I will say straight away, that I am in favour of changing the existing law, as long as it monitored properly. A close relative of mine died 18 years ago in a lot of pain.
Surely we should be able to assist someone to shuffle off this mortal coil with a bit more dignity ?
I totally agree, it is dreadful how some suffer, I know I would end my life rather than suffer, with or without the law on my side. It just needs to be well regulated as it is at Digitas in Switzerland.
Nine or so years of watching my mother decline in the most awful way is heartbreaking.....the last two sitting beside her bed even worse.
The fit, fiery and busy woman curled in the bed that moves for her because she can't move, fed, washed and frequent nappy changes.....the inability now to speak isn't a life to be ended. It just isn't a life.....but she will have to continue in this state.....with no dignity left.
When she had flashes of what was happening she begged and begged to be allowed to go to God.....for someone to help her go to God.....that was when her life should have been ended.
If I was told she has six months to live, GM.....but by some gift I could choose for her to go now I know what I would choose.....not for my sake.....not for money, there is none......but because I know without a doubt it's what she would want.
"Yep, crystal clear. Only They (not the doctors) are allowed to take (not given....take). See the subtle but important difference?
If you don't believe people are assisted to die in hospitals and especially hospices, they you're delusional. " - that's exactly the point, the current system does what is needed, no legislation necessary.
The doctor in your mother's hospice wasn't prosecuted, was he, mikey. I'm sure plenty of people (even after Shipman) are 'eased' into death. No-one gets prosecuted.
However, if you had suspicions about someone's death you could get the police involved. Once this state sanctioned 'death on demand' is allowed you'll have no chance of interesting them.
I believe the last service a doctor can perform for their terminally ill patient is to ease their going. There needs to be safeguards in place but if a patient still has the wit to express their views, or has made them clear in a 'living will', it's no ones business but theirs.
whenever this comes up, everyone focuses on known cases and their own examples. I have said a thousand times, fine let them die if they want to they all sound like valid cases. My fear is that the law will later be misused by unscrupulous relatives. There is no way to disentangle the 2 aspects so leave it alone, as several above has said, assisted dying is common place already, leave the status quo.
Yes, jth, why not? Every other country that has death on demand started off with your tight controls. But 'death' campaigners, like all their ilk, are never satisfied. They push and push the boundaries until perfectly healthy people choose to die. Like that British woman who went to Switzerland last week, week before, perhaps.
TTT, until you or someone you are close to has been in that position, it's hard to be objective. Knowing you are going to die soon but not being in control of how this will happen must be very distressing. Knowing that there are legally accepted ways of ending it when you are ready must be some degree of comfort.
What is so dignified about lying in a bed for long periods, muddled and confused. Lying in your own waste matter. Being hoisted about like a sack of potatoes. Please tell me because if I got like that I genuinely would like to die!
At present I'm forced to accept a situation in which I have no choice.
I want to be able to sit with my family now and say.......
If x or y or z is happening to me I want you to have the legal wherewithal to follow these instructions....
Then if x or y or z happens.....
Mum has said she doesn't want this.....she would choose to die now. We know because she made it clear when she was well and sound.
So....we gather the cousins for the last party and say goodbye with dignity..x
///They push and push the boundaries until perfectly healthy people choose to die.///
Perfectly healthy people have been dying (at their own hands) since time began.
I do not consider it to be a sufficient worry to deny those in 'genuine' need of the RTD.
///There is no way to disentangle the 2 aspects.....///
Of course there could be and this is, hopefully what this debate will achieve.
There was a lady who came into a local hospital after taking an overdose, she didn't want to die alone. The psychiatric team assessed her mental capacity and assessed her to be fit to take the decisions she had taken. They allowed her to die. I thought that was a very brave decision on the medical team.
"My brothers and I are firmly convinced that the morphine "assisted" her final end..."
The oath reads "With regard to healing the sick...I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage".
The morphine was administered for "no hurt" reasons, Mikey. Which is why euthanasia is routinely practised by compassionate people in health care every day.
A comment on, not an answer to the question.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.