FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Should Euthanasia be made legal in UK
Should Euthanasia be made legal in UK
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
 | |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best. "I understand where you are coming from, and for years I was in agreement with this. But the case I described above was all over the news at the time and too close to home, I knew the guy that did it, I actually liked the guy and then went and did that. An act of mercy? Killing a 10 year old? I just can't accept that. Just out of interest, where would you draw the line? What regulations would you put in place to stop the process being abused? A friendly question.,. | |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best. "Totally agree  | |||
"I understand where you are coming from, and for years I was in agreement with this. But the case I described above was all over the news at the time and too close to home, I knew the guy that did it, I actually liked the guy and then went and did that. An act of mercy? Killing a 10 year old? I just can't accept that. Just out of interest, where would you draw the line? What regulations would you put in place to stop the process being abused? A friendly question.,." I don't know the case you refer to. I don't really want to know the case either. Because at best it is a red herring. Here is a simple truth, it does not matter what the issue is there will always be some who will corrupt or attempt to corrupt any solution. Once we accept this the question becomes one of do we refuse to act in the best interests of the majority so we can claim to be blameless when something bad is done? Or do we accept that wrong decisions and mistakes will be made as a result of our attempts to improve things for all? It is the same ethical dilemma as is faced with all contentious issues. Here is a second simple ethical question: What has age to do with the question what is the right thing to do? why would you think it is right to end the pain of an adult but not a child? I believe that too often we allow sentiment to blind us to reason. | |||
"I understand where you are coming from, and for years I was in agreement with this. But the case I described above was all over the news at the time and too close to home, I knew the guy that did it, I actually liked the guy and then went and did that. An act of mercy? Killing a 10 year old? I just can't accept that. Just out of interest, where would you draw the line? What regulations would you put in place to stop the process being abused? A friendly question.,. I don't know the case you refer to. I don't really want to know the case either. Because at best it is a red herring. Here is a simple truth, it does not matter what the issue is there will always be some who will corrupt or attempt to corrupt any solution. Once we accept this the question becomes one of do we refuse to act in the best interests of the majority so we can claim to be blameless when something bad is done? Or do we accept that wrong decisions and mistakes will be made as a result of our attempts to improve things for all? It is the same ethical dilemma as is faced with all contentious issues. Here is a second simple ethical question: What has age to do with the question what is the right thing to do? why would you think it is right to end the pain of an adult but not a child? I believe that too often we allow sentiment to blind us to reason." A red herring? Really?? It just happens to be the only thing that I know of personally that relates to euthanasia. It really did happen and the links are still available. I don't post them because I don't think it is appropriate, anyone could be reading this. If anyone would like proof then feel free to inbox me. But I would need to be sure that whoever I share this with only confirms that I'm not making it up, and doesn't post more info or links. Also I never said that it was right to end the "pain of an adult but not a child," that is a ridiculous comment with no truth whatsoever to it. As I explained earlier, I always believed in being cruel to be kind, and then this happened. I still understand why people should want to be afforded the same sympathy that we have with suffering animals. But still have a nagging doubt. That is all. | |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best.
Totally agree "I also agree I watched my wife die in horrendous pain and in the end she was just skin and bone it broke my heart, a young healthy 39 year old full of life and love who suffered back pain but put on a brave face and carried on, sadly that back pain was cancer and within 3 months of first diagnose, I lost her in a heart breaking way. I have swore that if this happens to me, I will if I have the ability, end my life early, I do not wish others to assist due to the trouble they may end up in, but if I have the ability to choose, I will not put myself and others through the pain Just wish I had a small pill same as Hermann Göring for when the time comes | |||
| |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best.
