janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 It is simple, their not thinking any possible solutions. If someone is terminally ill then they should have the right to end their suffering, as for lock in syndrome the suffering is even worse, ya basically a live ornament. Am sure it would make death that little easier for victim and family. Not all lock in syndrome patients will tend to feel the same though, Ron Houben was mistakenly put as being in a coma for 23 years for which he went through hell but since doctors realised their mistake, he is now said to be as happy as he could be I agree with you,but assuming the ill person isn't at a stage of the illness where they are not suffering pain that requires strong pain relief, who is going to end the persons life if they themselves are not capable of doing so? Should it be the Doctor?in which case they're may be few who would wish to this because many doctors don't wish to be given that right, and the British Medical Associition have been debating this for years and are opposed to assisted suicide. Or should it be the family? and if the family are in disagreement among themselves wouldn't that cause a problem? What if the family are putting their own interests before the that of the ill person? (as terrible as that may sound to you and I) it does happen. Also if assisted suicide was legal,what if the terminally ill person wanted to die naturally,but chose or agreed to go through the assisted suicide route because they couldn't bare the thought of being a burdon to those caring for them,and this weight of pressure they felt over this was making them suffer more then the illness itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 It is very simple, if I want to end my life, I can end it, I can end it in a various ways, but it would make much more sense for someone to give me a lethal injection than for me to jump in front of a train, a bus, jump off a cliff or building. Legally allowing someone to give me a lethal injection would save thousands of pounds and save someone the unpleasant task of cleaning my body parts off the train track or where ever it ends up after death. All that is probably true, but what of the 'slippery slope'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 I agree with you,but assuming the ill person isn't at a stage of the illness where they are not suffering pain that requires strong pain relief, who is going to end the persons life if they themselves are not capable of doing so? Should it be the Doctor?in which case they're may be few who would wish to this because many doctors don't wish to be given that right, and the British Medical Associition have been debating this for years and are opposed to assisted suicide. Or should it be the family? and if the family are in disagreement among themselves wouldn't that cause a problem? What if the family are putting their own interests before the that of the ill person? (as terrible as that may sound to you and I) it does happen. Also if assisted suicide was legal,what if the terminally ill person wanted to die naturally,but chose or agreed to go through the assisted suicide route because they couldn't bare the thought of being a burdon to those caring for them,and this weight of pressure they felt over this was making them suffer more then the illness itself. Being a burden on my family would be substantially worse than any pain I was suffering. Why should my family be expected to suffer along with me, I would be much happier dying and allowing them to get on with the rest of their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 All that is probably true, but what of the 'slippery slope'? There isn't a slippery slope, we all live and then we die, and having the right to choose when and how we die should be our choice, a choice that is removed from a person that is physically incapable of doing it themselves. We don’t stop the disabled from doing anything; we try to give them the same opportunities that an able body’s person has. But when it come to suicide we make a choice for them by denying them the right to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 I agree with you,but assuming the ill person isn't at a stage of the illness where they are not suffering pain that requires strong pain relief, who is going to end the persons life if they themselves are not capable of doing so? Should it be the Doctor?in which case they're may be few who would wish to this because many doctors don't wish to be given that right, and the British Medical Associition have been debating this for years and are opposed to assisted suicide. Or should it be the family? and if the family are in disagreement among themselves wouldn't that cause a problem? A bit of a red herring though, in this case. That would only be a problem for those who wished to die, who had no one available to carry it out for them. It's not at all relevant to those who wish to die, who do have someone willing to carry it out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Being a burden on my family would be substantially worse than any pain I was suffering. Why should my family be expected to suffer along with me, I would be much happier dying and allowing them to get on with the rest of their life. We are not just talking about what you or I would want though are we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 We are not just talking about what you or I would want though are we. No, we are talking about giving everyone the right to choose how and when to die, which should include those people that are incapably of killing themselves, why should they be deprived of the choice to commit suicide just because they are physically incapable of killing themselves? We wouldn’t deprive them of going into a shop just because they are physically incapable of getting into the shop on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 But why should any person be authorised to kill another at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daven Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Being a burden on my family would be substantially worse than any pain I was suffering. Why should my family be expected to suffer along with me, I would be much happier dying and allowing them to get on with the rest of their life. But the danger is that you make this decision now when you are well and then when you are ill you change your mind but aren't able to verbalise this. What then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 which should include those people that are incapably of killing themselves, why should they be deprived of the choice to commit suicide just because they are physically incapable of killing themselves? . Those are the people i refer to,and one of the questions raised, who is going to end their life for them, and how could we be certain that abuse wouldn't happen?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.