[Politics] Assisted Dying

[Swansman]

You have no choice about how, when and where you come into the world - that should not be the case when you leave it

... because?

 

[Swansman]

If/when assisted dying is in place, there will absolutely be professionals who will approve it following rigorous checks. Alcoholism alone would surely never be approved due to the potential to recover from it - unless there are alcohol related illnesses which are untreatable and causing extreme pain.

In terms of ethics, this is such a black and white issue. If someone is in unsufferable pain and there is no relief from it, then of course they should be allowed to die if that's what they and their family wants. I just don't believe there is any argument against this, if there is I would love to hear it.

Would? Unfortunately that is not the case. In the Dutch law, "social isolation and loneliness" are now valid reasons to apply for euthanasia. Which is a scary development.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Two doctors and a High Court judge.

**** me. I wouldn't trust them to rule on a haemorrhoid.

I would only consider it if the person was either of sound mind and had been asking for release for some time. And even then...

My 84 year old granny said 'I wish Jesus would take me' on occasions, when she was virtually bedridden, her immune system destroyed by decades of high voltage anti-inflammatories (phenylbutazone - now reserved for horses) and her third hip replacement (you can do the maths) giving her the screaming abdabs. But even she didn't really mean it.

And there is the rub. Who really means it? The high profile cases are very specific, but how can anyone say that the person really means it? And this is before we get into the psychological equivalent of body dysmorphia, instincts to self harm . . . . .and can you really trust the motives of the relative who swears blind that their terminally ill husband/wife who can no longer speak or move 'really wants to go'?.

Is it OK to take your life when 'the balance of' your 'mind is disturbed'? Or get someone to help you?

Many things that humans desire and humans do may be understandable. Many things humans desire and do we deplore (I won't list them). Other things we find we can support, if it makes sense to us, or maps to our desires and biases.

No, sorry. I am implacably against it. As I am the death penalty. Thou shalt not kill. And I do not believe in god, before anyone asks.

 

[Swansman]

I'm not familiar with Dutch culture and ethics, but we would never accept that here, as we have an absolute faith in recovery and the potential to recover. We would almost universally believe it to be ethically wrong to let someone end their lives with 'social isolation or loneliness' as the reason, if that's really what happens over there.

In fact I think the only reason we would allow someone to end their lives is through untreatable chronic physical pain.

Pretty sure that the Dutch would have said the same thing 25 years ago but since the introduction of euthanasia for the reason you mention I guess attitudes have changed.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Assisted dying is one of those things that ethically UK law is completely wrong about.

So much hypocrisy - we can put our beloved pets to sleep to save them suffering, even though it is painful for us to do, but we do it for them - yet our loved ones have to endure any pain until the very end, even though they can even vocalise that they've had enough.

Here is a bit of reverse anthropomorphism for you:

Thankfully we do not base our judgement on what is fair, just, ethical and legal for humans on what works best for a cat.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The point was that animals get better treatment and have more rights than human beings when it comes to this particular issue.

...which is rare, possibly even unique.

Do animals give informed consent for their vet-assisted deaths?

What checks and balances are made to ensure the 'owner' isn't simply taking the cheaper option?

In what way is being killed without any discussion with the animal giving the animal 'better treatment' and 'more rights'?

(I don't object having an animal put down to end suffering by the way. I consider that the rights and responsibilities of members of the animal kingdom are not the same for each species. The most obvious example here being that, of the planet's species, only humans have legally defined responsibilities. See what the cat does if you have a coronary. Moggy won't be dialling 999. We have to act in their best interests as we see their best interests. The converse does not apply).

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

We're specifically talking about the right to die - which pets have and humans don't. Obviously their rights are very limited beyond that.

As animals are unable to communicate, a comparison would be if a human got into an accident and was mentally incapacitated and as a result was unable to communicate. This is an example where we would surely all allow other love ones to make the decision for us, similar to that of a pet... but as things stand, we could end a pets suffering, but not a persons.

I think this is going off on a tangent. Pet's don't have a 'right to die'. A right is predicated by an ability to make a choice. Pets don't choose to die.

As for the rest - absolutely not. If I lose the ability to communicate I don't want other people deciding whether to let me die. Do you know how they do it? Palliative care. They sedate you and leave you to die of 'natural causes' which means dehydration. **** that. Nobody does any shit to me unless I have given written instructions, and even then.....

 

[Da Man Clay]

I’ve no desire to go through the same suffering as some of my family members. With the proper safeguards it should be an absolute no brainer to allow assisted dying. Forcing people to have a tortuous last few months serves no one.

