A Duty To Die?
 

I have to admit feeling a little queasy when I first read the article, especially as I was listening to people on the radios opinions as I drove home, my first thoughts were that this woman is Hitler's daughter and that it'd be insane to license people to 'put others down' but her choice of language aside, she raises some interesting points about peoples right to choose, although considering her age I wonder how she'd feel if it were one of her kids being 'put down'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ty-to-die.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The Woman is 84, say no more.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

So?Hardly means her views are not valid...She has a right to her opinions whatever age as is anyone else.

It's a highly emotive and divisive subject..and will never become enshrined in law as such..It will always be an 'underground' issue that is never acknowledged as happening but probably frequently does happen.

I can understand anyone contemplating it for themselves or a loved one.The trouble is once you start on the slippery slope where does it end?The parameters can start off being sharply and tightly defined but all too soon will be 'stretched'.:(

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

What a crock thats all I have to say on the matter.

In the case dying in severe pain maybe but just because someone needs caring for not a chance

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

A "duty to die" in order to make things easier for other people and the state is absolutely wrong and is both a disgusting and ridiculous thing to say. If a person themself chooses to request euthenasia for valid medical reasons then i don't have a problem so long as very stringent procedures are in place to ensure it is only that persons wishes and capacity to make that request that are taken into account. This idea of family members being able to choose when someone can be "put down" scares the hell out of me and is not something i would ever support in any shape or form.

Yes people get old and they require more care and yes they get medical problems that can be hard to bear for family and friends but isn't part of being family and a good friend that you look after those that need it at times they need it. Also as has been said this might start off small but it will grow into something abhorent and far reaching. Taking myself as an example i have a degenerative illness which means i will require more care as i get older so why wait give me the shot now and save all that hassle.

This is wrong and the fact someone in her position is even talking like this is a worrying thing for me

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

She has an awful lot of influence with those that matter, to write of her comments with a 'say no more' because of her age doesn't really challange the issue, after all John Mccain is 107 and could well be 'leader of the free world soon'

---------- Post added at 21:44 ---------- Previous post was at 21:39 ----------

I agree with everything you say in particular about some one in her position using such language and if it ever coming to pass about stringent procedures being in place to prevent abuse.

It's also interesting to note that it 'scares' you, I wonder how many elderly people she has scared with these comment? Especially those who faught against the Nazi's who agreed wholeheartedly with her sentiments.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Although I agree with you on this, I don't think thats what she said, she still seems to think the choice is with the indivdual. Let's be clear, she is not in any way suggesting that other people can choose when someone else dies.

I don't agree with her though, I feel that although the idea may be valid her statement almost suggests that old people are a burden and they, themselves, should consider it. I feel this would be an awful suggestion for those people to hear, that they should consider killing themselves for the good of society or their family. It's basically suggesting they are a unwanted burden, although dementia is awful it's not a good view IMO.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Should people be killed just because they are a burden? It's not a simple question, but I'd say no.

I think people should be given the *right* to die if they are in great pain or distress. I have to admit, I am not sure what should happen if they are judged mentally unfit and have a member of their family or a friend making decisions for them (e.g. Britney Spears), should that person have the right to decide to die or should their guardian have the right to decide for them?

Killing people just because they are a burden is wrong though. Where does it end? Do you start killing because they are black? Gay? Jewish?

Hang on, I think I see a pattern here.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I think if a person is in great pain/distress then they should be able to choose to die (obviously if its a long term illness). Though if they dont have the capacity (mental or physical) to communicate this properly, then they should be cared for by family/friends.

The suggestion of people being "licensed" to "put people down" is plain wrong in my opinion

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

It obviously depends on the persons belief, & right to terminate his or her own life. If someone is in great pain, or extremely ill & dependant, then they should have the right to euthanasia.

However, for the state to decide, no. Doctors do make these decisions every day, but only for the good of the patient, not the public.

I do think that eventually it will become compulsory to terminate , "disabled" babies, (sorry for the term, there are too many ailments & deformities to list) before they are born, & it may come to doctors "not treating" elderly patients who would require continual help, & costly drugs.

When people who contribute to society get old & need help, they should get it. Thats what they worked for, fought for, & paid for in national insurance contributions.

I would however, terminate dangerous criminals with mental health problems, serial rapists, murderers & pedophiles etc, no problem.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I am sure you are right about that, I wonder how many times they give a patient morphine to relieve pain knowing that the dose will probably kill them and tbh when the person is in that much pain, perhaps it is kinder.

