Assisted suicide - yea or nay?

[Y'man]

Yes. The right to die is as important as the right to live. I demand that right.

No idea who claims that 'Legalised euthanasia has led to a severe decline in the quality of care for terminally-ill patients in Holland' but it's incorrect. If you want to see a severe decline in the quality of elderly care, you'll need to look closer to home, The UK is probably the worst in Europe.

[silverfox]

As per the article, Dr Anne-Marie The, in her book on the history of euthanasia called Redeemer Under God.

Also, Dr Els Borst, the former Health Minister and Deputy Prime Minister who guided the law through the Dutch parliament, who now says it was brought in 'far too early'.

They would seem to be good authority on whether the quality of care has declined or not.

Also, an important lesson for us to consider if we intend to bring in such a law.

[Huguenot]

They certainly appear more informed than Y'man ;-)

[Y'man]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They certainly appear more informed than Y'man ;-)

Yes, well, I only live here (Netherlands) helping to care for the elderly on a part time basis. And watched in horror, complaining bitterly, at how my own Father was treated in an English residential care facility. What could I possibly know from experience that is more relevant than a claim in a published book! I stand down, put in my place by those who think from afar.

[Huguenot]

Pffft. You parade opinion as fact ;-)

[computedshorty]

?

[Keef]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Pffft. You parade opinion as fact ;-)

Pot and bloody kettle surely!!! ;-)

[Smiler]

The research mentioned did not focus in particular on these kind of situations, it was about all kinds of situations and perceptions of honesty.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It may be that this study tells us a little about

> the psychology of the situation...

>

> Only 47% of people think that a nurse persuading

> an elderly and infirm patient to change their will

> in the nurse's favour was dishonest.

>

> So what proportion will believe that persuading a

> chronically ill person to 'end their suffering'

> and advantage themselves is also not dishonest?

>

> If people want figures to support my concern about

> abuse of legalised suicide being widespread, they

> need only consider the 53% of people who would

> take advantage of the ill and infirm with a clear

> conscience.

[Smiler]

Huguenot, don't like the implication that people who wish to help their relative to end their life are doing it because it is "about them" and not the ill person. Especially don't like that this is made in response to someone who has been in an awful situation with their Mum.

I also disagree with the suggestion that people who are pro-euthanasia hold this view because it is difficult to watch / care-for people who are dying.

With respect to palliative care, there are some medical conditions that no amount of drugs / care can ease suffering can help, such as motor neurone disease.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I'm sorry about your mum shosh, but your

> description is telling: "watch your 56 yr old

> mother vomit diahharrea and writhe in pain and

> then let's discuss it again"

>

> You see that comment's not about your mum, it's

> about you watching your mum. It suggests that

> euthansia is more about the viewer's own

> discomfort rather than the poor victim.

>

> I'm sure you didn't intend that and I apologise

> for highlighting it, but I believe that's

> dangerously close to a lot of people's views on

> euthanasia. We perhaps want to allow people a

> lifeline from their misery because of ourselves.

>

> I watched my own mother die over a painfully long

> ten year period that left her mentally and

> physically incapacitated. Myself and my siblings

> eventually switched off her life support for many

> reasons, but I made absolutely sure that none of

> them were about myself.

[Huguenot]

I'm not contesting that all people are in it for themselves Smiler, I'm saying that if legalisation opens the door for even one person to exploit the system, for one victim, that's one person too many.

I'm also observing that many people may not realise the pressure they're imposing, nor the consequences that it may have. They'll believe themselves innocent even if creating dreadful moral mistakes.

That figure of 53% merely demonstrates that a very large proportion of people are poor judges of the righteousness of their actions - particularly when it comes to the elderly or near-death issues.

In summary, the OP was a question regarding euthaniasia - I'm against it two-fold: firstly that one mistake is too many, and secondly that a large proportion of people demonstrate errors in judgement in this high-stress environment, suggesting it won't be one mistake, but very many.

[silverfox]

Mother cleared of bid to murder suicidal daughter

"A devoted mother who admitted helping her bed-ridden daughter commit suicide walked free from court this afternoon after being cleared of attempted murder.

