Right to Die?

o1s1n

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I understand but the only solution would be for the courts to show some compassion during sentencing and give a 10 year suspended sentence or something. Making it legal to kill somebody even if its only for the terminally ill will open up the flood gates to some to get killed against their wishes for reasons of greed etc like what was said by another poster earlier.
How will it affect the death insurance claims etc? it will make them null and void.

I seriously doubt there's a 'murder floodgate' being held back because we don't allow assisted suicide. Bit of an overly dramatic, tabloid view on it.

If people are in agony and there is no end to their suffering other than death (and they wish to die) then why can't we help them in their hour of need?

I've an aunt who died a few years back from cancer. She was in absolute agony towards the end. I couldn't understand why it had to go on for so long.

We'll alleviate a sick animal from their agony through assisted death, why must we prolong human life at all costs no matter what?

Boo2112

The number one reason for assisted suicide isn't pain its loss of autonomy. Imagine literally having no control over your own body or mind, horrific.

My granny told me about when her sister was dying from a brain tumour they had to look after her, one day her daughter was helping her change her nappy and she said the look of disgust on my aunts face was one that will stay with her forever. She couldn't talk at this stage and they knew she was going to die but having to see her soon disgusted at her complete loss of independance was apparently the worst thing they can remember.

I would personally do it if I got alzhiemers or dementia, no need to put my loved ones through the pain of watching me forget my life. Id rather spend my last moments knowing I loved and was loved than an empty shell.

CollardGreens

You're making a key misassumption here in that you assume that everybody on this thread is of a religious background.

@ P_1, no friend, it is you that is making the assumption and here's how: I do not follow a "religion" and am not of a religious background AND if you read one of my first post I said that I realized that many here (looks like most) do not believe in God.

About Jesus, one, He did not like religion. It was actually the overzealous religious ones that had Him beat and killed.
Two, the people he hung out with while on earth were fishermen and a few hookers, a doctor and a tax collector.
And three, we are called to have a relationship with Him, not a church (apparently...and I'm guessing, that you have had a "church" shoved in your face?).

Jesus is my friend, and I hope one day soon He will become your friend too.


I do hope y'all can get this ironed out, not sure if the OP was talking about America making this law or Ireland?

Time for lunch!

Boo2112

o1s1n wrote: »

I seriously doubt there's a 'murder floodgate' being held back because we don't allow assisted suicide. Bit of an overly dramatic, tabloid view on it.

Also this. The state of Oregon legalised assisted suicide in 1997 and all the deaths are accounted for and the process is impeccable, they don't take the decision lightly.

Anyone with that kind of cynical view on it should look up their website, all the records are there to see and its actually really inspiring.

3ndahalfof6

If your a horse, cat , dog, they will put you down if you are in distress or pain, well the option is there,

but if your human you are fooked, for some reason they seem to think it is better to let other humans suffer till the very end, crazy stuff I tells yis.

Hilly Bill

o1s1n wrote: »

I seriously doubt there's a 'murder floodgate' being held back because we don't allow assisted suicide. Bit of an overly dramatic, tabloid view on it.

If people are in agony and there is no end to their suffering other than death (and they wish to die) then why can't we help them in their hour of need?

I've an aunt who died a few years back from cancer. She was in absolute agony towards the end. I couldn't understand why it had to go on for so long.

We'll alleviate a sick animal from their agony through assisted death, why must we prolong human life at all costs no matter what?

Its not over dramatic its a potential for the law to be abused for the gain of others. If even one person gets killed against their wishes as a result of a law change then there would be a call for the law to change back.

Hilly Bill

wprathead wrote: »

Hilly Bill you sound like those that say "Sure we don't need abortion, can't they just get the boat/plane to England"

Thanks.

P_1

CollardGreens wrote: »

@ P_1, no friend, it is you that is making the assumption and here's how: I do not follow a "religion" and am not of a religious background AND if you read one of my first post I said that I realized that many here (looks like most) do not believe in God.

About Jesus, one, He did not like religion. It was actually the overzealous religious ones that had Him beat and killed.
Two, the people he hung out with while on earth were fishermen and a few hookers, a doctor and a tax collector.
And three, we are called to have a relationship with Him, not a church (apparently...and I'm guessing, that you have had a "church" shoved in your face?).

Jesus is my friend, and I hope one day soon He will become your friend too.


I do hope y'all can get this ironed out, not sure if the OP was talking about America making this law or Ireland?

Time for lunch!

I have to say that this is possibly one of the most friendly attempts at proselytism that I've ever encountered and I thank you for that. Sadly I'm not too keen on that though but again thank you.

In relation to the OP, it's referring to a report in the Irish Times about a case taking place in the Irish Supreme Court so we are discussing this law in its Irish context.