Some thing else that made me wonder in light of this thread, is that a friend of mine died recently and being young, the hospital staff really did try everything to save him, far, far above and beyond, I can't praise them highly enough, it makes me wonder though, if he had been 60 odd for instance whether they'd have tried as hard?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I knew something like this would happen. I'm 64 this year, before I'm able to draw anything they will send me a gun to shoot myself.;)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

No need to worry, if the Baroness gets her way the government will make a few quid out of the licences, send some one round to do it for you, thus creating jobs, plus you get put out of your misery, without cashing your pension or draining the NHS, every ones a winner :)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Like it, didn't think of that.
George;)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

There are some thnings that people may discuss in private and that is where it should stay and this is definately one of them i find the whole idea disgusting and repulsive and is not a discussion we should be having in this country in this day and age.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Ah, who decides these criteria though. Some you list are defined but
"dangerous criminals with mental health problems"?

If you were in power then anyone opposing you is obviously a criminal and must by definition be mentally unbalanced.

Also what of miscarriages of justice. Once someone is dead it is far harder to say, oops, sorry we got that one wrong. I am very much firmly of the opinion that it's better that guilty go free than the innocent are punished.
Death penalty also does not give the chance for the person to change and become a contributing member of society.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Where it is shown and can be seen that a person murders with total intent and knowing what they are doing i support the death penalty and in those circumstances a miscarriage of justice is highly unlikely. But thats off topic and getting back on topic no one no matter what there ailment has a duty to die and to even talk about it in that way is wrong and shouldn't ever be considered.

I find it mildly amusing this comes from someone that is wealthy and therefore is exempt from her own criteria i wonder how all those pensioners that don't have her wealth feel about this i suspect there isn't a lot of support for this.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Hmm must have missed that bit when I said I agreed with you either that of you added it later?

Either way I certainly don't agree with that sentence, even in the middle ages we tried not to execute the mentally ill and tbh I don't want the likes of Ian Brady being given the option, he wants to die now, why oblige him? Keep the sicko alive and make his life a misery I say, punish them properly and let them go to hell when their time is up.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Oh I dunno, once they are in the ground I'm sure they'd work quite well as fertilizer.

Anyway there are some people who will never be contribute to society again. Has Ian Brady contributed anything since he was locked up? Aside from every so often popping up for air to complain how poorly he's treated and to give false hope to the family of his unfound victims.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

People like ian brady are perfect adverts for the re-introduction of the death penalty and sadly we have a few of them.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Dr Nitschke said of the council's decision to cancel the venue: "I give workshops in other countries and I have never had anything like this happen before. It is very disappointing."

I am actually quite shocked by that, considering what he is peddling

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...urnemouth.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The right to die/duty to die debate still rages, I fully agree with the chief and have alluded to the same myself, it's why we have to be oh so careful with this and see the wider ramifications.

“From a policing perspective we need to be very careful on this to make sure it does not become a way of getting rid of a burden.

Or a way of people getting their grubby mits on inheritances early

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ice-chief.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

although i don't agree with her choice of words she does bring to the forefront an issue that is always on peoples minds ,and i think she is a brave woman to do so.We in britain are so sqeamish about disussing subjects like this ,whats wrong with talking about this subject after all most of us have said things like "if ever i get to that state i want someone to put me me down " or "i don't want to be left in a nursing home drooling in the corner "
my own personal feelings are once i stop being a productive member of society with dementia or any other degenerate illness then finish me off no problem .I watched my Grandad die over 5yrs with parkinsons disease there's no way my kids are watching me go through that or similar

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I remember an old black and white film set in the far north of Canada where the old mother of the family was no longer able to chew the seal blubber or skin and thereby contribute to the well being of the group. Everyone else in the igloo looked at her and she looked back at them and late that night she walked out into the blizzard and sat down waiting for the polar bear that eventually came along to club her to the ground and finish her off.