Bridget Kathleen Gilderdale, 55, crushed up pills and fed them through her 31-year-old daughter Lynn's nasal tube, handed her morphine and injected three syringes of air into a vein after her own attempt to take her life failed...

Lynn had suffered from ME for 17 years... Unable to speak, eat or drink, she was fed through a tube at the family home in Stonegate, near Heathfield, East Sussex. She had attempted suicide in the past, had drafted a ?living will?, placed a Do Not Resuscitate note on her medical records and considered ending her life at Dignitas, the Swiss-based clinic.

The court heard that in the early hours of 3 December, 2008, Lynn injected an overdose of morphine directly into her vein after being handed two syringes by her mother.

But when she realised that the dosage was not high enough, she called out to her mother, who then spent around an hour trying to persuade her not to press ahead with killing herself.

Gilderdale searched the house for tablets, fearing her daughter would be left alive but severely brain-damaged. These pills, including Diazepam, Zopiclone and Temazepam, were crushed using a pestle and mortar and then inserted into her daughter's nasal tube.

Three syringes of air were also pumped into her with the intention of causing air embolisms, it was alleged...

Jurors were told that she could not be tried for murder as it was uncertain whether her daughter died from the overdose she gave herself or from that given by her mother."

ummmmmh ... something not quite right here.

(my bold emphasis here)

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23798975-mother-cleared-of-trying-to-murder-sick-daughter.do

[HAL9000]

silverfox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lynn had suffered from ME for 17 years...

> Unable to speak ... she called out to her mother ...

> ummmmmh ... something not quite right here.

Someone unable to hold a conversation may still be able to vocalise an utterance meaningful to his or her carer?

[silverfox]

The court heard that in the early hours of 3 December, 2008, Lynn injected an overdose of morphine directly into her vein after being handed two syringes by her mother.

But when she realised that the dosage was not high enough, she called out to her mother, who then spent around an hour trying to persuade her not to press ahead with killing herself.

Am I missing something? Why give her two overdosed syringes and then spend an hour talking her out of killing herself?

Dodgy decision if you ask me.

[silverfox]

Archbishop of Canterbury says changes to assisted dying laws will 'cross a moral boundary'

Changing the law on assisted dying would be immoral, the Archbishop of Canterbury warned yesterday.

Dr Rowan Williams said making it legal to help a desperately sick relative to die would 'cross a moral boundary' and 'enter very dangerous territory'.

The Government has ... declined to act to prevent the DPP from taking the framing of suicide law into his own hands.

The Archbishop's speech ... came as Mr Starmer prepares to publish within a month the final version of his guidelines, which will set down conditions under which those who assist in a suicide are likely to escape prosecution.

The first draft in September said broadly that family members who help in the death of someone who is terminally sick or disabled, and who wants to die, should not be prosecuted unless they hoped to gain something from the death.

But the Archbishop rejected that position. He said the present law on assisted dying which means those who help a loved one to die face 14 years in jail 'serves us better than an opening of the door into provision for the legal ending of lives'.

Dr Williams said changing the law on assisted dying would 'cross a moral boundary' and take it into 'very dangerous territory'... 'Once the possibility is there, it will not only be utilised by the smallish number of high-profile hard cases but will also create an ethical framework in which the worthwhileness of some lives is undermined by the legal expression of what feels like public impatience with protracted dying and "unproductive" lives.'

... granting a right to die is not only a moral mistake ... but the upsetting of a balance of freedoms'.

... the balance of liberties still comes out against a new legal framework and in favour of holding to the principle, not that life should be prolonged at all costs, but that the legal initiating of a process whose sole or main purpose is to end life is again to cross a moral boundary, and to enter some very dangerous territory in practical terms.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249718/Archbishop-Canterbury-Rowan-Williams-attacks-assisted-suicide-laws-changes.html

[Huguenot]

Regardless of the Daily Mail...

"[Euthanasia] will not only be utilised by the smallish number of high-profile hard cases but will also create an ethical framework in which the worthwhileness of some lives is undermined by the legal expression of what feels like public impatience with protracted dying and "unproductive" lives"

I've never heard it expressed better.

[silverfox]

I understand Newsnight will be doing a feature interviewing self-confessed 'assisters' or 'murderers' tonight which may be worth recording.

Perhaps it's more widespread than we think.