ITS_A_BADGER

Hilly Bill wrote: »

That goes without saying but whats the best option? another 14 years of pain or 14 years in jail? If the courts show compassion afterwards then he might not see the inside of the jail .

Thats leaving a lot up to chance tho, already the courts have showed their stance by not allowing the lady an assisted suicide, so it goes without saying that the husband would definatly see the inside of the jail because he broke the law and because he would have defied the courts and went ahead and asisted her, He would do jail time but he might not see a 14 year jail sentence but would still see a jail term

o1s1n

Here's a really heartbreaking (and amazing) documentary worth watching about one of my favourite artists - John Hicklenton. He documented his daily struggle with MS. Kept his sense of humour about it all, but even with that level of good humour you can still see it getting to him.

In the end he went over to the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland to end his life.

It's a really amazing documentary and just shows the daily pain and frustrations someone with an illness like MS can go through. Worth watching for anyone who doesn't understand why someone would want to end their suffering.

http://www.cultureunplugged.com/play/3705/Here-s-Johnny

Edit - just to note that his artwork is fairly heavy (he was a 2000AD artist) so might offend those with delicate sensibilities. Although, if you are unable to see past the artwork and witness a person in absolute agony trying to express themselves then you have bigger issues to be honest!

Hilly Bill

ITS_A_BADGER wrote: »

Thats leaving a lot up to chance tho, already the courts have showed their stance by not allowing the lady an assisted suicide, so it goes without saying that the husband would definatly see the inside of the jail because he broke the law and because he would have defied the courts and went ahead and asisted her, He would do jail time but he might not see a 14 year jail sentence but would still see a jail term

He would do jail time and his wife would end her suffering.

ITS_A_BADGER

Hilly Bill wrote: »

He would do jail time and his wife would end her suffering.

Do you think that its fair that he should do potentially 14 years in jail because he helped his wife have a peaceful end to her life?

catallus

Boo2112 wrote: »

Also this. The state of Oregon legalised assisted suicide in 1997 and all the deaths are accounted for and the process is impeccable, they don't take the decision lightly.

Anyone with that kind of cynical view on it should look up their website, all the records are there to see and its actually really inspiring.

I don't know if the Oregon assisted suicide law would help the woman who is bringing the case to the Irish Court: The Oregon law specifies that you have to administer the prescription yourself.

http://public.health.oregon.gov/ProviderPartnerResources/Evaluationresearch/deathwithdignityact/Pages/index.aspx

I think the problem with the idea of assisted suicide is that it actually would open the door for unscrupulous people to start recycling their grannies. I think that's why so many courts around the world are wary of loosening the laws around it.

Knasher

CollardGreens wrote: »

So what I'm hearing is that His pain and suffering and humiliation on the CROSS FOR YOU was for nothing

Assuming god is real for a second. Feeling the need to physically hurt your children (or yourself) before you can forgive other people for things they (or their great great great ..... great grandparents) did to you, isn't healthy behavior. You should stop enabling it by pretending it is some noble sacrifice.

3ndahalfof6

Knasher wrote: »

Assuming god is real for a second. Feeling the need to physically hurt your children (or yourself) before you can forgive other people for things they (or their great great great ..... great grandparents) did to you, isn't healthy behavior. You should stop enabling it by pretending it is some noble sacrifice.

Much sense, no.

InReality

No.
The recent High court ruling had plenty if reasons against it.

P_1

InReality wrote: »

No.
The recent High court ruling had plenty if reasons against it.

But what about the reasons for it?

brummytom

CollardGreens wrote: »

So what I'm hearing is that His pain and suffering and humiliation on the CROSS FOR YOU was for nothing :rolleyes:

I have not suffered near as much as Jesus did, nor Paul for that matter.

Again, the OP was about our view on the subject. You obviously voted yes. With your attitude you might want to question the pain and suffering AFTER you die....just a thought.

Have a happy day!

1. A nutcase may have been crucified. What's that got to do with me?

2. Jesus may have existed, but wasn't anything special.

3. There is no hell.


So yeah, I'd take my chances and top myself if it came to it.

Boo2112

catallus wrote: »

I don't know if the Oregon assisted suicide law would help the woman who is bringing the case to the Irish Court: The Oregon law specifies that you have to administer the prescription yourself.

http://public.health.oregon.gov/ProviderPartnerResources/Evaluationresearch/deathwithdignityact/Pages/index.aspx

I think the problem with the idea of assisted suicide is that it actually would open the door for unscrupulous people to start recycling their grannies. I think that's why so many courts around the world are wary of loosening the laws around it.

I know I was just using it as an example of how it can be done really successfully without people taking advantage of the system. Very few people actually qualify for it. I think there's a machine available in switzerland that can be activated with blinks or something which could be implemented but it does leave the law that bit more open to abuse.

puppieperson

The courts should not make a general law for it they should have a sitting which evaluates each case and then grants a single licence per individual case. So if i make a valid case then i may get a licence valid for a certain amount of time and then do the deed without any repercussions.