Totally agree "good post, I also agree | |||
 | |||
"A red herring? Really?? It just happens to be the only thing that I know of personally that relates to euthanasia. It really did happen and the links are still available. I don't post them because I don't think it is appropriate, anyone could be reading this. If anyone would like proof then feel free to inbox me. But I would need to be sure that whoever I share this with only confirms that I'm not making it up, and doesn't post more info or links. Also I never said that it was right to end the "pain of an adult but not a child," that is a ridiculous comment with no truth whatsoever to it. As I explained earlier, I always believed in being cruel to be kind, and then this happened. I still understand why people should want to be afforded the same sympathy that we have with suffering animals. But still have a nagging doubt. That is all." Yep, a red herring. At best your example is badly chosen, at worst it is the deliberate use of a harrowing story of the murder of a child to justify forcing many to suffer intolerable physical pain and mental anguish. You start by saying the child had an incurable and debilitating illness and would not live long. You then tell he liked to play football. Nice picture that will tug at any parents heartstrings... You then go on to how he was killed by his d*unken villainous father. You conclude your story with the fact that he was convicted of manslaughter by grounds of diminished responsibility. A masterful piece emotional manipulation I have to say. No right minded person could support euthanasia after hearing that. Only that was not the real story was it? The real story is about Hunter syndrome (from wikipiada as it is a well put together synopsis): "The continued storage of GAG in cells can lead to organs being affected in important ways. The thickening of the heart valves along with the walls of the heart can result in progressive decline in cardiac function. The walls of the airway may become thickened as well, leading to breathing problems while sleeping (obstructive airway disease) and noisy breathing generally. People with Hunter syndrome may also have limited lung capacity due to pulmonary involvement. As the liver and spleen grow larger with time, the belly may become distended, making hernias more noticeable. All major joints (including the wrists, elbows, shoulders, hips, and knees) may be affected by Hunter syndrome, leading to joint stiffness and limited motion. Progressive involvement of the finger and thumb joints results in decreased ability to pick up small objects. The effects on other joints, such as hips and knees, can make it increasingly difficult to walk normally. If carpal tunnel syndrome develops, a common symptom even in young children with Hunter syndrome, a further decrease in hand function can occur. The bones themselves may be affected, resulting in short stature. In addition, pebbly, ivory-colored skin lesions may be found on the upper arms, legs and upper back of some people with Hunter syndrome. The presence or absence of the skin lesions is not helpful, however, in predicting clinical severity in Hunter syndrome. Finally, the storage of GAG in the brain can lead to delayed development with subsequent mental retardation and progressive loss of function. The rate and degree of progression is different for each person with Hunter syndrome. Although Hunter syndrome is associated with a broad spectrum of clinical severity, two main forms can be recognized - severe and mild/attenuated.[4] The differences between the severe and attenuated forms are due mainly to the progressive development of neurodegeneration in the severe form. It is important to note, however, that though the terms "attenuated" or "mild" are used by physicians in comparing people with Hunter syndrome, the effects of even mild disease are quite serious. Between the two main forms of disease, and even within them, two of the most significant areas of variability concern the degree of mental retardation and expected lifespan. Some people who have Hunter syndrome experience no mental handicaps and live into their 20s or 30s; there are occasional reports of people who have lived into their 50s or 60s. Since the implementation of enzyme replacement therapy for Hunter syndrome, lifespans for those without mental handicaps are expected to lengthen since their physical disease appears to improve or stabilize with such treatment. The quality of life remains high in a large number of people, and many adults are actively employed.