|
Post by tam on Nov 11, 2012 22:33:57 GMT 10
To me that was suicide. Terminal people, or those in great pain, should have the right to choose.
|
|
|
Post by jody on Nov 12, 2012 6:57:59 GMT 10
It should be up to the individual when they die though I think killing yourself for no reason like the above is suicide. I do have a concern for their soul but it is their choice to do with it what they choose. Please don't turn my opinion into another anti religious tirade. There are enough anti religion threads on general at the moment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2012 7:15:35 GMT 10
Today would have been my father's 90th birthday.
He passed away 17 years ago in a nursing home from oesophageal cancer, so bad he had a hole in his neck you could have poked your finger through and played 'Dixie' on his vocal chords. A truly cruel and horrible way to end one's days. Both my brother and I were living interstate and neither of us were there at his passing, which followed yet another bleed from his carotid artery. Had the laws allowed, he would have chosen his time where both bro and I were present to hold him as he quietly slipped away.
From such experience, I have come to a position of being a staunch advocate of the right to choose our own time to leave this earth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2012 11:57:28 GMT 10
I'm quite sympathetic to the right to die when the case is terminal.
The problem as I see it is born from the experience of the Dutch euthanasia experience. Research done there is horrifying in it's findings in that 1/3 (Yes one third!) ie about 2000 people were euthanised without their consent!
What we need as I see it is a right to die PLUS very very stringent safeguards.
However here is something worth considering -
The following organizations who are very close to the issue don't approve or endorse voluntary euthanasia -
Australian Medical Association Palliative Care Nursing Association
Apparently none of the Churches nor the Aboriginal Community support it either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2012 12:12:53 GMT 10
I more or less agree Phil.
Question: Is your support only for terminal illness or based on any condition that the patient feels their quality of life is so poor as to merit death?
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on Nov 12, 2012 17:30:06 GMT 10
Hmmm...how about the right to kill, I can see some benefits in that..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 15:00:33 GMT 10
Hmmm...how about the right to kill, I can see some benefits in that.. We have that already for the unborn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 15:02:01 GMT 10
Any condition. I watched the story last night and the person involved had made a decision whilst in complete control of her faculties. The issue remains though, is it a choice influenced by temporary depression - or a completely valid choice made over a long period? A very difficult thing to judge. Agreed a very difficult thing to judge, how do we as a society agree to a 16 year old paralysed from the waist down asking for their legal right to euthanasia?
|
|
|
Post by fat on Nov 13, 2012 17:07:24 GMT 10
Buzz - I agree with this as you've described it.
Where I see the problem is when more 'safeguards' come into the picture - all the boxes have to be ticked by x number of doctors or whatever and then aunt Sally is allowed to be shuffled off - simply because it is such a short step then to having a box to tick for economic viability - it won't be called that but that's what it will mean - perhaps the dignity or quality of life box has a 'we need the bed factor' sitting silently in the background.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 17:39:26 GMT 10
Good point Fat, and the medical profession is turned from saviours to potential killers in the eyes of the very vulnerable.
|
|
|
Post by Salem on Nov 13, 2012 17:51:58 GMT 10
It should be legal but there needs to be safeguards.
|
|
|
Post by Salem on Nov 13, 2012 17:53:26 GMT 10
Hmmm...how about the right to kill, I can see some benefits in that.. We have that already for the unborn. No Skippy, we don't. Unless you mean menstruation or men wasting their seed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 18:02:58 GMT 10
We have that already for the unborn. No Skippy, we don't. Unless you mean menstruation or men wasting their seed. Respectfully Salem we do. Some, not all, use abortion as contraception and thus kill a defenceless unborn baby.
|
|
|
Post by Salem on Nov 13, 2012 18:05:19 GMT 10
Sorry Skippy, but it is not an unborn baby. Putting emotive and manipulative words like 'defenceless' before it won't help it to be true. Its no more a baby than a sperm is. It is not an unborn 'baby'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 18:10:46 GMT 10
Sorry Skippy, but it is not an unborn baby. Putting emotive and manipulative words like 'defenceless' before it won't help it to be true. Its no more a baby than a sperm is. It is not an unborn 'baby'. Your kidding? So what is it then - a dingo or a carrot? And using masking or manipulation words like fetus or zygote doesn't hide what's going on. I thought most pregnant women say they can feel the baby kick. Can you tell me when it becomes a baby and what happens biologically 1 second before and after to make it a baby from the blob/dingo/carrot it was 1 second before?
