| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? 07:41 - Mar 27 with 1009 views | The_Romford_Blue |
Just seen this article on BBC website. Poor bloke. Not terminal but not curable either. Deteriorating.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39368159
And I know it's a Monday morning. And that I have started a few threads this weekend but I just wondered what TWTD makes of this. I don't remember a previous thread on it.
For me, if someone wants to go. They should be allowed to make that decision themself. Whilst it would devastate me if my grandad says he wants to kill himself one day (he has Parkinson's), if he really wanted it enough, being made to travel to Switzerland for that to happen legally is wrong. |  |
| |  |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 07:51 - Mar 27 with 984 views | oldbluestu |
Only right if they can make that decision, but then is it fair on those people who are incapable of making that decision ? |  | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:36 - Mar 27 with 933 views | HARRY10 |
This is an extremely selfish act, possibly prompted by dubious intentions. The law that exists is there for protection when needed not as something enforcible in every case.
Talk to medical staff and they will tell you that ending your life goes on all the time and questions are only raised when there is doubt or concern.
The present system works well, given the minefield it has to cross. And changes would hinder rather than help. It's about time we trusted others a bit more. |  | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:44 - Mar 27 with 923 views | WeWereZombies |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:36 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
This is an extremely selfish act, possibly prompted by dubious intentions. The law that exists is there for protection when needed not as something enforcible in every case.
Talk to medical staff and they will tell you that ending your life goes on all the time and questions are only raised when there is doubt or concern.
The present system works well, given the minefield it has to cross. And changes would hinder rather than help. It's about time we trusted others a bit more. |
But there have been cases where people have been living in agony and incapable of ending their own life, although compos mentis, where medical staff or relatives would have been prosecuted if they had acted on the patients wishes. The 'locked in' man and, was it, Diane Purvis are a couple off the top of my head. I'm sure there are others we do not hear about. Seems to me that there is a two way slippery slope here - if we legislate if could end up as proxy eugenics and if we do not then terminations carry on unofficially and do not get the clinical peer review they may warrant. |  |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:45 - Mar 27 with 920 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:36 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
This is an extremely selfish act, possibly prompted by dubious intentions. The law that exists is there for protection when needed not as something enforcible in every case.
Talk to medical staff and they will tell you that ending your life goes on all the time and questions are only raised when there is doubt or concern.
The present system works well, given the minefield it has to cross. And changes would hinder rather than help. It's about time we trusted others a bit more. |
Someone with an incurable illness deteriorating slowly over time, like my grandad for example, should get the choice in my opinion to say 'enough is enough'
He used to be climbing ladders all the time, fixing and building things. Now he can't walk 5 yards (has a walker), has a movement chair to help him stand up, can't hold things properly and often says to me that he's trying to move but his legs won't allow him - often taking 3/4 minutes just to move himself from his chair to the kitchen.
I certainly wouldn't turn round to him and say he's selfish if he said he wants to go. | |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:59 - Mar 27 with 892 views | HARRY10 |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:45 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Someone with an incurable illness deteriorating slowly over time, like my grandad for example, should get the choice in my opinion to say 'enough is enough'
He used to be climbing ladders all the time, fixing and building things. Now he can't walk 5 yards (has a walker), has a movement chair to help him stand up, can't hold things properly and often says to me that he's trying to move but his legs won't allow him - often taking 3/4 minutes just to move himself from his chair to the kitchen.
I certainly wouldn't turn round to him and say he's selfish if he said he wants to go. |
Who said he was selfish,and why would you have your back to hime before speaking.
Romford te case you mention were again motivated by entirely selfish reasons.
People in that position ARE NOT prosecuted, and a great deal is left to that dying person, relatives and GP. All to frequently Downs Syndrom children were suffocated at birth pre war. That was why you rarely saw many, as with other chronic disabilities.
There are of course the obvious concerns re proxy eugenics, and so the position as it has evolved to the present works, extremely well. Removing that ability to prosecute would be a very dangerous and backward step.
A football analogy would be standing at football games. What happens now works, although the authorities have the legal ability to stop fans from standing, but common sense prevails. Trying to make it absolute either way would be disasterous. | | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:19 - Mar 27 with 861 views | bluelagos |
Not sure I'd want a Swiss style operation in the UK, but absolutely have no issue with assisted dying and those helping them to travel there.
We need to ensure no one is pressured into it, but in 99.9% cases am sure it is simply someone choosing the time of their death. To force someone to suffer a disease against their will, seems inhumane to me. |  |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:26 - Mar 27 with 835 views | bluelagos |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 08:36 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
This is an extremely selfish act, possibly prompted by dubious intentions. The law that exists is there for protection when needed not as something enforcible in every case.
Talk to medical staff and they will tell you that ending your life goes on all the time and questions are only raised when there is doubt or concern.