We dont have polar bears where I live.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Kant will have something to say about that. Ive watched this movie recently that tackled on bioethics. yea this is kinda sensitive.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

then make arrangements to do so its not hard

BUT any law that legalises this will lead to mass ( i am not joking on that ) culling of the ill disabled and old

once the precedent is set even with safe gaurds such as for example the so called safe guards put in for abortion of 2 dr's agreeing the womans life would be in danger etc they will slowly slip as that has to now them wanting a nurse to authorize it and its basically abortion on demand with no thought of whether it is actually in their interest

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

We're on the slippery slope

Families who help terminally-ill loved ones kill themselves will not be prosecuted unless police can prove that they stood to gain from the death, landmark guidelines are expected to say next week.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...icide-law.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

It's about bloody time.
Humane treatment for humans.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The only thing that worries me is that any husband or wife assisting their partner to die will, in a lot of cases benefit, from their deaths financially which will still leave them open to charges.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Or as Baroness Warnock put it, a way to get rid of a burden on the state or as the police chief said a fast way to a legacy. I doubt anyone could fail to have sympathy with people who help a loved one on their way for the right reasons however I don't trust our politicians in the future not to water this proposed legislation down.

---------- Post added at 17:43 ---------- Previous post was at 17:42 ----------

Yes I was thinking the same myself yesterday.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

don't see a problem here as the partner if mentally competent to make this decision can easily at the same time sign over all money and property to partner or to whom they wish to leave things to before hand with a solicitor to witness they did so freely and of their own will long before doing the deed

if they are not capable of this i would hazard to say they are not capable of making the decision

where it is sudden i can understand some would say this might be a problem but really its just another reason for setting out your will with instructions in case of a situation where you feel you wouldn't want to live ! just because some wont shouldn't be a reason to put lots of vulnerable people at risk from the abuse if this law was changed

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

As far as I know property , or monies held in joint names automatically reverts to the surviving partner so I would assume that there would be no need to include them specifically in a will leaving them to that person.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Until they do, and I very much doubt they will, this is an excellent outcome.
Baroness Warnock can think terminally ill people are a burden on the state as much as she likes, I'd rather see them as the human beings that they are with their own thoughts and levels of tollerance.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

only if they are married and the point is you can put it all in their name while a solicitor and Dr can certify you are of sound mind and un-coerced making your death in real terms non beneficial that way as they already would have the money and it could be done so they don't ever see the will so no one could say they were the ones pushing and that it was all your decision

as the clarification seems to be going to say its only where the partner or person helping is going to benefit that prosecution may be considered so if you take away the benifit after death it mostly will remove any chance of prosecution

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I wonder how many people believed that murderers would see out their days in prison when the death penalty was abolished like the public were promised, makes me dread to think what this bill may develop into in the next 40 years. Already in about a year we have had a Doctor wanting to run suicide classes in God's waiting room (aka Bournemouth) and a senior government advisor advocating licensing to put people down, what next?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

You equate releasing people on parole with allowing people to be pushed into suicide willy nilly?
Really?
Do you honestly believe that the government impliments every single thing that advisors suggest?
Are you really objecting to people being informed about the law and how to stay withing it?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

While i am happier about the guidelines being released and people being able to die with dignity more easily (though still not as easily as i would prefer) i also share TheDaddy distrust of future governments on this matter. Like many aspects of todays life that have more then a four\five year lifespan i believe we should have systems that are outside political interference and exist solely to deal with the issue in hand. Fact that one labour moron has talked of a duty to die worrys me in the longterm and i can see more like her being around in the future.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

When was the last time the government increased the time an abortion can be performed without medical reason such as risk to mother or child?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Just an example of how legislation has been watered down in the past

This woman is more than an advisor, her words carry real weight and even if they aren't considering her proposals (which I don't think they are) you can bet your life they took them on board and if the worse happens they'll be quoted in the future.

No I am objecting to where this'll end up going, it's all to easy for our politicians to twist perfectly decent legislation and send it to places it were never intended.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

On the other hand, the law will not require people with terminal diseases (such as Cancer) to live out their lives in agony.

Swings and roundabouts..

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Actually as far as I can see it wasn't. I don't recall any legislation saying that instead of hanging life in prison would mean dying in prison.
There are plenty of examples of legislation being tightened up though and becoming more draconian.

