Dying with Dignity Bill

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Suicide by doctor will surely not be available for someone who is years away from death.

And let's be clear: it's already quite legal to kill yourself. Anyone who really wants to kill themselves can do so now.

Most suicide methods are unsuccessful. The only foolproof ways are the violent ones. Why should a terminally ill person be expected to resort to that?

Mules

SmilingLurker wrote: »

It will require the person to be terminally ill and in sound mind and the decision freely made when making the decision. If you cannot consent the proposed bill is useless. Being unduly pressured would negate the consent.

This is a separate issue to abortion. Do not conflate separate issues. (I believe in free safe and legal access in broader circumstances than stated under current legislation)

Allowing people to chose if they do wish the manner of their passing given the circumstances is reasonable. If you do not want this, do not consent.

If properly managed, it will ease the pain of some, and reduce the costs on our healthcare system which is under untold pressure.

Do you really think reducing costs on the health service is a good reason to legalise euthanasia. I dont like to judge but that's a bit :eek:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalux wrote: »

On certain levels I have serious reservations about euthanasia, it is very sad and it is undoubtedly open to abuse via pressure or neglect, and in other jurisdictions the qualifying requirements have been made very broad and, to my mind, unconscionable. But my father wanted it desperately and because it was not available he had to put in a good few years of terrible, inhuman suffering. On his behalf I support it.

It’s not euthanasia! This is really important.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Most suicide methods are unsuccessful. The only foolproof ways are the violent ones. Why should a terminally ill person be expected to resort to that?

Also it's a trauma for a family to see a family member going in such a violent way. This was always going to become an issue as we started to live for much longer imho. The healthier our lives have become have opened us up to a potentially more uncomfortable death as we live to much older ages. Regardless of age, facing a terminal illness that robs a person of dignity, we should respect that person's choices.

suicide_circus

SmilingLurker wrote: »

If properly managed, it will ease the pain of some, and reduce the costs on our healthcare system which is under untold pressure.

That's a rather unsettling way of looking at it

eleventh

seenitall wrote: »

Catholicism idolises suffering.

I'm not Catholic FYI.

Deleted User wrote: »

Why?

I believe in death happening naturally, that we don't choose when it happens (and nor should prolong life artificially). We don't choose when we are born either, or the circumstances. That's my view (I'm aware it's a minority view).

JustAThought wrote: »

How can such a significant and morally complex and worrying bill have gone so far through with virtually no media coverage or public debate?

It's no coincidence, when people are distracted by other things (things related, arguably).

uptherebels wrote: »

You do understand the difference between assisted suicide and suicide?

There's no difference, except others are implicated.

marklazarcovic

marklazarcovic wrote: »

i wonder what the insurance implications are etc

Was thinking of this myself. I wonder, if I opt for assisted suicide, what happens the Mortgage? Insurance company will hardly still cover the cost, if i deliberately opted for death?


Or would they, seen as you'd be such a small percentage of their customer base it wouldn't make sense to try to alienate people further?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Was thinking of this myself. I wonder, if I opt for assisted suicide, what happens the Mortgage? Insurance company will hardly still cover the cost, if i deliberately opted for death?


Or would they, seen as you'd be such a small percentage of their customer base it wouldn't make sense to try to alienate people further?

I know a man whose brother opted for assisted suicide when diagnosed with terminal cancer. He had a wife, two kids and a mortgage.

His insurance paid out, he was diagnosed with a terminal illness, that was enough.
This was in the Netherlands. If they can do it there, I guess they can do it here.

John Hutton

John Hutton wrote: »

KKV it is unclear to me (now) if you were being hypothetical (I thought you were)or are actually seriously depressed to the extent you would like to avail of assisted suicide as an alternative to inevitably hanging yourself or throwing yourself in a river, I.e thisnis the only option you see.

If it is the latter I urge you to reach out for help and contact the appropriate services and people as a matter of priority.

I won't go into a big long spiel, but I'd be legitimately interested in it. I do get through day to day as a functioning adult. I pay my bills, go to work, don't really socialise or such, but i exist in a 'normal' capacity.