[citation needed] In contrast, others with Hunter syndrome develop severe mental impairment and have life expectancies of 15 years or less, often due to neurodegeneration or physical complications from the disease. The age at onset of symptoms and the presence/absence of behavioral disturbances are predictive factors of ultimate disease severity in very young patients. Behavioral disturbances can often mimic combinations of symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, and/or sensory processing disorder, although the existence and level of symptoms differ in each affected child. They often also include a lack of an appropriate sense of danger, and aggression. The behavioral symptoms of Hunter syndrome generally precede neurodegeneration and often increase in severity until the mental handicaps become more pronounced." Add the above to your final aside that he received a suspended sentence leads me to believe that there is a lot more to your quoted case than meets the eye and that a jury verdict reflected that and the judge agreed and gave the minimum possible sentence. Brightonish, this is a very emotive subject for most and I am not having a go at you, your reactions are very understandable, However like all emotive subjects it needs to be examined in cold detachment when our laws and attitudes are being formulated. I hope that you will give some thought to what I have said and see the logic in my position. | |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best. "Very rarely agree with you but on this point 100%. When my mother was in hospital dying of a brain tumour I commented a couple of times that if I kept my farm animals alive as they were doing to several other patients I would quite rightly be in prison. Totally agree it needs safeguards but I dont want to die in agony when there is no hope and certainly dont want my family to have to watch on | |||
| |||
"I like the idea that a Doctor's only interest is to keep people alive. I'd like to keep it." Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell | |||
"I like the idea that a Doctor's only interest is to keep people alive. I'd like to keep it." No doctors interest is to keep people alive, all doctors share a common vow: 'I will do no harm'. Modern medicine makes this an impossible vow to keep so doctors are always making choices between between lesser and greater harms. What can be more harmful that extending a life that is filled with suffering for the patient and all that have to watch that suffering? Sometimes the correct answer is not what we want to hear. | |||
"A red herring? Really?? It just happens to be the only thing that I know of personally that relates to euthanasia. It really did happen and the links are still available. I don't post them because I don't think it is appropriate, anyone could be reading this. If anyone would like proof then feel free to inbox me. But I would need to be sure that whoever I share this with only confirms that I'm not making it up, and doesn't post more info or links. Also I never said that it was right to end the "pain of an adult but not a child," that is a ridiculous comment with no truth whatsoever to it. As I explained earlier, I always believed in being cruel to be kind, and then this happened. I still understand why people should want to be afforded the same sympathy that we have with suffering animals. But still have a nagging doubt. That is all. Yep, a red herring. At best your example is badly chosen, at worst it is the deliberate use of a harrowing story of the murder of a child to justify forcing many to suffer intolerable physical pain and mental anguish. You start by saying the child had an incurable and debilitating illness and would not live long. You then tell he liked to play football. Nice picture that will tug at any parents heartstrings... You then go on to how he was killed by his d*unken villainous father. You conclude your story with the fact that he was convicted of manslaughter by grounds of diminished responsibility. A masterful piece emotional manipulation I have to say. No right minded person could support euthanasia after hearing that. Only that was not the real story was it? The real story is about Hunter syndrome (from wikipiada as it is a well put together synopsis): The continued storage of GAG in cells can lead to organs being affected in important ways. The thickening of the heart valves along with the walls of the heart can result in progressive decline in cardiac function. The walls of the airway may become thickened as well, leading to breathing problems while sleeping (obstructive airway disease) and noisy breathing generally. People with Hunter syndrome may also have limited lung capacity due to pulmonary involvement. As the liver and spleen grow larger with time, the belly may become distended, making hernias more noticeable. All major joints (including the wrists, elbows, shoulders, hips, and knees) may be affected by Hunter syndrome, leading to joint stiffness and limited motion. Progressive involvement of the finger and thumb joints results in decreased ability to pick up small objects. The effects on other joints, such as hips and knees, can make it increasingly difficult to walk normally. If carpal tunnel syndrome develops, a common symptom even in young children with Hunter syndrome, a further decrease in hand function can occur. The bones themselves may be affected, resulting in short stature. In addition, pebbly, ivory-colored skin lesions may be found on the upper arms, legs and upper back of some people with Hunter syndrome. The presence or absence of the skin lesions is not helpful, however, in predicting clinical severity in Hunter syndrome. Finally, the storage of GAG in the brain can lead to delayed development with subsequent mental retardation and progressive loss of function. The rate and degree of progression is different for each person with Hunter syndrome. Although Hunter syndrome is associated with a broad spectrum of clinical severity, two main forms can be recognized - severe and mild/attenuated.