In nothing more than your opinion

Have you been borrowing Freezin's crystal ball? :D

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

it doesnt do that now suicide is not illegal in this country the "Suicide Act 1961" took away the offense

and i m sorry but if you have a sound mind it should be easy to arrange inside the current frame wok to take your life and not have a risk of prosecution its not hard

any one with a long term condition which meant couldn't do the act are really the only ones who could theoretically get their chosen helper into trouble but if they followed what i said in previous answer and went abroad i cant see there even then would be much if any chance of a prosecution taking place

what some are asking for is a pre decision now that i find really scary

just imagine the long suffering ( for they go through almost as much as the ill person ) getting a nice piece of paper saying they wont be prosecuted in the matter of any future death of their partner

they go to the other country but the partner decides they are not really ready but the helper has had enough and kills them what do you do now where would the protection be then

plus once in pace do you really want to see these headlines here

http://www.lifenews.com/bio589.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...cineandhealth1

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

What exactly is your impression of what happens at Dignitas?
They wheel you in, hand a syringe full of barbituates to your loved one and say "Ve vill just turn around und look zee ozer vay" ?
Or do you mean they're in the hotel room after getting back from Dignitas, and your loved one who took you there picks up the lamp and whacks you over the head with it until you're dead, then one would think that the local police would treat it as a murder. Your loved one saying "but he changed his mind so he beat himself to death with the lamp" really isn't going to wash is it?

As for your linked articles, while in some cases spina bifida has been treated surgically, the cases mentioned had serious spina bifida, and other non-treatable terminal conditions.
The guardian article is reporting on someone's opinion.
To allow someone who cannot make the decision for themselves die slowly in pain no matter if their loved ones say they should die quickly and painlessly is unethical to me.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

When the act was passed outlawing the death penalty it was replaced with a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment and we were told at the time it would mean just that, rest of their life, steadily though it's gone down and down, rape a baby these days and be out in 5 years, murder some one and you'd be unlucky to get a 15 year sentence, it's not what was intended, very far from it.

No not my opinion, she played a leading role at government committee level from everything from special needs education to embryology, if people didn't listen to her opinions there'd be something wrong.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Can you list the act which stated that the Judicary must give life sentances and that life should mean death in prison and the amendments which removed the requirement?
Also can you explain your thinking behind linking such amendments which give someone their life back with the likelihood of amendments being made which would make it easier to take someone's life? To me they appear to be opposing directions.
How do the amendments to acts which tighten the law and bring in more draconian restrictions come into play with your theory that laws are watered down over time?

Listening is one thing, but that's not the same as having a say in how things are done.
My nan used to write to Maggy Thatcher and tell her how to run the country, her opinions were listened to, but not acted on.
An advisor can say what they like, but it means nothing if ministers do not hold the same views and can see that it's a vote winner.
This is why there have been so many strange things published in the media suggesting that one party is going to do this or another is going to do that, simply because an advisor has suggested it, when it never happens because firstly it's not in line with ministers' own thinking, and secondly it would lose votes.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I can give you the words from Roy Jenkins own mouth, life will mean life and David Blunkett said the same in 2003

It was intended as an example, as you well know there is no link other than 40 odd years ago the public were duped on a massive issue.

Not all laws

With respect quite possibly the only things the Baroness and your nan have in common is their ages, she isn't some old dear writting in complaining about stuff, this is a well respected Life Peer whose opinion has been saught in some of the most moral and philisophical areas of modern life, just because her views on this aren't vogue they could well be in the future and at some point they will almost certainly be wheeled out to help test the water.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

But legislatively, there was nothing?
So if there was no legislation, then how can that non-existant legislation be watered down?

Why do you specifically think the law on assisted suicide will be watered down at some future time, to enable people to knock off their kinsmen for financial gain, then?

And as I've been saying, just because she says something does not automatically mean that at some point in the future it will become law.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Fact is it has been, people were never intended to be let out in 10 years after murdering some one and you know it, the mandatory life sentence was intended as Roy said to mean life.

Police chiefs and doctors have already expressed grave concerns, it isn't beyond the realms of fantasy to expect the worst, in fact where politicians are concerned the worst is generally my default expectation, I await to be pleasently surprised though, it has to happen if only by luck one day.

No and I never said it did, what I said was her words carry great weight and are bound to be used in the future to support any changes to the legislation.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Politicians words are not the law in this nation, acts of parliment are.
So unless there's an act which states that life must mean life for murder, the law has not been watered down.

Yes, and I've yet to hear one of them actually explain how their concerns would actually play out.
Mostly it's a case of "oh but someone could be pressurised into suicide or it could be a cover for murder" which frankly shows a lack of knowledge on the subject.