However, I would say I've been depressed for about 20 years. I've been to GPs etc. and find it all a bit of a charade. I'd be excessively pessimistic about everything, despite knowing my thoughts aren't based on real-world experience. I'd be the kind of person you would likely end up hearing about being found dead.

Which is why I feel that if someone has a legitimate "mental wellness" issue, they should be as good a candidate for this as anyone else.

I don't buy into the 'burden' of suicide on others. I don't agree with it as i feel its saying "suicide is bad because others have to deal with it", as it's also a way of saying "you should suffer eternally, so other people don't have the inconvenience of you dying". Yes a suicide will cause grief for a small few people around you. The majority will get on with their lives fairly swiftly.


I realise I'm rambling now, but I do think it's genuinely unfair to introduce something like this, which may be seen as a glimmer of hope to some people who have genuine chronic mental issues, and then say it's only available to people where we can physically point out their problem.

(for clarity, when i mention depressed people getting this service, I mean people with a lengthy history of depression and where it's been brought to their GPs attention about a decade ago with no real improvement. That would help rule out people who have had a breakup with their partner and decide 'feck it, no point anymore' and try to go this route, based on a sudden event that they would likely recover from in a few weeks anyway).

happyoutscan

1990sman wrote: »

yay another gate to hell for ireland

well done

Hell? What's that?

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

It’s not euthanasia! This is really important.

I think it falls within the definition of Voluntary Euthanasia - though that definition probably is argued by people. In Wikipedia it says

Voluntary euthanasia

Voluntary euthanasia is conducted with the consent of the patient. Active voluntary euthanasia is legal in Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Passive voluntary euthanasia is legal throughout the US. When the patient brings about their own death with the assistance of a physician, the term assisted suicide is often used instead. Assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland and the U.S. states of California, Oregon, Washington, Montana and Vermont.

On page one of this thread the following passage from the proposed bill is linked...

(1)An attending medical practitioner who has complied with the conditions specified in this Act may prescribe substance or substances for a qualifying person who has made a valid declaration under section9 to enable that person to end their own life.



(2)Such assistance may be provided by the attending medical practitioner to a qualifying person in the following circumstances:


(a)the prescription of substance or substances which can be orally ingested by the person;

(b)in the case of a person for whom it is impossible or inappropriate to ingest orally that substance or substances, by prescribing and providing means of self-administration of that substance or substances; and

(c)in the case that it is not possible for the self-administer then the substance or substances may be administered; with the purpose of enabling that person to end his or her own life.

Mules

Yes, part c is euthanasia alright.

uptherebels

eleventh wrote: »

There's no difference, except others are implicated.

Ignoring that you also don't seem to understand the difference. There is no point in saying no difference, then pointing out a difference🙄

seenitall

eleventh wrote: »

I'm not Catholic FYI.

I believe in death happening naturally, that we don't choose when it happens (and nor should prolong life artificially). We don't choose when we are born either, or the circumstances. That's my view (I'm aware it's a minority view).
.

Oh really? Well you coulda fooled me ^

You must hate the fact we have things like cancer treatments, and ventilators for Covid sufferers. All that prolonging lives artificially... you’re as transparent as a glass pane, I’m afraid.

Stihl waters

eleventh wrote: »

I'm not Catholic FYI.

I believe in death happening naturally, that we don't choose when it happens (and nor should prolong life artificially). We don't choose when we are born either, or the circumstances. That's my view (I'm aware it's a minority view).

What are your views on animals suffering prolonged agony before death, would you be in favour of a dumb animal being put out of its misery

John Hutton

John Hutton wrote: »

A disappointing aspect of society today is that the points of an argument can never, seemingly, be engaged with and debated. Instead, it comes down to an attack on the person or organisation making the argument. Debates today seem to hinge entirely on this point. You opponent raises a good issue? No problem, simply ignore it and attack them. Accuse them of bias, as if that is some sort of "gotcha" that someone on one side of a debate would be biased towards the position they are advocating. The implication is of course that you are not biased, because in your hubris your own position must certainly be the default objectively correct "unbiased" position.

This is no way to govern or run a society - serious issues dont get teased out because if you come down on the eventual "wrong" side you are cancelled or otherwise destroyed.