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 13, 2012 18:21:10 GMT 10
I thought most pregnant women say they can feel the baby kick. Yes and that's called the "quickening" which means "coming alive". The word "quick" originally meant "alive" so when you moved "quickly" you moved in a "lively" fashion. I'm not Anglican and I'm not familiar with the Book of Common Prayer. But I am aware that in the Catholic version of the Nicene Creed there is a reference to Christ's Second Coming when he will come to judge "the living and the dead". I have heard there is a Protestant version i which the reference is to "the quick and the dead" where "quick" means "living". There was a time when women said when they felt the baby move in the womb that was the time the baby came alive. And we still call it the "quickening" - with its old meaning. And that was when it acquired a soul. Presumably before that it was something else - but it wasn't regarded as being alive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 18:26:43 GMT 10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 18:42:39 GMT 10
Oh we see Kiwi, your hero Himmler was just exercising ( involuntary ) euthanasia ? He just got a bad press right?
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Nov 13, 2012 18:44:31 GMT 10
Just saw an interesting story on Seven's Sunday Night program. A lady, aged 79, in perfect health, decided she was ready to die. au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/features/article/-/15329075/crossing-the-line/She enlisted the help of a friend to purchase some drugs from Mexico that would end her life painlessly. She made a video a week or so ahead of her chosen day to die, and she explained what she was going to do. Sure enough, on the designated day, she drank the drug and died peacefully. So, do we all have the right to decide when we want to die? Any thoughts? she has the right to suicide... she has the right to pick her time... she isn't the first to do that ... there was another in the USA she decided she didn't want to live past 80.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 18:45:04 GMT 10
Oh we see Kiwi, your hero Himmler was just exercising ( involuntary ) euthanasia ? He just got a bad press right? Well I guess you are too STUPID to comprehend what I have posted several times (including within the past couple of days) about that because your BULLSHIT religious book has stuffed up your mind and made it INTELLECTUALLY DEFICIENT. In other words....you're full of shit (yet again).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2012 20:26:35 GMT 10
You have posted many things several times but don't make the mistake of believing that people believe you. Flung any bags of pork chops into synagogues over the last couple of weekends?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2012 8:54:58 GMT 10
If you had seen as many people die as I have, you would understand why I am completely in agreement with euthanasia. Death in a nursing home environment can be horrifying because staff are mainly unskilled carers. If I was to die I would be choosing a hospice environment where staff are qualified professionals.
I have seen some terrible deaths - one where a woman took about 6 weeks to die. She had refused food, liquids and medication over a long period. How she could have endured this lingering death, literally starving herself over such an extended time is horrifying. Yet every day she was dragged from her bed, hoisted up on lifters, washed and incontinence pads changed, dressed into day clothes and brought down to the lounge area where she could be put in a position outside the RN's office. Of course she didn't need food, because once the organs are shutting down there is no need for sustenance. Staff would use swabs to keep her mouth moist ... she could no longer swallow. I thought it was all terribly inhumane as she was obviously suffering. She could not move a muscle and she had lost her ability to speak but the pain in her eyes was unmistakable and you could see her begging for release every day of those 6 weeks.
Whenever I think of euthanasia I can see her face. I believe everyone should have the right to decide when their time has come and they no longer wish to go on. Best make your wishes known while you are able. Death is not quick. It can be a long slow process and quite an undignified process at that. I am not talking about hospices here ... the staff are skilled and compassionate and mostly pain free. Not always so in the nursing home environment.
The lady in the article was not 79, she was 89. That is a big difference. She had seen her sister Sara Henderson die a lingering and horrible death suffering from breast cancer. This lady made a decision to go whilst she was still had a degree of independence. But she knew it would not last and she couldn't bear the thought of being completely helpless. This is the main fear of those who have been active and independent all their lives.
|
|
|
Post by sonex on Nov 14, 2012 9:29:02 GMT 10
Exactly Stellar, and if people like this knew they had the means in their cupboard to end their life in a non painful peaceful way they may actually stay alive longer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2012 9:54:47 GMT 10
That is true Sonex. Knowing that they have the means to prevent the inevitable pain and suffering and indignity of a lingering death. Everyone should have that means.
However if the person suffers a stroke for instance, they would not be in the position of being able to take the medication to bring their life to an end if they become completely incapacitated. And so we need to work this one out ... who is to give the dose that brings their life to an end? I wouldn't want it to be me.
This is why the lady in the article decided to take the Nembutal at the age of 89 whilst she was still capable to do so. She had had a good innings and she wanted to go out and be remembered as the vibrant and independent personality she was and I am in full agreement with her decision.
|
|