And I've said it doesn't matter because no one is listening. If she's still around when they may possibly perhaps more-chance-of-winning-the-lottery decide that making it easier to murder people or pressurise them into killing themselves, then they'll ask her opinion on the matter then, not say "it's ok luv, we know what you think, you said so way back in 2009"

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

As stated many times what we have now is not what was intended

These people deal with this sort of thing everyday so when it come to the crunch I'd rather side with them and their experience tbh and lets see where these laws have gone in other counrties, like Holland where you can be put down if feeling depressed or Switzerland if you are lonely, I wonder if those reasons were what they expected when they made assisted suicide legal

She will almost certainly be dead which is why I have said all along people will quote her as an authority on the subject

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

the stuff i have read and what i have seen seems to indicate that the person dieing and those helping are left alone to do what is to be done so there is room to say that the person is give cart blanche to decide as once aone there is no come back plus once given the person is free to put pressure on the other one to carry it through

if you have other info point me to it i read anything me ;)

as to the other articles they are more to show the mission creep that happens once you allow this.

as to the in pain its subjective plus ( i cant find the other article at the mo ) the same argument was being put for people in a vegetative state and even mentally impaired where they had had a chance to give consent before hand doctors were wanting to be allowed to assume they would give consent

once on that road it will be almost impossible to stop

and for the life of me ( pun intended even if its a bed one ;) ) i cant see the problem with the law as it is as long as you sort your finances properly

and there are many ways to end your life peacefully with out going to Switzerland or getting your relatives in trouble already just takes a bit of planning

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Surely this isn't what living wills were intended for either

It is believed to be the first time a so-called "living will" has been used to legally aid someone's suicide.

Kerrie Wooltorton, who suffered depression over an inability to have children, was rushed to hospital by ambulance from her flat in Norwich after swallowing car anti-freeze fluid.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-...15396677?f=rss

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I wouldn't have thought so and now its been publicised I can see a few more people trying it on.

Surely her previous history of mental health problems would have counted towards her being sectioned though?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

no just another way things tend to get away from what the original intention was

plus i find what she did very selfish if we are going to say she was of sound enough mind to make that decision as if she was capable of that she should have been able to take her own life with out putting the hospital staff through that ordeal by doing it quietly at home

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I feel so sorry for the mother, who wouldn't

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8470572.stm

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

i feel sorry for the family

but think the sentence was fairly fair

if she wasnt thinking straight the family should have taken greater care of her to protect her from doing this

and if she was of sound mind then she should have thought much more carefully if she truly didnt believe the DR's and was convinced he stood no chance of recovering and wouldn't want to live as he was ( remember we only have thier view on that ) and chosen a quieter less public way on both occasions of doing the deed

not going into it here for various reasons but even a novice could just by going toa library even with out the net find quick and given that he would be given several drugs way of ending life that would be put down unless some one had been telling everyone they were gong to kill him to natural causes

what she did may have helped him though it seems to me it as more about easing her perception of the situation but at the same time put the rest of the family through even more of an ordeal than they needed to have

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Agreed

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I think this is fair and balanced, unusual for guidelines these days, still I am sure it won't be long before some one says that it doesn't go far enough.


New guidelines over whether people would face prosecution over assisting suicide place closer scrutiny on a suspect's motivation.
Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said whether a person acted "wholly compassionately" and not for financial reasons was important.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8536231.stm

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

i expect so :)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Well... Those new guidelines seem as clear as mud....

Let's face facts, most people will stand to gain financially from the death of a loved one. Be they an aged uncle, parent or partner/spouse. No matter what way you slice this particular hot cake. If the assister gains from the death, then you can bet your ass you can expect them to come after you wearing rubber gloves and carrying torches.

On the flip side.... Whats to stop a religious person, who happens to work for the DPP from pushing for prosecutions based of their religious beliefs ?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

seem very clear to me unless you can show that the person had made their own mind up and you have no financial gain to make ( this can be avoided if they really have made up their mind by giving money they have to those they wish to have it before doing it ) you risk prosecution for breaking the law


i don't see how that is unfair or can be used to further a cause by any one religious or other wise

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Very dignified.....

Scores of urns containing human ashes have been found dumped in a lake near the Swiss suicide clinic Dignitas.

One estimate puts the number discovered 30ft down on the bed of Lake Zurich at 300 or more.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_i...7243887795H556

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Consider this.
A 20 yr old is involved in an accident and his spinal cord is severed. The only thing keeping him alive is a respirator, his brain functions are undamaged, he is unable to communicate yet his sight and hearing are undamaged. On life support he can survive another 6 years or so. What life does he have? Is keeping him alive in his own interests?

Someone has a debilitating disease which takes their mental faculties and leaves them in intense pain, they are no longer of sound mind or body and cannot make the decision to end their life for themselves. Is it humane to keep them alive?