 

[Juan Albion]

I have been involved with two assisted deaths, present for one of them. I have very mixed feelings about them. At the end of the day, when there is a divisive moral issue such as this, it is best to let those affected decide rather than try to push your own beliefs on others. There must, however, be an option for staff who are opposed to something such as assisted dying to opt out of being involved in their care.

 

[Silverhatch]

**** me. I wouldn't trust them to rule on a haemorrhoid.

I would only consider it if the person was either of sound mind and had been asking for release for some time. And even then...

My 84 year old granny said 'I wish Jesus would take me' on occasions, when she was virtually bedridden, her immune system destroyed by decades of high voltage anti-inflammatories (phenylbutazone - now reserved for horses) and her third hip replacement (you can do the maths) giving her the screaming abdabs. But even she didn't really mean it.

And there is the rub. Who really means it? The high profile cases are very specific, but how can anyone say that the person really means it? And this is before we get into the psychological equivalent of body dysmorphia, instincts to self harm . . . . .and can you really trust the motives of the relative who swears blind that their terminally ill husband/wife who can no longer speak or move 'really wants to go'?.

Is it OK to take your life when 'the balance of' your 'mind is disturbed'? Or get someone to help you?

Many things that humans desire and humans do may be understandable. Many things humans desire and do we deplore (I won't list them). Other things we find we can support, if it makes sense to us, or maps to our desires and biases.

No, sorry. I am implacably against it. As I am the death penalty. Thou shalt not kill. And I do not believe in god, before anyone asks.

I mean it. If I’m dribbling in my own piss & puss and shitting myself and I don’t know who my loved ones are - ****ING SHOOT ME! You can be implacably against it but it’s barbaric to force me away from my own home to end MY LIFE. It’s an emotive issue that needs safeguards but as I said in an earlier post, make your own wishes known to family, friends, health professionals and even lawyers. If and when the situation arises you can be assisted to die with some personal and familial dignity. And for balance - NEVER leave family/friends/health professionals and the judiciary to make a decision without your wishes being known.

 

[Eeyore]

in principle it sounds all well and good, and i for one have always said a trip to Holland seems a good way out.

however, my concern is that it could open up Pandora’s box. How long until it’s deemed a special circumstance that AN Other is given special permission to make the decision for you …

a slippery old slope. Of course we would all be reassured at the outset that such ‘extras’ could never happen, but we all know what happens when the thin edge of the wedge gets leant on a bit heavy.

I don't agree. Quote from Lady Meacher 'the number of assisted deaths in Australia and the US remains very low - under 1% - and a former supreme court judge in Victoria, Australia, [talking] about pressure from relatives has said it just hasn't been an issue."

In the case of my mother it wouldn't have applied. She had dementia and couldn't have made her own decision. So she stayed on to the rotten end. But remembering the haunting images of the last two years of her life, a shell of a human staring at the ceiling, incontinent, distressed and making incoherent utterings, I am all for it for those who are of sane mind to see what's coming.

I desperately wanted her to die, and I didn't have any money to collect either. I wanted her to die because she didn't deserve that shit. I wanted her to die because I loved her.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

I was working in Oregon in 1997 when it became one of the first States in the USA to allow assisted dying. I saw a programme about a woman who had decided to end her life that way. She had agreed to allow a TV crew to follow her last few days with her family. It was an incredibly tough watch but I also found it very life affirming. She was witty, clever and very brave and definitely knew exactly what she was doing. It's a debate which is long overdue in England. When it comes to the end people should not have to worry about a botched suicide attempt, a trip overseas or involving friends or family in what is now an illegal activity

 

[Baldseagull]

**** me. I wouldn't trust them to rule on a haemorrhoid.

I would only consider it if the person was either of sound mind and had been asking for release for some time. And even then...

My 84 year old granny said 'I wish Jesus would take me' on occasions, when she was virtually bedridden, her immune system destroyed by decades of high voltage anti-inflammatories (phenylbutazone - now reserved for horses) and her third hip replacement (you can do the maths) giving her the screaming abdabs. But even she didn't really mean it.

And there is the rub. Who really means it? The high profile cases are very specific, but how can anyone say that the person really means it? And this is before we get into the psychological equivalent of body dysmorphia, instincts to self harm . . . . .and can you really trust the motives of the relative who swears blind that their terminally ill husband/wife who can no longer speak or move 'really wants to go'?.

Is it OK to take your life when 'the balance of' your 'mind is disturbed'? Or get someone to help you?

Many things that humans desire and humans do may be understandable. Many things humans desire and do we deplore (I won't list them). Other things we find we can support, if it makes sense to us, or maps to our desires and biases.

No, sorry. I am implacably against it. As I am the death penalty. Thou shalt not kill. And I do not believe in god, before anyone asks.

