Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Lauren

Assisted Dying

Assisted Dying  

34 members have voted

  1. 1. Using the parameters below, do you agree or disagree with assisted dying?

    • Agree
      29
    • Disagree
      5


Recommended Posts

Parliament today voted heavily against allowing terminally ill people who have the mental capacity to choose to end their own lives, do so with the approval of two doctors and a judge.

 

How do you feel about this and why?

 

For sake of argument and as the bill stated the person must be:

 

- terminally ill (ie. they have exhausted all treatment options and will now unfortunately die from their illness)

- be of sound mental capacity (ie be mentally capable of considering the pros and cons of ending their own life and choose to do so freely without coercion)

- be approved by two doctors and judge.

- the person ends their own life, not anyone else.

 

So let's keep the argument within these parameters.

 

If you don't agree with the bill, do you think there should be an alterations to the current law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The choice should be there. Not giving people that choice is nothing short of inhumane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good topic, Lauren, and I agree 100% with the bill. If we put our pet dogs, cats or guinea pigs through pointless end-of-life torture, like we do our fellow humans, we'd be given prison sentences...IMO, the only entity that can decide the fate of an individual, thinking person is that person themselves...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand the other side (who are terminally ill themselves) fighting against it. The 'I'm not dead yet' protesters. They seem to have the viewpoint that it's forced euthanasia from the interviews I've seen with them. It's not, it's a choice that person and that person alone chooses, no one is forcing anyone else to die.

 

Currently 2 UK residents a week go to Switzerland to end their lives. Many more are suspected to do it themselves or family take mercy on them and assist them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me neither! All I know (absolutely know) is that if I want to exercise my right-to-die, I'll bloody-well do so. Sod the Law! The Law is an ass! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly agree with the principle of the right to die providing that certain parameters are met and looking at the conditions listed, I feel that they have.

As previously said, we could not put animals through this so why we can deny humans the option is beyond me.

However the thing that really winds me up is why such a decision can possibly be made by 600+ out of touch idiots in Westminster when public opinion strongly backed it.

Surely this screamed referendum.

In the end though it's no real surprise that parliament listens more to the dinosaurs in the church than Joe Public who voted them in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That strikes me as odd too. In public polls the public overwhelmingly vote for it, so it just goes to show how out of touch parliament are with the public. I'd like to see the breakdown of which parties voted for what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That strikes me as odd too. In public polls the public overwhelmingly vote for it, so it just goes to show how out of touch parliament are with the public. I'd like to see the breakdown of which parties voted for what.

If ever there were a reason for a referendum, this is surely it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our MP voted against, he said that the system could be abused by relatives eager for the inheritance, or because they fall out. etc'.

Life is full of the above so although I would like the right to die should the need occur I now understand why they voted against. Humans abuse systems all the time . We are open to abuse when we get old. True.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our MP voted against, he said that the system could be abused by relatives eager for the inheritance, or because they fall out. etc'.

Life is full of the above so although I would like the right to die should the need occur I now understand why they voted against. Humans abuse systems all the time . We are open to abuse when we get old. True.

Yes, but this isn't about getting rid of rich, elderly relatives who go well beyond the SBD. If the safeguards are in place, as per bill, the deed can only be done by the hand of the one who is dying. Many folk hope for last minute miracle drugs that can reverse the fatal prognosis and would baulk at taking such a step as suicide; for those whose pain and suffering has reached the final straw, let them do the deed with dignity - it is their choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I want the right to choose. I couldn't give stuff what Sir This or Lord That happen to think...It's my life, and I'll end it when I want to. And, as for those with religion...They can do what they want; just as long as they don't tell me what to do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strongly disagree. 

 

Having a mother who's been suicidal but able to put on enough of an act to be aloud to go home i don't trust that it would'nt be open to abuse if we went down the slippery slope of lowering requirements (which has happened in the Netherlands and/or Belgium).

 

Secondly, i find it offensive that a state would condone the suicide of its citizens.

 

The only thing i'm open to is not prosecuting friends and family going to the Swiss clinic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be damn tough being an MP having to go against the will of the people at every occasion whilst still giving us the excuse that it is what we want.

We want the right to die, we get told we don't.

We don't want to invade other states killing innocent civilians, we get told we do.

Out of touch hypocrites the lot of them but as I voted "non of the above" at least they aren't making decisions on my account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strongly disagree. 

 

Having a mother who's been suicidal but able to put on enough of an act to be aloud to go home i don't trust that it would'nt be open to abuse if we went down the slippery slope of lowering requirements (which has happened in the Netherlands and/or Belgium).

 

Secondly, i find it offensive that a state would condone the suicide of its citizens.

 

The only thing i'm open to is not prosecuting friends and family going to the Swiss clinic.

 

Sorry but you can't do that, either you oppose assisisted dying or you don't. To imply it's OK if done in another country is a cop out.