Neither scenario above would result in any compunction to end the life of the sufferer if it was a family pet, yet we balk at making the same choices for a human. The Hippocratic oath states to 'Do no harm' yet is it not harmful to subject people to conditions we would not subject an animal to? Surely these are the questions that are pertinent. If we are capable of making the choice responsibly for pets, why not for humans who are in constant pain, or debilitated to the point where there is no hope of recovery and life becomes endless suffering?

The comparison IS valid. We do not balk at the choice for those we question the sentience of, yet we do balk at the choice when the subject is human. Why? Is not a human also due the same dignity we bestow upon animals? or are we not worthy of that?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Another reason to allow and regulate it in the UK

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

a very ex stream example

and nothing would stop them from having a living will

the problem in legislating for extreams is then it starts to slowly take in more than you intended

take your example yep a person who is completely aware and completely unable to communicate ( though i think that that situation will be very rare now ) and we put them down because we would do it for a pet

then once your law ios in place we get the cries of if my pet was unable to walk is incontinent etc due to old age i would put him down surely we should do this for those who cant decide who are in the same situation ?

now you are thinking of those who are old or injured

but its a small step to then say these mentally challenged people are or can be in the same situation often incontinent unable to fully comprehend what the issues are often disabled finding it hard or impossible to walk maybe they would be better off put to sleep ?

just look at abortion and how in the beginning you needed two doctors now they are pushing for nurses to be able to decide ! what was a law to protect women in a desperate situation has moved to women often just having a lifestyle choice

the law as it stands is fine

if you really believed a relative was in the situation you described there are many ways to gain the outcome you desire with out risking your liberty if you just plan properly and even if you end up before a judge in this country it is highly unlikely you would be sent to prison

but with out the law we have soon many relatives will be having their supposed loved ones telling them how hard their life is and how it would be easier to just go to sleep and no matter what safegaurds you put it prolonged suggestion will end up with those who could live happily ending it early to make it easier for their money grabbing relatives

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I am sure we can stucture a law in such a way that it cannot be misused and allows adults the right to die with dignity at a time of their choosing if they have an incurable condition. Life is not all important if the quality of it is non existent and the way we allow some people to live on life support sometimes for many years is plain wrong. In my town we had a case where a mother for thirty years was going to visit her son every single day after he was in an accident and went into a persistent vegatitive state despite him having a so called living will long long before most people had ever heard of them much less had one. What purpose was there in maintaining him for all those years with absolutely no quality of life and yet his living will was not honoured he was technically alive and therefore that was all that mattered.

We have to get a little more realistic in dealing with this and allow people properly monitored to be able to make such decisions about their own life and when that life should come to an end. No one is or ever will advocate wholesale euthanasia in an uncontrolled way but simply saying that life is life is no longer any good. Personally if i was diagnosed with something like alzheimers i would like to be able to choose to die before all the memorys of me as i am were replaced with memorys of what i would become but as it stands right now i cannot and anyone helping me would pay for it.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Can they not introduce something like the Doner card,( No jokes about kebabs please ;)) for people who wish to euthanise if the conditions are correct?
Something along the lines of D.N.R on medical or hospital records?:)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Euthanasia would have some people just waiting to use it to defraud and deceive. There's plenty of morally-bankrupt people out there rubbing their hands at benefiting financially from this.

It's a tough choice but keep it banned from the UK at all costs.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I've been thinking about getting DNR inked on my left wrist, where my watch would cover it day to day....

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Russ it would have to be structured in such a way that the vast majority of people like those you describe couldn't do it, but i think we do have to acknowledge that if people want to die with dignity and have a condition which is not curable they should be able to do so without going abroad. If it ever gets used by people of low moral or ethical standing then implement a very harsh custodial sentence for those people when they are found guilty of it. But to deny all people what i feel is a basic right because of a minority **** element is not fair at all. I like the idea of a voluntary card people could apply for and register in good times and i would certainly be happy to carry one of them

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

So what's the difference between the measures you say would be needed and insurance fraud? If there were ways to ensure systems weren't abused then they'd be applied to all walks of life.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Quite easily Russ. Anyone who wants to pre-book (can't think of a better way to describe it right now) their assisted suicide would speak to a panel of experts. The experts would have access to the applicants medical records, and any other relevant information. They would listen, advise and help the applicant understand the process.... If everything seemed cosher, then the applicant would be free to have the assisted suicide take place at a time of their choosing. That would mean that tragic cases of people being kept alive by machines, for years on end without their loved ones being able to have closure, on what many would consider an already dead loved one would stop.... There is nothing moral, or ethical about forced treatment for brain-dead or severely brain-damaged individuals. Keeping people alive, when they may well prefer to be assisted to die given the choice is by far the more ethical and moral thing to do....