The present system works well, given the minefield it has to cross. And changes would hinder rather than help. It's about time we trusted others a bit more. |
Why do you call it selfish Harry? Superficially it reads to me of a bloke wanting to die due to a poor quality of life and no chance of improvement. | |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:44 - Mar 27 with 802 views | HARRY10 |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:26 - Mar 27 by bluelagos |
Why do you call it selfish Harry? Superficially it reads to me of a bloke wanting to die due to a poor quality of life and no chance of improvement. |
read the post... and the one below and it does explain it
don't simply read the word selfish | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:55 - Mar 27 with 790 views | HARRY10 |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:19 - Mar 27 by bluelagos |
Not sure I'd want a Swiss style operation in the UK, but absolutely have no issue with assisted dying and those helping them to travel there.
We need to ensure no one is pressured into it, but in 99.9% cases am sure it is simply someone choosing the time of their death. To force someone to suffer a disease against their will, seems inhumane to me. |
If not sure what is being issued here but NO ONE is forcing this man or anyone 'to suffer a disease against their will'.
Others with a different agenda are using this case for their own purposes.
Assisted dying or whatever way it is described goes on every day - even King George V met his end this way. The withdrawal of certain drugs is often enough, as is the patient not taking them. In all cases the doctor is consulted and it is his or her recommendation that determines what happens next.
What this DOES NOT need is those using this for their own ends ie proving a point that does not need proving. | | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 10:05 - Mar 27 with 765 views | bluelagos |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:55 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
If not sure what is being issued here but NO ONE is forcing this man or anyone 'to suffer a disease against their will'.
Others with a different agenda are using this case for their own purposes.
Assisted dying or whatever way it is described goes on every day - even King George V met his end this way. The withdrawal of certain drugs is often enough, as is the patient not taking them. In all cases the doctor is consulted and it is his or her recommendation that determines what happens next.
What this DOES NOT need is those using this for their own ends ie proving a point that does not need proving. |
Am really not seeing the agenda you are referring to. Not saying there isn't one, but don't see it tbh.
Can you spell it out for me... (and apologies if I am being slow) | |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 10:10 - Mar 27 with 749 views | HARRY10 |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 10:05 - Mar 27 by bluelagos |
Am really not seeing the agenda you are referring to. Not saying there isn't one, but don't see it tbh.
Can you spell it out for me... (and apologies if I am being slow) |
I think you will find I have already spelt it above - not much else I can add | | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 13:09 - Mar 27 with 675 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 09:55 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
If not sure what is being issued here but NO ONE is forcing this man or anyone 'to suffer a disease against their will'.
Others with a different agenda are using this case for their own purposes.
Assisted dying or whatever way it is described goes on every day - even King George V met his end this way. The withdrawal of certain drugs is often enough, as is the patient not taking them. In all cases the doctor is consulted and it is his or her recommendation that determines what happens next.
What this DOES NOT need is those using this for their own ends ie proving a point that does not need proving. |
Agenda?
I'm not seeing how forcing someone to live with a disease is selfish either | |
| |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 16:58 - Mar 27 with 600 views | HARRY10 |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 13:09 - Mar 27 by The_Romford_Blue |
Agenda?
I'm not seeing how forcing someone to live with a disease is selfish either |
Slowly.... many terminally ill patients are 'helped' on their way, with those helping ie medical staff being ultra careful that is what the patient wants - and has the capacity to make that decision.
Often it is no more than the withdrawal of drugs, or the over use of painkillers - not a knee jerk "hold tight, here you go" type of scenario.
Involving the state would introduce far more time delay, checking and even appeals from family members, as it is now the decision relies almost entirely upon the patient.
some other interesting points here
http://www.broadreachtraining.com/advocacy/euth12rsns.htm
as with much that appears easy to the layman it is not that easy
an example being that 'criminals' should be made to pick up litter ... punishment, cleaner environment
where in fact the opposite is the case in the latter - as folk will chuck litter down on the basis of " bleep them, let those bleepers do it/some work etc
and a thought
In 1915 the British Army introduced the steel helmet, which quickly saw a five fold increase in injuries ..... any idea what caused those injuries ? | | | |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 17:15 - Mar 27 with 584 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Should sufferers of terminal or incureable illnesses have a right to die? on 16:58 - Mar 27 by HARRY10 |
Slowly.... many terminally ill patients are 'helped' on their way, with those helping ie medical staff being ultra careful that is what the patient wants - and has the capacity to make that decision.
Often it is no more than the withdrawal of drugs, or the over use of painkillers - not a knee jerk "hold tight, here you go" type of scenario.
Involving the state would introduce far more time delay, checking and even appeals from family members, as it is now the decision relies almost entirely upon the patient.
some other interesting points here
http://www.broadreachtraining.com/advocacy/euth12rsns.htm
as with much that appears easy to the layman it is not that easy
an example being that 'criminals' should be made to pick up litter ... punishment, cleaner environment
where in fact the opposite is the case in the latter - as folk will chuck litter down on the basis of " bleep them, let those bleepers do it/some work etc
and a thought
In 1915 the British Army introduced the steel helmet, which quickly saw a five fold increase in injuries ..... any idea what caused those injuries ? |
You make so many good arguments there so well played | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