 

To me, the operative words are "of a sound mind". That criteria alone should be paramount and if a person has the mental capacity to make a decision about how their life ends (or not, as the case may be) then that should be the end of the matter. 

 

If it is beyond the capacity of our e!ected and non elected representatives to make a reasonable law to allow that then they have no business pontificating about any other law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must be damn tough being an MP having to go against the will of the people at every occasion whilst still giving us the excuse that it is what we want.

We want the right to die, we get told we don't.

We don't want to invade other states killing innocent civilians, we get told we do.

Out of touch hypocrites the lot of them but as I voted "non of the above" at least they aren't making decisions on my account.

Absolutely! And I (and not Summer Blizzard, or a bunch of gormless politicians) will decide if I want to end my own life. It's as simple as that. No matter how much politicians and moralists want to over-complicate matters...My life is mine - it doesn't belong to 'society'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strongly disagree. 

 

Having a mother who's been suicidal but able to put on enough of an act to be aloud to go home i don't trust that it would'nt be open to abuse if we went down the slippery slope of lowering requirements (which has happened in the Netherlands and/or Belgium).

 

Secondly, i find it offensive that a state would condone the suicide of its citizens.

 

The only thing i'm open to is not prosecuting friends and family going to the Swiss clinic.

 

You've completely contradicted yourself there. You can't have it both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've completely contradicted yourself there. You can't have it both ways.

Sssssssh - he's a Tory. Sorry SB, I couldn't resist! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but you can't do that, either you oppose assisisted dying or you don't. To imply it's OK if done in another country is a cop out.

 

To me, the operative words are "of a sound mind". That criteria alone should be paramount and if a person has the mental capacity to make a decision about how their life ends (or not, as the case may be) then that should be the end of the matter. 

 

If it is beyond the capacity of our e!ected and non elected representatives to make a reasonable law to allow that then they have no business pontificating about any other law. 

 

The world is grey, there's no requirement to support absolutes (except in this poll obviously). Hell, if we had to be capitalists or socialists there'd be no true centrists.

 

While i respect on individual liberty on many issues. Health is one area where humans are especially irrational and indeed i don't think many people wanting to die can be deemed of sound mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world is grey, there's no requirement to support absolutes (except in this poll obviously). Hell, if we had to be capitalists or socialists there'd be no true centrists.

 

While i respect on individual liberty on many issues. Health is one area where humans are especially irrational and indeed i don't think many people wanting to die can be deemed of sound mind.

 

How on earth can you say that without being in that position yourself? If I'm facing the prospect of being dementia-ridden in my later years, then while I'm of sound mind I would most likely want to avoid it. If that means ending it early then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've completely contradicted yourself there. You can't have it both ways.

 

Not so. 

 

While i oppose assisted suicide everywhere, i don't govern Switzerland and can't stop people choosing suicide their. From there my thought process is simply that the UK gains nothing from filling prisons with people who's only crime in the UK was abetting their decision to leave the country with negative intent. They should be no more guilty of a UK crime than the taxi driver who took Muhammad Emwazi to the airport.

 

Now if you want to make Switzerland part of the UK in this scenario i'd happily make it illegal there.

How on earth can you say that without being in that position yourself? If I'm facing the prospect of being dementia-ridden in my later years, then while I'm of sound mind I would most likely want to avoid it. If that means ending it early then so be it.

 

How can you say that not all Muslims intend to harm us without being one? It's just an opinion based on my thought processes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so. 

 

While i oppose assisted suicide everywhere, i don't govern Switzerland and can't stop people choosing suicide their. From there my thought process is simply that the UK gains nothing from filling prisons with people who's only crime in the UK was abetting their decision to leave the country with negative intent. They should be no more guilty of a UK crime than the taxi driver who took Muhammad Emwazi to the airport.

 

Now if you want to make Switzerland part of the UK in this scenario i'd happily make it illegal there.

 

Eh?

 

You think it would be a waste of time and taxpayers money putting people in prison for going to Switzerland for assisted suicide purposes, but it would be a valuable use of taxpayers money to imprison people for doing exactly the same thing within the UK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh?

 

You think it would be a waste of time and taxpayers money putting people in prison for going to Switzerland for assisted suicide purposes, but it would be a valuable use of taxpayers money to imprison people for doing exactly the same thing within the UK?

 

Yes. In UK territory you follow UK law, what you do in another country (unless it's a danger to the UK) is their problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

How can you say that not all Muslims intend to harm us without being one? It's just an opinion based on my thought processes.

 

I don't know where to begin with this. Is there no topic where you don't try and bring Muslims into it...? Really weird analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. In UK territory you follow UK law, what you do in another country (unless it's a danger to the UK) is their problem.

 

Erm, but you based your argument on finances, i.e. 'filling prisons', not legalities.

 

Do you think it a valuable use of taxpayers money to imprison someone who helped a terminally ill person end their own life in comfort at the time of their choosing?

 

-----

 

Note it costs about £65,000 on average to prosecute and imprison someone. Then £40,000 a year to keep them there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...