'Should Assisted Suicide be allowed?' poll discussion

ceridwen

jamtart6 wrote: »

Please accept my apologies for my heated post. I am not very often this passionate abotu something, and it appears this thread and replies appeared on the wrong day!

JAMTART

Please DONT apologise for anything you have said in your post. You have NOTHING whatsoever to apologise for. You said what needed to be said and it is entirely understandable that you are upset and angry.

Thinking of you and hoping things go as peacefully as possible for you all now.

bookworm1363

It would be funny if if wasn't on such a serious issue, but it appears on this thread that the ones who argue most vehemently against the right for someone to end their sufferings the way they choose seem to be the ones who have had no close encounter with a loved one dying in the most painful and drawn out manner, whilst those who have are the first ones to say they would want it for themselves. I think that should tell us an awful lot about reality v lofty ideals, religious or otherwise.

Errata

bookworm1363 wrote: »

It would be funny if if wasn't on such a serious issue, but it appears on this thread that the ones who argue most vehemently against the right for someone to end their sufferings the way they choose seem to be the ones who have had no close encounter with a loved one dying in the most painful and drawn out manner, whilst those who have are the first ones to say they would want it for themselves. I think that should tell us an awful lot about reality v lofty ideals, religious or otherwise.

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions. Making such sweeping statements can add nothing to the discussion. Play the ball, not the man.

ceridwen

bookworm1363 wrote: »

It would be funny if if wasn't on such a serious issue, but it appears on this thread that the ones who argue most vehemently against the right for someone to end their sufferings the way they choose seem to be the ones who have had no close encounter with a loved one dying in the most painful and drawn out manner, whilst those who have are the first ones to say they would want it for themselves. I think that should tell us an awful lot about reality v lofty ideals, religious or otherwise.

Which is a very valid point actually.

I can only speak for myself - but I have sat crying and despairing more than once at what I have seen/am seeing other people going through and wishing I could "wave a magic wand" to give those people whatever their own personal choice of "release" is from that situation.

I can only speak for myself - but I've seen rather too many people I know personally going through severe illness to feel immune from worrying that it might happen to me too.

..and I have watched/do watch the "watchers" - ie those who are closest to the person concerned...and I see just how much the situation "drags them down" too....I have seen their sleepless nights, their tears, their depression so total that they literally were incapable of seeing/hearing/talking to anyone nearby...

bookworm1363

Errata wrote: »

I think you are making unwarranted assumptions. Making such sweeping statements can add nothing to the discussion. Play the ball, not the man.

Not at all. I am merely commenting on this thread: I am not pretending that I recall every post on it, but I do know that every one which was overwhelmingly in favour came from someone who had seen a loved one in unbearable pain, me included. On the other hand, a few comments seemed to have "God's will" or equivalent as the reason given against, or the fear of some imaginary financial gain from ruthless heirs (now THERE's a sweeping statement for you).

But I have yet to see one person say: "well, I saw my mother/child/partner in unbearable pain for months until their body could take no more, but I am really glad we let them suffer for that long and would put me and my loved ones through it all over again every time".

So, far from a "sweeping statement" (I actually quantified with "it appears", which is the exact opposite of both a statement and sweeping :rolleyes:), it is a reasonable and observed commentary on what people have been posting.

As for the weird football (presumably?) metaphor, I don't understand it, so can't comment on it.

meher

Never.

Assisted suicide is never a valid medical procedure. Palliative care is. And that is how it should continue to be because:

If I feel the state of my mind is at it's high and best when I'm on drugs then would you let me and drug users and abusers as myself seek legitimacy of the drugs of our choice? I think not, although I believe it would benefit the state, but that's a different discussion. Likewise we shouldn't allow legitimacy of an illegal act of taking away a life. Speaking for myself I do not wish to be or find why society has to be imposed of someones misplaced sense of dignity and I refuse to cater to such weaknesses and insecurities as I see it.

So the State focus should be for funding research, staff and training in Palliative care to provide excellent care for the terminally ill. It is insecurities at home and lacking in trust in relatives and ignorance of medical and nursing advancements in palliative care that make many people take that decision to die - so it is these insecurities that have to be addressed. Those who choose to enter a profession, to look after the terminally ill have great faith in their medical and nursing practise and respect for their clients - I'd much prefer if the State could make provisions for caring for the dying person instead of imposing an obligation to die.

ceridwen

The only way the State "would be imposing an obligation to die" would be if they withheld palliative care from someone who had decided to have this. I do question somewhat whether there IS in fact painkilling drugs available that DO "kill the pain - but not the patient" - as I had heard that there are painkillers available that are a lot stronger than morphine and that allow the patient to keep on with living their life as normal (well - relatively normal at least) and that there are specialists in painkilling who know about these and can prescribe the appropriate cocktail of these drugs for the patient concerned - BUT that there arent nearly enough of these specialists.

Now - if that IS the case - ie that we really do "have the technology" to do this - but the State isnt making enough funds available to cover the cost of these drugs - then, yes, the State would indeed be "imposing an obligation to die" if it knowingly didnt allow someone to see one of these specialists and get these drugs - if that is the person's choice so to do. If there are such drugs - then I would be the first person to be "up in arms" if people were denied them because of cost considerations.

meher

Thanks ceridwen, and whilst I appreciate your point, just to clarify what I meant by imposing an obligation to die, this part says it succinctly for me

any form of physician assisted suicide is a "slippery slope" that can put pressure on people to end their life and lead to non-voluntary euthanasia of disabled people and children.

"My terminally ill patients have a lot on their mind, especially the effect their illness is having on their family. My concern is that a right to die will become a duty to die, a duty to unburden their family," said Andrew Davies, a senior house officer in medical oncology in Cardiff.

bookworm1363

I doubt that very much somehow. Human instinct is to survive, under incredible conditions far too often. If a person is determined not to die, no pressure on earth will make them give in and say: "oh, go on then".

I must say, I don't know what experience people have of families, but I spent years working in psychiatric hospitals and regular ones too, and spend a lot of time now supporting families with cared for people, and I have yet to see any of those heartless relatives willing on (or pressuring on) the assisted person to die, or any of the assisted wishing they were dead so they could stop being a burden. It seems to me that this may be propaganda whipped up to stop assisted dying ever being made legal.

sianrssr

C there are too many nasty incurable degrading illnesses out there and i certainly do not want to die without dignity should i be unfortunate to have one of these illnesses