Road rules2 mins ago
March Your Granny Down The Exterminators And Nick Her House?
42 Answers
Ok by Rodders!
https:/
What will Labour not promise to get through the door of no 10?
Answers
He might not be pleased to hear it but i have a great deal of sympathy with ttt... it's all very well to talk about "checks" and stringent rules but the sad fact is that people at the end of their life are very often at the mercy of their family... great for those of us who are lucky enough to have nice families but unfortunatel
11:13 Sat 23rd Dec 2023
There would have to be personal agreement - something signed earlier in life and stringent checks in operation - and I'm sure there would be. Standing by watching someone die in pain and distress and being helpless to do anything about it is dreadful - an experience that never leaves you. We're kinder to animals than we are to human beings.
Obviously, TTT knows far more than the great and the good who would be called upon to devise and oversee a system whereby those considering assisted suicide could make enquiries and register their intentions.
Every time this subject comes up he trots out the same old hackneyed phrases and excuses.
Depending on how, when and why my ending makes itself known, I'd take a great deal of comfort if I knew I could be in control of it.
He might not be pleased to hear it but i have a great deal of sympathy with ttt... it's all very well to talk about "checks" and stringent rules but the sad fact is that people at the end of their life are very often at the mercy of their family... great for those of us who are lucky enough to have nice families but unfortunately family members are among the most common perpetrators of abuse. a relative of mine used to purposefully start horrible screaming rows with my great grandad on his deathbed in the hope that it would kill him sooner (Stalin reportedly did the same to Lenin oddly...)
i understand the moral case for assisted dying but it makes me uneasy. people tend to think about themselves as individuals in control of their faculties and their situation... but if there's one thing you often lose very late in life it is control.
I feel it would need to be a long process, ideally started with an advance directive, and including maybe 2 independent psychological, and two medical reviews. I would suggest the inclusion of a palliative care specialist to ensure all possible alternatives have been explored. No one without mental capacity should have the option and as with dignitas the death should only be facilitated but the ultimate act must be in the hands of the person choosing to die.... Even if all that is possible is eyeblinks, into a delivery device.
I do feel any system will have some scope for abuse, for example in cases where a person has been consistently controlled by a third party, where there are finances available to buy medical statements from unscrupulous practitioners, or where the person simply feels they are a burden on their family.
The first two should be uncommon enough but the third ....
It's one of those problems that should arise so rarely in an ideal world, but with the current unequal access to gold standard care, E.g. rationing by disease , end of life care for cancer patients is often ( but not always) far better than for example those with end stage lung, liver, or renal disease. This is due to access to hospice care, and specialist nurses and medical practitioners. Or the ability to buy the best treatment and support.
It's an ethical minefield, and I am somewhat uncomfortable with the idea of a state managed system but there is seen to be public support for the idea, without understanding of the actuality. It's not about sending granny to an early end, at the moment but sadly the worst case scenario often arrives in increments, subtle shifts in what society finds palatable until we find ourselves far beyond what we originally voted for. I hope this is never the subject of a referendum.
My nursing background included courses in care of the dying and this included palliative care, and multiple study days and seminars on the ethical aspects of health care. It was driven by working in an area where the dying were poorly served by support services at end of life (hepatology) unless they had liver cancer.
Before Shipman, some patients almost certainly were able to ask a family doctor if not for a direct exit but the means in terms of strong enough pain relief left within reach( a bottle of liquid morphine maybe) and it is still legal for a doctor to prescribe pain relief knowing it will hasten a person's demise if the sole intent is to reduce pain and distress. Fewer would be willing to do this since the Shipman case
The problem is we are still learning to control pain effectively in some conditions. For so many people loss of mobility and some degree of functionality in return for a pain free existence would still allow an acceptable quality of life. Life is precious especially to those who believe it's the only life we have.
To be honest Rowan, I feel the real me is long gone and I cant adjust to the new me so life doesn't feel precious any more. I'm here purely for my husband and son and I don't feel im of any use of any use to them. And I simply hate having lost my independence which I have always been known for. I can't do my own thing any more. It's impossible.
> Life is precious especially to those who believe it's the only life we have.
As I said, it's all about choices. Some people would like the choice, other people would not. A bit like with abortions ... some people would have an abortion, other people in the same circumstances would not - the choice is there. Likewise with DNRs. And so on. Why is euthanasia any different? Your body, your life, your choice ... that choice is what medical science has done, compared to the cavemen.
Related Questions
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.