Page 2 of 7
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:22 am
With respect,the fact we send young folks to the madness of war,which is barbaric,and we seem to never learn,does not mean one mad,insane,vile evil practise,the fighting of WARS,THE CARNAGE,THE LOSSES,THE GRIEF,can,IN ANYWAY,justify another,vile,loathsome,no matter how well-meant,though,I can never ever say MURDER in any form,can be "Well-Meant",act of killing.
Its wretched stuff to discuss,but the mere term "Assisted-Suicide",by definition,seeks to Excuse the Killer(s).To END anothers life,dress it up,try to justify,excuse,mittigate it whatever whichway,its still murder,y6ou cannot dodge it.
the taking of life,regardless of reason,is murder.
now,lets me honest,its hell to see another dear one suffer pain,decline etc.its vile.but,if,as a society we legalise KILLING,in any form,not as an act of some war,not on some battlefield,but in quiet suburbia,and thats what we are talking about,the potential abuses are too clear.
is that what we want as a society?.
I have problems with assisted
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:42 am
I have problems with assisted suicide- let's be honest and call it euthanasia! I can't easily dismiss the events of history, namely the Nazi culling of the chronically sick and disabled. That started off with one person lobbying for the assisted death of a disabled relative which they thought was an act of humanity and look what happened. It's a slippery slope- don't go there.
I am with Dragonlady here.
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:55 am
I am with Dragonlady here. My late husband always said he did not want to be kept alive when there was no longer hope. After suffering for 18 months with lung cancer, which spread to his brain, his specialist asked me if I would agree to his treatment being stopped. I refused to make the decision and insisted he ask his patient. Given the choice of an extra few months of suffering or giving up my husband chose to keep on as long as possible. I do not see how we can know at the end of somebody's life whether they might have changed their mind. My sister, who also died of lung cancer, even refused all medication at the end so she could spend extra time with her family in as conscious a state as she was then capable of.
I should have said that
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:57 am
I should have said that I also agree with Maxi. The whole idea is open to abuse.
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:06 pm
I was carefull NOT to compare Assisted Suicide with the Revolting Nazi regimes insane wholesale industrial-scale MURDER,to ME,theres no words ever to touch the nature of that event.
I feel the Nazi Carnage of the Death Camps,and the wars we send our young people to fight today are not relevent in the context of Assisted-Suicide.
Indeed,I feel it degrades both that Vile Era of Nazi insanity,of sickeing evil,and the plight of serving soldiers,today,now,dying in conflicts.
Those loathsome events stand-alone,in my view,as utterly sick events.
Assisted Suicide,on-its-own,its just disgusting and it IS "EUTHANASIA" or "MURDER","Killing"
ITS THAT,NOTHING LESS OR NOTHING MORE,in my view.
But,what I find outragous is EXCUSES.
You cannot "Excuse" it.
If we want,as a society,to legalise it,then,call it for what is is,
ITS NOT,in my view,Serving soldiers dying in conflict,its not wholesale slaughter by a nation gone insane with despotic rule,warped thinking etc,its the murder of a fellow human being,by a carer,loved-one,relative,partner,seeing the suffering first-hand.
To me,"Assisted Suicide" is KILLING.Its Murder,Its Euthanasia.Any curtailing of life by another is just-that.
It is TERRIBLE to see anyone we love,suffer,its natural to wish to ease the pain.Its so very wretched.
I think I have mentioned
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:14 pm
I think I have mentioned before that when we were at a conference in Stirling last year called "Living and Dying Well" the attitude of some of the so called professional Doctors and Nurses disgusted me. One Dr asked why are we wasting money on those who are going to die - palliative care funding should be withdrawn and used for people who are going to live. What money?? The children's hospices are funded mostly through charity.
We can't trust doctors with this if they are only going to think of their budgets. There are no palliative care services for my son's age group - this is what he and his friends are fighting for and if assissted suicide is allowed - how long before boys like mine are "encouraged" to go down that route because of the lack of services available? After all as the doctor at Stirling so kindly pointed out - they are going to die anyway.