Every single poster objecting to other adults being able to control their own lives have had the opportunity to explain why anyone should care about their opinion on it.

They are the ones bringing absolute rubbish into it.

We have seen it twice before from the same posters and ahem same types of posters and we know very well at this stage that it's bad faith posting to the fullest extent of the term.

Maybe rein in the posters on your side who want to compare this topic to Hitler, murder, dead babies etc before turning a baleful gaze on the other side of the argument

mvl

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Most suicide methods are unsuccessful. The only foolproof ways are the violent ones. Why should a terminally ill person be expected to resort to that?

- you assume there is suffering leading to this request, and are you also suggesting perhaps suicide by firearm would hurt more now, or what are you suggesting here ? when I hear about wishes to die with dignity, I would think how the body looks after ppl are dead should be of least importance...

mvl

mvl wrote: »

- you assume there is suffering leading to this request, and are you also suggesting perhaps suicide by firearm would hurt more now, or what are you suggesting here ? when I hear about wishes to die with dignity, I would think how the body looks after ppl are dead should be of least importance...

Do you really want your parents, your siblings, whatever, to see your body after you've blown your head off? Come on. It's pretty obvious what they mean. Most violent ways of ending a life leave significant damage to the body, in ways which would be disturbing for others to see, not only for the physical damage, but also the association of pain with the method used.

As for suffering, here's an example for you. I'm 43 years old now. My shaking disorder started when I was 13.

I can be reasonably sure that by the time I reach my 70's (even if parkinsons, or alzheimers doesn't occur), my shaking disorder will have progressed to the point, where my whole body will constantly be shaking. Not little tremors but very noticeable shakes. I've lived with this disorder already for 30 years, and it's "manageable", but there are many normal activities which are beyond me, or likely to result in spasms in my arms. I can't carry a cup of tea, or a bowl of soup. Many times when using a spoon, my arms will spasm, sending hot liquid everywhere. That's something that happens now, when my disorder is manageable. Later, I won't be able to manage it at all.

There is no cure. Beta blockers can reduce the shakes, but will turn me into a vegetable. There's a possibility of brain surgery connecting with the upper spine, but the success rate is rather low, and usually has "unintended" side-effects. There's little research done on the disorder because it's not life threatening. Cannabis resin can affect it somewhat but as time goes by, the body builds a resistance to it.

Now, my disorder on it's own, won't kill me, but I've met people with advanced conditions (of this disorder) before, and their lives are hellish. No real control over their limbs. Random and common spasms throughout the body. An active mind, but a body that won't be controlled. I don't want to live that way... It would be horrible. So... if I had the chance of end my life with some dignity, yeah... I'd take the opportunity.

I don't want to die now. I enjoy life, even with the problems I currently have, and don't want it to end... But I know there will come a time where I will want to end it.

And while you might say to yourself that you understand.. you don't. Not really. There are thousands of ways that this disorder affects my daily life, and you can't understand unless you have the same actual condition. I can appreciate people's belief in the value of human life... but at the same time, I feel people are too quick to volunteer others to a life of horror, just so that their own principles aren't threatened. I find it rather disgusting, TBH. If you're lucky enough to be going through life with no serious physical/mental problems, then I'm happy for you. Incredibly jealous too... but perhaps you really should consider where your empathy is for others who don't have such a situation.

Helping them to find a humane way to end the suffering should be the goal here...

mvl

Sorry klaz, but I do think how ppl look when they are dead is least important. its more important that family understands/accepts the reason leading to this act, and celebrates how the person lived before.
And I am saying this as someone who did attempt suicide in their teens: there should be plenty of info out there about how to do it today ... problem with this type of legislation is that it would only be abused by greed.
- I do appreciate you sharing info about your circumstance. But I have a different perspective on this I guess.

mvl

mvl wrote: »

Sorry klaz, but I do think how ppl look when they are dead is least important. its more important that family understands/accepts the reason leading to this act, and celebrates how the person lived before.
And I am saying this as someone who did attempt suicide in their teens: there should be plenty of info out there about how to do it today ... problem with this type of legislation is that it would only be abused by greed.
- I do appreciate you sharing info about your circumstance. But I have a different perspective on this I guess.

