tinfoilhat Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 If you don't allow assisted dying based on the fact that some people my attempt to abuse the system. Then you remove the right for all the genuine people to be able to end their suffering. Ok, how many secretly bullied and cajoled grannies are you happy to let quaff their final mug of death juice? 10 a year? 100? I bring it up as it's often the reason why we don't do the death penalty - mistakes. And what's the bar set at? Terminal cancer? Locked in syndrome? Arthritis (I believe dignitas let a woman with nothing more than arthritis kill themselves). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Would you allow someone paralysed from the neck down and who wanted to end their own life to be allowed to do so. Even if that meant they needed help by a relative or a doctor. Allowing someone and assisting someone are entirely different. Even if you personally assisted it would be most likely you wouldn't have the knowledge to do it "correctly", that being the case you would have to involve a 3rd party or a fourth or fifth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Well in Switzerland, Holland and Belgium things are going well. Also all assisted dying means is that a person would be able to acquire the drugs needed to end their life in peace. Why should someone suffer a horrible, long painful death? When we can stop them from having to do so. And yes it's not just a lack of compassion preventing assisted dying from being made legal.Religious sensitivities are a big reason as well. Organisations for or against assisted suicide have members and supporters who are religious and non-religious. No one is saying that anyone should die a long painful death. Drugs should be administered to prevent that, without being prescribed with the intention of causing instant death, I don't know whether the Countries you mention provide the same hospice care? Are you saying the person is given the drug to end their own life? I'm almost sure only a registered doctor would be the only person allowed to give the drug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Organisations for or against assisted suicide have members and supporters who are religious and non-religious. No one is saying that anyone should die a long painful death. Drugs should be administered to prevent that, without being prescribed with the intention of causing instant death, I don't know whether the Countries you mention provide the same hospice care? Are you saying the person is given the drug to end their own life? I'm almost sure only a registered doctor would be the only person allowed to give the drug. As far as I understand it, if you want to off yourself with dignitas you have to pick the glass up and drink it yourself. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dignitas_(assisted_dying_organisation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmack Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Ok, how many secretly bullied and cajoled grannies are you happy to let quaff their final mug of death juice? 10 a year? 100? I bring it up as it's often the reason why we don't do the death penalty - mistakes. And what's the bar set at? Terminal cancer? Locked in syndrome? Arthritis (I believe dignitas let a woman with nothing more than arthritis kill themselves). Firstly, I'm not happy for a single hypo-thetical granny to be bullied into killing herself but I'm also not happy with the totally unnessacry suffering of people who Sadly want to end their own life. Secondly, you cannot possibly compare the death penalty to euthanasia. They're nothing like each other due to the subtle differences between them. In the death penalty a judge tells you your going to be killed for your crimes. In assisted dying you walk into a office and say you want to die. That's the difference. Thirdly, where would I draw the line? Probably in cases of depression where the person can be treated. I think it's a given that those suffering from locked in syndrome and terminal cancer would have access to assisted dying. If they so choosed. ---------- Post added 16-01-2014 at 22:34 ---------- Organisations for or against assisted suicide have members and supporters who are religious and non-religious. No one is saying that anyone should die a long painful death. Drugs should be administered to prevent that, without being prescribed with the intention of causing instant death, I don't know whether the Countries you mention provide the same hospice care? Are you saying the person is given the drug to end their own life? I'm almost sure only a registered doctor would be the only person allowed to give the drug. So why are the religious groups the most vocal opponents of euthanasia then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 As far as I understand it, if you want to off yourself with dignitas you have to pick the glass up and drink it yourself. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dignitas_(assisted_dying_organisation)The link doesn't show anything. So I've copied this for information.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dignitas_(assisted_dying_organisation) I wasn't expecting to see that part " Allegations by ex employee". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmack Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Allowing someone and assisting someone are entirely different. Even if you personally assisted it would be most likely you wouldn't have the knowledge to do it "correctly", that being the case you would have to involve a 3rd party or a fourth or fifth. And by allowing assisted dying that 3rd party could be a trained medical professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 So why are the religious groups the most vocal opponents of euthanasia then? Well why do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmack Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 I suggest all the anti-euthanasia clan watch a Terry Pratchett documentary about assisted dying. Watch his Dimbleby lecture as well. ---------- Post added 16-01-2014 at 22:39 ---------- Well why do you think? Because they believe only God is allowed to choose when someone's life is to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Doesn't some legislation somewhere say that people have right to pain relief? In which case isn't the dose increased as a terminal patient has to cope with more and more pain? I would have thought that eventually the amount needed to control the pain exceeds what the body can tolerate, and the patient dies relatively peacefully. Does this happen and is it against the law? ---------- Post added 17-01-2014 at 00:31 ---------- I suggest all the anti-euthanasia clan watch a Terry Pratchett documentary about assisted dying. Watch his Dimbleby lecture as well. ---------- Post added 16-01-2014 at 22:39 ---------- Because they believe only God is allowed to choose when someone's life is to end. Yes, but there may already have been medical intervention which has prolonged life, so I'm not sure God has that much of a say in it anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.