Agony Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 It could be abused by family coercing the person into feeling like they were a burden,, and feel that they ought to do this, rather than making a rational decision for themselves. Yes that would be why you would be asked questions as well as other things before a decision came. How many sick individuals is they?? .. It's very rare for someone to do that. If the victim is sound of mind, he could say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 It could be abused by family coercing the person into feeling like they were a burden,, and feel that they ought to do this, rather than making a rational decision for themselves. The family would just make it clear that they was a burden and then it would be up to the person to choose what they want to do about it, they can continue to be a burden or choose to end their life. I'd choose to end my life before being a burden on my family; it would be selfish to make them suffer just because I can't do anything for myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 The family would just make it clear that they was a burden and then it would be up to the person to choose what they want to do about it, they can continue to be a burden or choose to end their life. I'd choose to end my life before being a burden on my family; it would be selfish to make them suffer just because I can't do anything for myself. So by your logic,anyone who doesn't wish to end their life would be selfish! if they had a choice and chose to stay alive only to be a burden to those who were caring for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Having recently witnessed what I'd consider to have been a very good death, I've had reason to consider all this stuff from a personal perspective . Sorry to hear that. I too have witnessed this from a personal perspective,and a professional one too. Sadlly the personal experience is something that most of will have to witness at some stage in life. Thankfully the GP and myself were in agreement about the adequate amount of pain relief that was required,and the imminent death was peaceful and pain free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 So by your logic,anyone who doesn't wish to end their life would be selfish! if they had a choice and chose to stay alive only to be a burden to those who were caring for them. That’s what selfish means isn't it, lacking consideration of others and putting yourself before others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 That’s what selfish means isn't it, lacking consideration of others and putting yourself before others. Don't let that halo slip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Also, what about people in supposedly PVS [Persistent Vegetative State] who emerge from it? Yes, some do at present; but they wouldn't if, in the interim, Dr Death has popped round to pop them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 What one 'wants' cannot affect what the law is; better? Much better, but of course it's a completely different statement with a completely different meaning. Also, what about people in supposedly PVS [Persistent Vegetative State] who emerge from it? Yes, some do at present; but they wouldn't if, in the interim, Dr Death has popped round round to pop them off. It already happens, legally. This is also an important issue, I feel. Currently, somebody in a persistent vegetative state can have treatment withdrawn, this includes nutritional supply. As with a terminally ill patient in the final stages of their life, they are then left to die an awful slow death of starvation and dehydration (if the patient still breathes unassisted), which is heartbreaking to witness. In my opinion, the act of "unplugging" a patient like this is a cowardly way of ending their life. The only difference between it and assisted suicide OR euthanasia is that the patient will suffer more, as well as the family and friends who will witness it over the period it takes to complete the slow process. Other than that, you are still ending someone's life. I cannot help but wonder about those who decide what should be legal or not, how they can be okay with ending lives in such a horrible way, but are against a quick and relatively painless end. Is it that they consider the latter a sin, but the former is more like washing your hands of the situation, Pilatesque? The real tragedy is that if I were found letting terminally ill dog starve to death in bed, I think there's a chance I could be prosecuted. With a human loved one, I would be expected to do just that. EDIT: By cowardly, I don't mean cowardice by the family or doctors who carry this out or make the choice, but by the lawmakers who let this be the only option for death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bailey Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 But why should any person be authorised to kill another at all? If that person has an incurable condition but is unable to carry out themselves their wishes, then it should be legal to help them out of their situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 I don't know what the current law - or interpretation of the current law - on 'living wills'is in the UK. I I suspect that should a member of The Jehovah's Witnesses require a blood transfusion and should the hospital in which (s)he was a patient know that (s)he needed a blood transfusion, (s)he wouldn't be forced to receive one and the mere confirmation that the patient was a Witness would act as a 'living will'. There's a difference between not providing treatment which would maintain life and providing a treatment which would end life. If I was terminally ill, in pain with no chance of recovery, I would like the option of terminating my own life. It is illegal to take somebody's life even to 'put him out of his misery' , yet there can be little doubt that it has happened very many times. I wonder how many people have been tried for and convicted of murder for delivering a 'Coup de Grace?' in wartime? If I was terminally ill, in acute pain and unable to help myself - and particularly if I had declared my wishes beforehand - then I would like the option of requesting assistance. I wouldn't be too happy about somebody else making the decision for me, however - unless I had nominated that person beforehand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.