Yes, well.. I also tried suicide when I was a teen, and even though I had plenty of information to draw upon, I still managed to mess it up. Still, as an adult, I would do it much better should i want to do it again . And yet, I'm aware there are always hickups with such things... I've read too many accounts of people who tried killing themselves, and managed to put themselves through a world pf pain because their blood chemistry managed the drugs differently, or their method slipped somehow.

The issue with others seeing my body after I die is important for those who care how their family feels about the whole thing. A controlled environment which lends a peaceful passing is likely to have better long term effects on the emotional state of family members. However, their encountering a death body, with blood pooling across the floor, is likely to have long-term negatives to their emotional state, and their memories, along with feelings of guilt. I know. I found a friend of mine dead, and I still wonder should I have done something, anything more to help him.. Whereas if it had been done in an official setting where he had announced his intentions, I suspect, I'd be well past such thoughts by now.

Suicide affects far more than just the person directly involved. It can have long term repercussions for those left behind.. the manner of the death matters.

mvl

mvl wrote: »

.. problem with this type of legislation is that it would only be abused by greed.
-

How exactly?

And just for your point about how dead people look, it is very clearly important, to Irish people anyway, how people look when they are dead. We have open caskets at wakes and the body is prepared with make up and their best clothes, it's obviously a very important part of grieving to the people left behind.

1990sman

"murder is murder, whether done for duty, profit or fun" - charles manson

screamer

Other countries already have this system up and running, you’d swear we had to start from scratch with it..... but I know nay sayers will be nay sayers

mvl

bubblypop wrote: »

How exactly?

coercion that may come from financial gains (or losses): family involved, insurers, medical and other service providers ...

bubblypop wrote: »

And just for your point about how dead people look, it is very clearly important, to Irish people anyway, how people look when they are dead. We have open caskets at wakes and the body is prepared with make up and their best clothes, it's obviously a very important part of grieving to the people left behind.

thought all European nations have the wakes. but I am sure all families of car crash victims accept what is going on; not everything can be fixed with makeup, and even natural deaths can be less pretty.
-> hopefully covid funerals showed sometimes it is OK to have another type of funeral.

mvl

mvl wrote: »

coercion that may come from financial gains (or losses): family involved, insurers, medical and other service providers ...

thought all European nations have the wakes. but I am sure all families of car crash victims accept what is going on; not everything can be fixed with makeup, and even natural deaths can be less pretty.
-> hopefully covid funerals showed sometimes it is OK to have another type of funeral.

So you think that families will force people into assisted suicide to claim their inheritance early? Good movie plot but not very realistic!

No, other European countries do not have wakes like we have them. Very few other countries have their dead laid out at home for the parish to come in and view them. Ireland is the only country, where when I have been at a wake or removal I have been forced into seeing the body, because they look 'lovely' or 'so peaceful'
Doesn't happen in other countries

mvl

bubblypop wrote: »

No, other European countries do not have wakes like we have them. Very few other countries have their dead laid out at home for the parish to come in and view them. Ireland is the only country, where when I have been at a wake or removal I have been forced into seeing the body, because they look 'lovely' or 'so peaceful'
Doesn't happen in other countries

you must be kidding. you can go visit my home country then !

mvl

mvl wrote: »

you must be kidding. you can go visit my home country then !

Ok, fair enough, there may be some.
I have experience in UK, Bulgaria, Finland, Netherlands, Kosovo and Germany but that's it. I know people from other European countries that were surprised by the traditions here, but obviously all countries are different.
Nevertheless, I think most people left behind would prefer to see their lives one looking like they are sleeping rather than if they blew their head off with a gun!

circadian

biko wrote: »

Suicide was de-criminalised in 1993 so there isn't any need for this bill as it's just a suicide bill wrapped up in a fancy name.

Disgusting statement. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself.

Stihl waters

bubblypop wrote: »

No, other European countries do not have wakes like we have them. Very few other countries have their dead laid out at home for the parish to come in and view them. Ireland is the only country, where when I have been at a wake or removal I have been forced into seeing the body, because they look 'lovely' or 'so peaceful'
Doesn't happen in other countries

You make it sound like we're doing wrong and everyone else is doing it right