Instead of putting so much into helping people to die - how about they put a bit more money into helping them have a decent quality of life while they are here?
We don't need a despotic
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:43 pm
We don't need a despotic regime for accepted widespread abuse of disabled people. It's not that long ago that most people simply accepted that people with learning disabilities should be put away in awful institutions with no rights. Only a brave minority questioned it. If we legalise any form of euthanasia people could quickly become accepting and before you know it you may have 2 doctors marking x in boxes to determine if someone's quality of life is up to a certain standard. We would all like to think it would never happen but I don't suppose many of us thought this present government would target the disabled first when it came to saving money and there is an awful lot of support for that among the general public! As a nation we are not as civilised as we like to think we are.
Posted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:47 pm
maybe its a bit too hefty for this place,but i want to just say that what bothers me is this acceptance based on heartfelt simpathy,it just aint good for law-making.
take the case of that poor soul i based this threads premis upon.He seeks release from his present state of existence Locked-in within himself.In order his wish to die may be granted intervention by a loved-one,killing him,in-effect,is what he seeks,and the law amended to ensure the relative who murders him,is imuned.
this mans terrible plight touches us all as human beings.
to change the law,freeing his loved one from sanction,enabling his death,might be,for some,mercy.
but in reform of law,we open,just-a-bit,that door.
so,later,another,maybe,"Locked-in" sufferer comes along,but say he or she cannot comunicate his or her wishes.the relatives decide he or she is suffering and they seek immunity so they might free him or her,killing .now,what then?.
the door was opened allready by allowing killing without penalty.
do we set-up some body,committee to,case-by-case,decide who should assist in a suicide,who should or should not kill free from punishment for doing so?.
door flung wide open then.
In a nation which does not murder,by hanging,or other means,murders,we sanction so-called,"Assisted Suicide",and please,lets drop that term."Assisted",all it means is "killing","Suicide" is taking ones own life.Can you "Assist" in a person ending their own life?.sounds just word-play to me,its murder.THATS ALL IT IS,I THINK.in our nation,what madness is it to open a door to killing the sick?.Yes,open that door,just a chink,then the presure,case by case,to edge it farther open is alltoo compelling.then,i grant you,yes,we do come to somthing far too close to Hitlers "Final Solusion".Do we want a country which does such things?.
Some thought provoking comments Maxi.
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 10:40 am
Some thought provoking comments Maxi. I read them last night but was too knackered to even think of a response
Makes you wonder if there is a place within the law for humanity.
Is it more a case of each situation will differ? From those requesting help to die, therein its assisted suicide
or as you call it, murder
. Or situations like my mams where no medicine, no operation was going to cure her and each time they saved
her was only delaying what we already knew was happening, her death. I know it is a cliche used many times but it is so true, we would not allow an animal to suffer the way we do at times our loved ones.
Is it purely like you say a play on words. In this situation I would call it assisted dying
by the medical profession. Others have posted how this is already in place but not really discussed in the open.
We all have the right
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2010 2:23 pm
We all have the right to refuse medical treatment which could extend our lives. I wouldn't class refusing treatment as suicide in terminal disease- it's how some people choose to make the best of it. Conversly some people lobby the medical profession for any treatment that would give them a bit more time. I have problems with assisted dying where young people are involved and there is no terminal prognosis. In fact in two high profile cases doctors gave evidence that their condition would probably improve yet the prosecutors and judicary were very light handed. I am also troubled that the DPP in England has said he probably wouldn't prosecute in cases of "mercy killing"- this would mean that he alone is deciding if it was alright to bump someone off. Given the accepting attitude we have seen so far in the courts I would view this as dangerous. I agree with Rosemary and LazyD that terminal care in hospitals is appallling and a lot more could be done to ensure that people are treated with dignity. We really need more hospice type facilities and better domiciliary care for the dying. Dying is an inevitable part of life - I think this euthanasia fad is really some peoples attempts to make it all neat and clean. There is a lot of humanity in dying. The last few days of a loved one's life can sometimes be an uplifting experience despite the pain and grief.