The fact that the arguments against legalising assisted suicide are those warning of the baser urges for personal gain from family. I'm more inclined to think that it's a deep seated religious dogma that makes people object to assisted suicide, or living wills that must be legally enforced. If religious people believe that all human life is sacred, and that suffering is good for the soul, then thats fine. But I'd prefer it if the religious objectors where more honest, and kept their beliefs to themselves and stopped projecting onto others. Personally I accepted my mortality many years ago, and as such don't particularly fear death. I know that most likely dying will suck ass in a big way, but I'd rather have to option of being helped out, rather than being forced to lie in a bed, crapping into a bag, and being fed through a tube in my nose.... Rather a bit of dignity, than a pointless, pityful existance because someone else objects to a fellow human dying at a time of their own choosing....

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

i seriously doubt that you could as anything you do wont be able to stop those who can from pressurizing people into going to where ever you need to go to register that they want to do this

you can already end your life with help as long as that help will in no way benefit from your death or be in a position to persuade you to do it

---------- Post added at 00:10 ---------- Previous post was at 00:07 ----------

you can already stop your self being kept alive that way by putting it on record you don't want extraordinary measures taken to save or prolong your life

and my stance is nothing to do with relgion

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

You can use the misuse argument for everythig but that doesn't stop us implementing many things that benefit the majority i don't see the difference in this issue. Not sure how someone being alone at a time they make whatever choice can be pressured into something or for the process to be done over a period of time with independent people questioning the person i am sure we can make the law as safe as it can be.

While there may be ways to end your life and get help in doing it the fear that those who help may suffer legally is very off putting for many. You may not get the choice on when and how you enter this world but once you prove your a competent adult that has thought the metter through i believe you should be able to choose how you leave this world.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Surely a simple '5 majority' rule would prevent spurious usage.
5 doctors each have to give a report on the patient's condition, if a majority agree that the condition is
1) Permanent
2) Causing distress TO THE PATIENT
3) No treatment possible for the long term alleviation of the symptoms

Then the termination may go ahead, if the above criteria can not be met then there is no justification, if less than 3 doctors agree, then there can be no justification.

Simple enough

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I am sure the people of Switzerland and Holland thought the same, now they have otherwise healthy people being put down for being depressed or lonely....

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Yeah well we all know your mortal hatred for religion so you could at least admit to being biased.

My view is the same as the one I had before I became a Christian - euthenasia WILL be abused.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Russ i get what your saying but everything gets abused but does that mean we deny all things that can be abused no we don't because while abuse may happen many more benefit from it. I am not saying there isn't **** out there that would attempt to abuse this but we have to look beyond that at the many thousands maybe tens of thousands of people who if they were able and it was medically permisable would elect to end their life while there was still dignity to it and family members were left with good memories rather then the memories of the person that was ravaged by whatever illness.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

for the vast majority the law is fine you can end your life when and how you wish as long as you plan don't make a fuss and don't involve people who will directly benefit

and as a family you can arrange to alleviate the suffering and in most cases how someone dies

the media and some campaigners make it seem like that you can not end your life or help some one die with dignity now but this is far from the truth you just have to follow the rules

and it allows investigation to prevent outright abuse

if however some one has i signed piece of paper saying they wish to die i very much doubt there will ever be any checking done

which how ever cruel that is to a very few who may not be able to use the law as it stands is the way it needs to be

you can never make it so its fair to absolutely every one no mater what you do but changing this would put far more at a disadvantage than it would help

=

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

am i missing something here ,why have all these urns containing peoples ashes been dumped anyway don't people claim them and put them in a remembrance garden ?

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

If you have no family, or family that cares about you, then there is no one to claim.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Swiss suicide clinic Dignitas is under investigation over claims that it ignored a patient's distressed mental condition to give him drugs to end his own life.

Strict assisted suicide laws in Switzerland state that each patient must be of sound mind and able to understand the consequences of their actions.

But now details have emerged of a patient who was allegedly given a DIY suicide kit prescribed by a Zurich gynaeologist despite suffering from paranoid schizophrenia.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...icide-kit.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

The assisted suicide of a woman who wanted to escape old age has reignited the debate about euthanasia.

