Assisted-Suicide or Murder? - The Tony Nicklinson Story

[llamatron]

Because you, I and family could just as well be in a TN situation?

 

so you don't want you or a family member to have the choice?

 

That seems totally selfish to me.

 

Its like advocating making abortion illegal on the basis that you would not want to have one? It doesn't make sense!

[Chris_Sleeps]

Because you, I and family could just as well be in a TN situation?

Indeed we could. That's why it interests me.

 

Equally, that is also a reason why it should be legal for a man to have assistance in his own death if he finds himself incapable of doing it on his own. We should have a legal framework that allows for euthanasia and assisted-suicide.

[llamatron]

Usually even if I disagree with someone I can see an argument for their opinion. I cannot see a single argument against giving people this choice (particularly true on this thread).

[Plain Talker]

I can see both sides in this case.

 

I can understand that this man now finds his "existence" unbearable, after the massive stroke he suffered. I can understand that he would want to end his life, and would choose to do this, if he had the physical capability to use some means of killing himself.

 

I completely get that this decision has been arrived at, by him, after seven years of being "locked-into" his own body, unable to move or do much else, independently.

 

However, my reservations are the ramifications for other people, should the court's decision go in his favour, that other people who would not consider ending their lives may feel coerced into going through with it as they feel they are a burden on their families and friends.

 

I worry that it's too small a step from helping this man carry out his choice to die, to vulnerable people being made to feel they ought to follow suit - moral pressure, perhaps, however subtle.

 

I suffer depression, and occasionally, I feel so low, that I feel like I want to end it all. However, the rational side of my thinking sees this as the depression talking, and that I don't really wish to die.

 

I'd be concerned that if someone in my position listened more to the "depression-talking", than Ration, then they may make the decision to die, even if they don't really wish to. (of course, that may be precisely what happens in practice anyway!)

[ronthenekred]

those are my words:confused:

 

I answered your question and added a comment.

 

Then why ask me a question I haven't argued against?

 

I'm in favour of the law but I would hope that the consensus would be that of most people and not just the odd little enclave deciding on the premise it has nothing to do with anyone else.

[quisquose]

Indeed we could. That's why it interests me.

 

Equally, that is also a reason why it should be legal for a man to have assistance in his own death if he finds himself incapable of doing it on his own. We should have a legal framework that allows for euthanasia and assisted-suicide.

 

The thing that get's me about this discussion is that those that disagree with providing a legal framework that allows for euthanasia and assisted-suicide will retain the choice to die a prolonged painful death if they want. There would be no change for them, it is simply resisting change for others and restricting their choice.

 

Same applies to many discussions like this; "I wouldn't choose XYZ for myself, and I don't see why we should allow others to choose XYZ even though it won't effect me in the slightest. I just don't like it".

 

[Chris_Sleeps]

the premise it has nothing to do with anyone else.

You've not refuted that argument yet though. You even agreed that the death of TN doesn't affect you. Nobody said the law doesn't affect anyone else.

 

The solid line is that if I choose to end my own life, due to severe ill health, it has nothing to do with anyone else.

[llamatron]

Then why ask me a question I haven't argued against?

 

I'm in favour of the law but I would hope that the consensus would be that of most people and not just the odd little enclave deciding on the premise it has nothing to do with anyone else.

 

eh did you quote the wrong post, I wasn't asking a question. Now I am:

 

Why do you think that someone else should not be allowed to ask a doctor or nurse to administor an injection to end their life (accepting they are mentally competent)?

[llamatron]

I can see both sides in this case.

 

I can understand that this man now finds his "existence" unbearable, after the massive stroke he suffered. I can understand that he would want to end his life, and would choose to do this, if he had the physical capability to use some means of killing himself.

 

I completely get that this decision has been arrived at, by him, after seven years of being "locked-into" his own body, unable to move or do much else, independently.

 

However, my reservations are the ramifications for other people, should the court's decision go in his favour, that other people who would not consider ending their lives may feel coerced into going through with it as they feel they are a burden on their families and friends.

 

I worry that it's too small a step from helping this man carry out his choice to die, to vulnerable people being made to feel they ought to follow suit - moral pressure, perhaps, however subtle.

 

I suffer depression, and occasionally, I feel so low, that I feel like I want to end it all. However, the rational side of my thinking sees this as the depression talking, and that I don't really wish to die.

 

I'd be concerned that if someone in my position listened more to the "depression-talking", than Ration, then they may make the decision to die, even if they don't really wish to. (of course, that may be precisely what happens in practice anyway!)

 

I agree with your reservation but I think that is an argument about how it is safeguarded not about whether it should be an option.

[quisquose]

I can see both sides in this case.

 

I can understand that this man now finds his "existence" unbearable, after the massive stroke he suffered. I can understand that he would want to end his life, and would choose to do this, if he had the physical capability to use some means of killing himself.

 

I completely get that this decision has been arrived at, by him, after seven years of being "locked-into" his own body, unable to move or do much else, independently.

 

However, my reservations are the ramifications for other people, should the court's decision go in his favour, that other people who would not consider ending their lives may feel coerced into going through with it as they feel they are a burden on their families and friends.

 

I worry that it's too small a step from helping this man carry out his choice to die, to vulnerable people being made to feel they ought to follow suit - moral pressure, perhaps, however subtle.

 

I suffer depression, and occasionally, I feel so low, that I feel like I want to end it all. However, the rational side of my thinking sees this as the depression talking, and that I don't really wish to die.

 

I'd be concerned that if someone in my position listened more to the "depression-talking", than Ration, then they may make the decision to die, even if they don't really wish to. (of course, that may be precisely what happens in practice anyway!)

 

But it's a two-way agreement. Both the person who wants to die has to want to die, and the people that love them have to want them to die as well.

 

If you claimed you wanted to die because of depression, your loved ones and/or medical team would not want you to die because they would know it was the "depression-talking".