to put an end to it's suffering, how is it any different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lbm Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 We do it for our pets etc...not that we can actually ask them if they mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmark Posted October 29, 2008 Author Share Posted October 29, 2008 I've always said to Mel that if I have a serious accident or I'm not all there (more so than usual), to simply put a bottle of pills by the bed with a glass of milk. That is mine and Sarahs outlook too, as you and your lass we are both firm supporters of it aswell however it goes through my mind that it is easy saying it just now but when the day comes it is a whole different ball game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustGav Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 That is mine and Sarahs outlook too, as you and your lass we are both firm supporters of it aswell however it goes through my mind that it is easy saying it just now but when the day comes it is a whole different ball game. Yes, I agree, crunch time may be tough, however as Mel has said... if either of us are really at that stage, which is better.... remembering the other half in a negative light because you have spent x years looking after effectively an infant, or rather remembering the better side and not having a tainted view. Sounds cold I know, but life isn't always happy happy smiles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mathew Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 im all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewOW Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I don't see why it is so controversial... at the end of the day people don't think twice of putting an ill animal down to put an end to it's suffering, how is it any different? I'd thought its more to do with money, ie. inheritances etc. Its a sinister thought, but all too possible to imagine that bumping someone off before their time could be fortunate to others. Maybe. I am in favour of it, as long as all those precautions have been addressed first, but very difficult to do IMO. If the person affected is virtually a vegetable (due to an accident etc), and couldn't even nod a yes or no to agree etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustGav Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 But very difficult to do IMO. If the person affected is virtually a vegetable (due to an accident etc), and couldn't even nod a yes or no. Valid point, however I have complete faith in Mel that if she feels there is no quality of life for me I can be confident she would do the right thing for me. Everything I own is hers anyway so inheritance doesn't matter and they are only worldly goods which as a invalid wouldn't benefit me anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Lynz_ Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Firm supporter too. Why is it that we don't let animals suffer yet we let humans suffer. My nan had a stroke and brain haemorage (sp) at 60 but lived until she was 65, it was the most awful thing I've ever seen. She couldn't talk, she couldn't walk and had to totally rely on everyone for everything. She would get upset as she was so frustrated that she couldn't say or do what she wanted to anymore. I never want to go through what she went through and think if she had been given the choice she wouldn't have put up with it for 5 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Voluntary - definitely Compulsory - for some people As has already been said, if you left your dog in the same condition as some people are left to die in, you would be regarded as cruel. Lots of grey areas, but in general, I think, properly controlled, it should be lawfull. PS... I may change my mind as I get older Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I wouldnt say its right or wrong, everyone should have equally opportunities in life and in the case that someone fells they have no life due to disability or disease then yes they should have the right to end their life. I think it should be back obviously by a doctor whether that persons will live a normal life or not, thus euthanasia! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I've heard euthanasia consultants make a killing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I've heard euthanasia consultants make a killing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Trouble is, people change. Plenty of people who attempted suicide at a young age go on to comment on how lucky they were that they didn't die, and can recount all the amazing things they've then done in their life. It would be horrible for the families and people involved if -for example- someone was euthanased because of an incurable and debilitating illness, only for a cure to be found a year later!! It's difficult with people who are ill, because you can never say they're in sound enough mind to make the decision, the illness will no doubt be clouding otherwise rational judgement. In a way it would be better to leave the decision to the family, but then there are some right gits out there who'd take advantage of that!! I would say I want to be euthanased at any point in my life where I can't say that I don't want to be!! This doesn't count for comas and unconsiousness etc. but if I'm a vegetable, brain damaged to the point where I can't answer 'YES' in any way to the question "Do you want to remain alive?", then what's the point in staying alive anyway!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazboy Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 I'd do it anyway and to hell with the law. Seriously how hard is your punishment gong to be? Derranged nutters who kick a man to death and pleaded not guilty got 15 years (and that is being reduced on appeal) so for a crime of the heart, plead guilty and be a good boy inside and mention that taking away your kids remaing parent is a bad idea. You are also tried by 12 of your peers who may sympathise too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesmark Posted October 29, 2008 Author Share Posted October 29, 2008 I'd do it anyway and to hell with the law. Seriously how hard is your punishment gong to be? Derranged nutters who kick a man to death and pleaded not guilty got 15 years (and that is being reduced on appeal) so for a crime of the heart, plead guilty and be a good boy inside and mention that taking away your kids remaing parent is a bad idea. You are also tried by 12 of your peers who may sympathise too. Possibly no jail time at all...... There have so far been no prosecutions of relatives of 101 UK citizens who have gone to the Dignitas clinic. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7697200.stm However there is always a first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foodfreak Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 When my farther died last christmas from terminal cancer, He pleaded to go for 3 months, which was absolute hell for him, (& very painfull for my mum, my brother & me to sit and watch) The doctors could not do anything but wait for things to take thier natural course & let the gradual liver failure kill him. I would have gladly pulled the switch for him. My view is that where there is a obvious terminal illness, where quality of life & dignity are so low, the law should allow for volantary(sp) euthanasia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 It's assisted suicide, not assisted euthanasia. Two totally different things. Suicide = DIY Euthanasia = getting someone else to do it for you, either voluntary where you make the decision or involuntary because you are incapable of making the decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian R Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Who has the right to decide what you do with your own life. Surely not allowing someone to carry out their own wishes is an infringement on human rights. Though that was the EU's favourite topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy442 Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Im with Ian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Although... if you had an annoying old relative with dementia or something, it would be easy to bump them off and call it euthanasia. I suspect that why there are laws against it... how many murder cases would be framed up as euthanasia?! I'm thinking quite a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian R Posted October 29, 2008 Share Posted October 29, 2008 Although... if you had an annoying old relative with dementia or something, it would be easy to bump them off and call it euthanasia. I suspect that why there are laws against it... how many murder cases would be framed up as euthanasia?! I'm thinking quite a lot. Agreed however I think if we had something similar to the donor card or by means that a written agreement has to be drawn up by a lawyer then may sort problem out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.