Nan Maitland, 84, a right-to-die campaigner, was not terminally ill but suffered from arthritis and said her life consisted of ‘more pain than pleasure’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...de-clinic.html

This guy sums up my views perfectly

‘The true aim of those campaigning for a change in the law, as we have seen today, is to allow anyone who requests it, regardless of their age or health, to be helped to end their lives.

‘All the evidence shows that any change in the law would place pressure on vulnerable people ... to end their lives so as not to be a burden on loved ones, carers, or the state.’

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

easy for her to say as she is probably wealthy enough to not need the nhs.

as a side note I think the government shouldnt even have advisors, advisors arent elected yet I expect have a great role in how policies are drawn up.

---------- Post added at 11:02 ---------- Previous post was at 10:59 ----------

Got to love the daily mail... not.

'healthy women' headline then goes on to say she had crippling arthritus.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I live with pain everyday and the only certainty i have for the future is that my pain will continue to increase to the point oneday where it will be unbearable. At that point i would like to have the option to elec t to die properly and not make some half assed attempt on my own. Nothing about being a burden although i certainly would be but about my right to choose not to live in pain which i think anyone should have. Hell if an animal was suffering at my level now we would consider it cruel to keep it alive yet we insist on it with human beings because "life is sacred" total stupidity.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

yeah next we will be saying anyone ill should stop living as they a burden.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Chrysalis you know very well i would never support that attitude but intelligent people in their right mind should be able to have a choice and in my right mind there is no way in hell even the most persistent or ardent of family members would ever get me to agree to dying if i didn't want too. Can we formualte a law that would prevent it 100% no of course we couldn't but then you name me one law we have that is 100% effective for what it is intended doesn't mean we do away with them all does it.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Voters in the Zurich area of Switzerland are voting on two proposals related to assisted suicide.

The first, to introduce a complete ban on the practice, looks set to be defeated.

But the second, which proposes limiting assisted suicide to Zurich residents only, could get more support.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13403074

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Campaigners against a change in the law over assisted suicide today warned prosecutors were interpreting new guidance very liberally and risked creating "legalisation by stealth"

By far the worst form of legalisation, perhaps it's time for our glorious leaders to debate this again.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...legislation.do

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I wouldn't have wanted to be the judge in this case

A WOMAN with brain damage must not be allowed to die despite being barely conscious for eight years, the High Court ruled today.

The landmark ruling represents the first time English courts have been asked to decide whether to stop life-supporting treatment of a patient who was not in a vegetative state.

Relatives wanted to end her life because they said she would not want to live "a life dependent on others".

Not sure how I could weigh up

Mr Justice Baker said today: "The factor which does carry substantial weight, in my judgment, is the preservation of life.

and

They love her dearly and want only what is best for her, and it has been desperately difficult for them to make this application to court for treatment to be withdrawn

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...ed-to-die.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Definitely a toughie ,and just re-inforces the urgent need for further debate in this matter in my opinion

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I hope they know what they're doing...

Doctors should be allowed to help terminally ill patients kill themselves – but only if they have less than a year to live, under proposals published in a major report today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-to-live.html

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Well it moves the debate on further, which can only be a good thing.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

A paralysed man who wants a doctor to be able to lawfully end his life can proceed with his "right-to-die" case, a High Court judge has ruled.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17336774

Who'd be a judge eh, certainly not me in this case, although I'm pretty much against "right to die" as explained in detail earlier in the thread I'm not sure it's fair to put people through this disease either.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Kevin Boyle, one of Jamie Oliver's original apprentices from his Fifteen restaurant, has been found dead in a garden.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddr...ound-dead.html

He had been missing for three months, having disappeared on the same day a suicide kit he bought online was delivered to the house.

Patti, 53, said: “It was such an innocent looking package. Just a brown Jiffy bag that weighed next to nothing.

“I thought it was a packet of icing bags for yet another banquet. I didn’t suspect a thing.�

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...icide-kit.html

This is so tragic, when I read about the old or terminally ill I accept their points and find it hard to argue them, not quite so hard when it's some one young and healthyish.

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

We'll all be suicidal before the next General Election. ;)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I will be if we get millybore and his merry band of spenders back in. :)

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

is it case for parliament or have the courts bottled it ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19249680

Re: A Duty To Die?
 

I must say I feel incredibly sorry for people suffering like this who clearly want to end that suffering. It's not as though he and his loved ones can't articulate how he feels is it...