[4] The differences between the severe and attenuated forms are due mainly to the progressive development of neurodegeneration in the severe form. It is important to note, however, that though the terms "attenuated" or "mild" are used by physicians in comparing people with Hunter syndrome, the effects of even mild disease are quite serious. Between the two main forms of disease, and even within them, two of the most significant areas of variability concern the degree of mental retardation and expected lifespan. Some people who have Hunter syndrome experience no mental handicaps and live into their 20s or 30s; there are occasional reports of people who have lived into their 50s or 60s. Since the implementation of enzyme replacement therapy for Hunter syndrome, lifespans for those without mental handicaps are expected to lengthen since their physical disease appears to improve or stabilize with such treatment. The quality of life remains high in a large number of people, and many adults are actively employed.[citation needed] In contrast, others with Hunter syndrome develop severe mental impairment and have life expectancies of 15 years or less, often due to neurodegeneration or physical complications from the disease. The age at onset of symptoms and the presence/absence of behavioral disturbances are predictive factors of ultimate disease severity in very young patients. Behavioral disturbances can often mimic combinations of symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, and/or sensory processing disorder, although the existence and level of symptoms differ in each affected child. They often also include a lack of an appropriate sense of danger, and aggression. The behavioral symptoms of Hunter syndrome generally precede neurodegeneration and often increase in severity until the mental handicaps become more pronounced. Add the above to your final aside that he received a suspended sentence leads me to believe that there is a lot more to your quoted case than meets the eye and that a jury verdict reflected that and the judge agreed and gave the minimum possible sentence. Brightonish, this is a very emotive subject for most and I am not having a go at you, your reactions are very understandable, However like all emotive subjects it needs to be examined in cold detachment when our laws and attitudes are being formulated. I hope that you will give some thought to what I have said and see the logic in my position." I have more reason to support euthanasia than to not. My own mother had MS, and it was very aggressive. Long story short it took 6 years from diagnosis to cause her death, she was a 5 stone shadow of her former self by then and had tried to commit suicide at least twice that I know of. So I am no stranger to this subject, I just have this nagging doubt about the elderly and disabled. How do we stop evil bastards from using it to help them commit legal murder? Say if someone cannot speak for themselves and had given power of attorney to an unscrupulous bastard that is included in their will. How about people who have to spend their inheritence on palliative care? They could guilt trip the terminally ill into ending it sooner than they might otherwise have wanted to. Yes I am a cynic, unfortunately life lessons have taught me to be. I just don't trust humanity anymore. | |||
"No doctors interest is to keep people alive, all doctors share a common vow: 'I will do no harm'. " What gives you this idea? | |||
"Not allowing euthanasia is totally illogical. If an animal is ill and suffering and there is no relief or cure we consider it a kindness to stop the animal suffering by 'putting it down' as humanly as we can. In fact we consider prolonging an animals suffering so barbaric we will jail those that cause suffering to animals. However humans are a different matter, its a case of suck it up and suffer! And if someone helps a person suffering shuffle off this mortal coil we will look for an excuse to send the helper to jail for as long as we can. Double standards at their best.
Totally agree
I also agree
I watched my wife die in horrendous pain and in the end she was just skin and bone it broke my heart, a young healthy 39 year old full of life and love who suffered back pain but put on a brave face and carried on, sadly that back pain was cancer and within 3 months of first diagnose, I lost her in a heart breaking way.
