Re: A Duty To Die?
 

That wouldn't be right, and that's not what's happening.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

That's what has happened, you and I have even discussed specific cases iirc and imo its what will happen again.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

We treat animals *differently* than humans in this area, because they are animals. I see no necessary read-across from what a vet is allowed to do simply because an animal's owner asks him, to what a doctor is allowed to do.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

As I recall (but I can't find it), you posted a case where it was decided that Euthanasia should be allowed in people who suffer 'unbearable mental anguish' or something to that effect. That's rather different from expecting the lonely and depressed to end their lives, as you appear to be implying. That, patently is not happening.

---------- Post added at 15:38 ---------- Previous post was at 15:36 ----------

It is indeed different. It is also, in my opinion better. I'd have thought that it was pretty obvious that I was voicing an opinion, rather than making a statement of fact?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I would have thought it equally obvious that I was disagreeing with your opinion ;)

I also disagree that it is 'better' in any possible sense. Human life and animal life is not equivalent, either legally or morally. The treatment of profoundly sick or untreatable animals is a function of that lesser status.

The treatment of animal life is appropriate to their moral and legal status, as is the treatment of human life in our current system.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

And it is my opinion that the elevated status of the human entitles the human to decide on his own fate, and if he wishes to terminate his life, then, with certain provisos, a qualified medical practitioner should be allowed be allowed to aid said person in doing so in a dignified manner.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

That's one awfully short, neat sentence to use to gloss over a broad and extremely complex set of issues...

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Yes it is. And there's a reason for it. It is indeed a complex set of issues, and where you stand on it is going to depend on your moral outlook. The reality is that we could argue over this till the cows come home, and not reach an agreement. What's more neither of us would be wrong, as you can approach the issue from all sorts of philosophical angles, neither of which could be proven to be 'correct'.

That's sort of summed up in you arguing that we can put down animals and not humans as animals are of a lesser status, and me arguing that the elevated status of humans gives them more rights to decide on their own fate. Neither of them is right or wrong. It's highly subjective.

I'm not, for want of a better word, held back by a religious notion of the sanctity of life. From my perspective my life is mine, and it's for me to decide what to do with it, even if that means ending it. And if I were to find myself in a situation where I am not capable or willing to do it myself, I'd want someone else to be able to assist me (with certain safeguards).

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Sadly it is Daniel, looks like it wasn't this thread we discussed it in though, I think the Dutch woman's doctor was called chabot if that helps, can't remember the lonely guys name though but here's another case of dignitas putting down the mentally ill

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...eign%2BService

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I think many that object to this would have a different opinion were they to be living day in and day out with severe pain with no hope of having it removed. This is a debate where having a condition that causes severe pain and shortens lifespan with the chance of a very undignified end counts for quite a lot because unless you have that you really do not understand how the prospect of being able to terminate your life with dignity appeals. I am not and never would say\support this becoming a daily thing or a matter of course but where there is medical reason for it i believe that people should have the right to choose when it is their time to go.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Well, all I can say is that despite reading Dutch media on a daily basis, I don't recall any controversial cases of euthanasia, which suggests that there is no wide-spread abuse of the system. As for the Dignitas case, it would appear that the Swiss rules have been flouted, which clearly is unacceptable. If that story is true, the I would hope that the guilty party faces a stiff penalty. However, I don't think that an isolated case of abuse should be reason to deprive people of the right of decide their own fate, and I do belief that it is possible to build enough safeguards into the system to ensure that vulnerable people don't fall victim to it.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The thing is the courts rule that assisted suicide is illegal. There isn't a defence that it was the wishes of the individual in question. Even the people who have brought the cases to the high court, who have a clear will to end their life, are not granted it. This is because that is the law, the court doesn't have the scope to go on a case-by-case basis, they must enact the law.

Hence why I think a debate is needed because it's my view that we may need to allow people to end their suffering. This can only be changed by Parliament. Having the debate and if some change is proposed a free-vote would be a good idea.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

And time and again in this thread there are examples of prosecution being deemed not in the public interest or suspended sentence being appropriate, the balance imho is right

---------- Post added at 20:32 ---------- Previous post was at 20:30 ----------

It was a long time ago now and actually led to a change in Dutch law and whilst you're right abuse isn't widespread now it could be in the future, best not to open that can of worms imo

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...s-1425973.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Do you want to try and explain that to the likes of Mr. Nicklinson. I'm sure he would have been delighted to learn that it abuse isn't widespread in places where Euthanasia is legal, but we're keeping it illegal just in case it might be abused in the future.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

nice dan very nice, I would've expected better of you. The experts like doctors and police chiefs have been explicit in their warnings on this and I happen to agree with them. The circumstances of individuals don't out weigh what's right for society as a whole imo, no matter how much sympathy you have for their plight.