I have had to put my dog down when her cancer was advanced and it was sad but a gentle kindness to her. if any member of my family had the same advanced cancers then i would have to watch their pain and suffering until they died naturally however long that would take, totally unnecessary suffering under the umbrella of ethics...... if i was terminally ill i would join a gun club and buy a gun and say nothing to anyone, write my letters, shoot my pets and then myself, my choice.

Nabber

Where there is a will there is a way.

Pumpkinseeds

If I were suffering from some awful and terminal disease I would want the right to end my life when I couldn't bear to cope with the symptoms anymore. I don't think that people should be made to suffer and endure the indignity of an agonising and terminal disease to satisfy someone elses ethics or religious beliefs.

catallus

There are hospices and nursing homes up and down the country with people in them that are literally at death's door. There are also people there that are fully lucid and well able to live their lives with minimal assistance and are there because living by themselves isn't an option for one reason or another.

If a law was brought in which permitted a third party to have the power to administer an action (drugs or otherwise) which would end the life of another person there would have to be safeguards to protect them, because they are very vulnerable.

Also, some people on here seem to think that helping people with neurological illnesses or dementia to die is an easy decision to make, and it seems to me that it would be an avenue taken by people to make themselves, and not the victim of that disease, more comfortable.

I suppose our opinions on this issue are shaped by the words we use: nobody who wishes to see an end to a loved one's suffering wants to be told that they are contributing to a "culture of death": but we should be careful about where the choices we make will take us. It's a slippery slope and the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I'd kill a friend if they genuinely asked me and couldn't do it themselves. Could I kill a friend if they were severely brain damaged, unable to talk or do anything? I don't bloody know. Could I kill a relative with a disease in which their mind and soul has disappeared? I hope I never have to make that choice.

CollardGreens

While the OP's post is of a serious nature, i do believe that a person should be allowed to chose how they leave this world.

When i think of Jesus - this comes to mind and sums it up better than i could:

@ StinkyMunkey; When i think of Jesus - this comes to mind and sums it up better than i could!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1BwfQURWJ8

CollardGreens

Could I kill a relative with a disease in which their mind and soul has disappeared?

How would anyone know if a persons soul has disappeared, this would be impossible.

Hilly Bill

CollardGreens wrote: »

How would anyone know if a persons soul has disappeared, this would be impossible.

They stop listening to James Brown.

Hilly Bill

ITS_A_BADGER wrote: »

Do you think that its fair that he should do potentially 14 years in jail because he helped his wife have a peaceful end to her life?

Of course not, thats why i mentioned that the courts should show some compassion if he did it but only in the extreme rather than changing the law which could be abused.

krudler

CollardGreens wrote: »

@ StinkyMunkey; When i think of Jesus - this comes to mind and sums it up better than i could!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1BwfQURWJ8

Christian rock? fcuk that.

Knasher

CollardGreens wrote: »

No, I'm not telling other people what to do and I would never do so. The question was (if I understood it correct) did I "believe" in it - no, I think it is wrong. I only make decisions for myself, the OP was what our thoughts were on it...right?!

No the question was on the *right* to die, not if you would choose to exercise that right.

To give an example, it is against the Jehovah Witnesses religion to receive blood transfusions. I believe that they should have the right to refuse transfusions, but I disagree with them exorcising that right, especially on religious grounds, when a transfusion could save their life. I think it is the wrong decision to make, and I'd never make it for myself, but ultimately it isn't my place to make that decision for them.

o1s1n

CollardGreens wrote: »

How would anyone know if a persons soul has disappeared, this would be impossible.

I think he's using the word 'soul' figuratively and not literally

Gbear

When people ask others why they get pissy at, for example, religion, it's for reasons like this.

Some notion having no basis in reality that people want to believe should have precisely **** all to do with what people are allowed to do with their own life.

"God wants you to suffer". What a vile and utterly reprehensible notion.
God, if you exist, kindly **** off.
I'd rather burn in hell for eternity than suffer being in the presence of that murderous sadistic tyrant.

If you do want to believe in that, kindly don't inflict that ****e on the rest of society.

Saying that there'll be a wave of murders masquerading as assisted suicide has nothing to do with whether or not assisted death should be legal in general or not and everything to do with legislating for it properly.

catallus

Gbear, with all respect, I don't think that's why people get pissy at religion. It is a very human thing to fear death; most religions are built around that fear.

The fault of pagans is to anthropomorphise the idea of god and think of him as a beardy guy in the clouds who is delighting in the suffering of people. The ancient Greeks did this. Their culture was vapid.

We give ourselves courage to say "let's just do this" by rejecting our fear of death (and, therefore god).

P_1

interesting philosophical question,

We all have the right to live right? Surely it stands to reason that we should then also have the right to die.