I have swore that if this happens to me, I will if I have the ability, end my life early, I do not wish others to assist due to the trouble they may end up in, but if I have the ability to choose, I will not put myself and others through the pain
Just wish I had a small pill same as Hermann Göring for when the time comes"you have my utmost empathy.. have long felt that a properly managed system with the appropriate checks and balances is needed to allow people where they can to make in informed choice for themselves or for their relatives.. we lost a wonderful dog on new years eve who had idiopathic epilepsy for 2 and a half years of his less than 4 years, we knew we would be in the position to have to take the decision when his quality of life got to the point where because of the level of medication that he could not function.. when the time came we had him put to sleep.. a slightly strange reference perhaps some may think but when the quality of life is not there for an animal then we as pet owners have a duty to make that decision and an obligation to end their suffering.. its accepted that it is the humane and right thing to do, yet for our fellow man and loved ones we allow other influences to distort or influence our thinking.. | |||
"I have more reason to support euthanasia than to not. My own mother had MS, and it was very aggressive. Long story short it took 6 years from diagnosis to cause her death, she was a 5 stone shadow of her former self by then and had tried to commit suicide at least twice that I know of. So I am no stranger to this subject, I just have this nagging doubt about the elderly and disabled. How do we stop evil bastards from using it to help them commit legal murder? Say if someone cannot speak for themselves and had given power of attorney to an unscrupulous bastard that is included in their will. How about people who have to spend their inheritence on palliative care? They could guilt trip the terminally ill into ending it sooner than they might otherwise have wanted to. Yes I am a cynic, unfortunately life lessons have taught me to be. I just don't trust humanity anymore. " You have my sympathies for your experiences with your mother. Nobody should be forced to endure of witness such a bad death. I also understand your cynicism and fear of corruption. However I would say that killers will kill regardless of laws and therefore that argument not to change the law is based on false logic. Further I would propose that even if a change in law to allow euthanasia did result in more unnecessary killings the amount of suffering relieved would far more than balance the equation. It's the same ethical dilemma we face with capital punishment, nuclear weapons and many more subjects. | |||
| |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'." You havent answered my point | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'." So there we have it, 10's of thousands must suffer an intolerably agonising death and their family, friends, doctors and nurses must be forced to watch and live with the guilt that they did nothing because one unnecessary killing is an unacceptable balance. | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point " I'm struggling to find it? | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. So there we have it, 10's of thousands must suffer an intolerably agonising death and their family, friends, doctors and nurses must be forced to watch and live with the guilt that they did nothing because one unnecessary killing is an unacceptable balance." When it's your child that's the acceptable collateral damage - come and tell me it's still ok. | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it?" Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it? Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell " I saw that and I understand it as your view. I don't understand the point that you'd like me to respond to? | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it? Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell I saw that and I understand it as your view. I don't understand the point that you'd like me to respond to?" It was a question if you had ever faced that senario,especially a child and how would you feel if you could end their suffering would you | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it? Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell I saw that and I understand it as your view. I don't understand the point that you'd like me to respond to? It was a question if you had ever faced that senario,especially a child and how would you feel if you could end their suffering would you" I see. No. Of course I wouldn't want anybody to suffer. But I don't see killing them as the acceptable approach to easing their suffering in this context. | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it? Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell " | |||
"One unnecessary killing is an unacceptable 'balance'. You havent answered my point I'm struggling to find it? Have you ever seen someone you love writhe in agony when there is no hope of a cure and beg you to help them die, think if it was one of your children, I would go to jail for the rest of my life to save them five seconds of hell I saw that and I understand it as your view. I don't understand the point that you'd like me to respond to? It was a question if you had ever faced that senario,especially a child and how would you feel if you could end their suffering would you I see. No. Of course I wouldn't want anybody to suffer. But I don't see killing them as the acceptable approach to easing their suffering in this context." So you would just let them suffer,please dont say about palitive care,I have seen it in action and its shit. I know others like you have a very different opinion to myself and accept you are entitled to it | |||
| |||
"I didn't say I'd let them suffer. I don't believe giving medical practitioners the option to kill others is justifiable. " so who would you have make that decision? | |||
| |||
| |||
"I have been reading about the laws I. Switzerland regarding euthanasia. They legalised it in the 1940's, and as long as a physician is present and the person wanting to day plays some part in the administration of the lethal drugs, then it is legal there. You don't have to be a Swiss national either, and that is why Switzerland has the reputation of being the suicide tourist capital. So there you have it, you want to end it, go to Switzerland. It's not far anx doesn't cost a fortune. " So the status quo is fine. If you have the money and the mobility to be able to travel to Switzerland on the multiple occasions in order to make contact with veritas, attend the multiple medical consultations needed to confirm that you are in sound mind ad not being pressured into making your decision, before finally travelling to Switzerland to die. Of course if your really poor having spent all your money making ends meet after falling ill (benefits are means tested) and cant afford the travel costs you can just suffer... | |||
"I didn't say I'd let them suffer. I don't believe giving medical practitioners the option to kill others is justifiable. so who would you have make that decision?" Nobody with regard to this - I'd already made that clear. My wording was in recognition that there are others who can be justified in killing - soldiers for example. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