I had a friend that meant it, was tired of the cancer treatments and blood transfusions she was having to keep her on her feet, didn't want her husband to have to wipe her arse and clean her as she became bed ridden, and she wanted to die at home, so she took to her bed, stopped eating and starved herself to death.
Macmillan nurses fitted a catheter, would come and give her morphine etc, but it took weeks, many of which she was incoherent and not really there. Absolutely no quality of life and an incredible effort from her family to comply with her wishes to die at home.

 

[A mex eyecan]

I don't agree. Quote from Lady Meacher 'the number of assisted deaths in Australia and the US remains very low - under 1% - and a former supreme court judge in Victoria, Australia, [talking] about pressure from relatives has said it just hasn't been an issue."

In the case of my mother it wouldn't have applied. She had dementia and couldn't have made her own decision. So she stayed on to the rotten end. But remembering the haunting images of the last two years of her life, a shell of a human staring at the ceiling, incontinent, distressed and making incoherent utterings, I am all for it for those who are of sane mind to see what's coming.

I desperately wanted her to die, and I didn't have any money to collect either. I wanted her to die because she didn't deserve that shit. I wanted her to die because I loved her.

it is just heartbreaking, horrid horrid place to be, both the person and for everyone who cares so deeply for them. So sad.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I mean it. If I’m dribbling in my own piss & puss and shitting myself and I don’t know who my loved ones are - ****ING SHOOT ME! You can be implacably against it but it’s barbaric to force me away from my own home to end MY LIFE. It’s an emotive issue that needs safeguards but as I said in an earlier post, make your own wishes known to family, friends, health professionals and even lawyers. If and when the situation arises you can be assisted to die with some personal and familial dignity. And for balance - NEVER leave family/friends/health professionals and the judiciary to make a decision without your wishes being known.

Put it in writing while you are still pissing out of your own willy. Get three people who won't profit from your death to countersign. State your preferred means of exit. Jobza goodun. .......

Unfortunately the legislation won't give you that protection. Because our government is shit. And the next one isn't likely to be better (in terms of deep thinking wherewithall). The 'I have changed my mind' option needs to be catered for. And that is impossible if you are immobile.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I had a friend that meant it, was tired of the cancer treatments and blood transfusions she was having to keep her on her feet, didn't want her husband to have to wipe her arse and clean her as she became bed ridden, and she wanted to die at home, so she took to her bed, stopped eating and starved herself to death.
Macmillan nurses fitted a catheter, would come and give her morphine etc, but it took weeks, many of which she was incoherent and not really there. Absolutely no quality of life and an incredible effort from her family to comply with her wishes to die at home.

Yes. This is where it gets tricky.

I have considered hiding a stash of kit to do the deed. I have plenty of access to the needful. Best jump before circumstances preclude, and all that.

But I haven't.

I haven't thought about it enough to know why. Love life to much to plan for death, perhaps. The human condition. Well, one of them.

But I still can't countenance some other bugger out there pulling my strings. **** that.

Do we plan ahead or not? That is the question. Tricky.

 

[Silverhatch]

Put it in writing while you are still pissing out of your own willy. Get three people who won't profit from your death to countersign. State your preferred means of exit. Jobza goodun. .......

Unfortunately the legislation won't give you that protection. Because our government is shit. And the next one isn't likely to be better (in terms of deep thinking wherewithall). The 'I have changed my mind' option needs to be catered for. And that is impossible if you are immobile.

I don’t want protection. I want people to know my wishes if I’m unable to make my own decisions.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don’t want protection. I want people to know my wishes if I’m unable to make my own decisions.

Fair enough.

The advanced, legally-binding statement is needed then.

That said I am reminded of how many lapsed Catholics take the sacrement on the death bed, though. This would be a legal minefield.

 

[Silverhatch]

Fair enough.

The advanced, legally-binding statement is needed then.

That said I am reminded of how many lapsed Catholics take the sacrement on the death bed, though. This would be a legal minefield.

I want legally binding advanced decisions. I don’t want Dignity in Dying operating as some sort of Quasi-quack website that cannot collate all the advanced decisions into a centrally recognised, uber-attributable database. No religion, no government and no-one else has any jurisdiction over MY decision to end MY own life when I decide it’s appropriate. I cannot think of any other safeguard apart from many years of consistent and documented advance decision.

 

[Cotton Socks]

It's wrong that we're not allowed to choose. My Mum has always said that she doesn't want to live in a certain state, if /when she gets to that state there is nothing I can do to stop her pain.
If me and my dog were randomly at the point of no return and in the same amount of pain, at the same time, I can give permission to put my dog out of pain but I can't ask for the same thing for myself. As far as I'm concerned that's not right. I might need to point out that neither my dog or I have anything to pass on when we're dead, so I can take money out of my argument to allow it.