# Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia



## Julia (4 June 2006)

It's been a while since we had a debate on a difficult topic so I thought I'd bring up what is probably an emotional question about suicide and euthanasia.

Some of you may think it odd to group these two together, but I think they are definitely two aspects of the same question, i.e. should we as individuals have the right to determine our time and method of dying?

Of course, suicide is no longer illegal.  However, aiding and abetting a suicide is.  So if your elderly grandmother, dying anyway and in great pain, asks you to in any way assist her in suicide, you can be charged with murder.  
Although from grandmother's point of view, this seems  unreasonable, it's hard to see that it could be any other way, as to do otherwise would open the doors for murder in the true sense.

Voluntary euthanasia:  when the Northern Territory passed a law to make this possible it seemed to work very well, requiring, I think, the opinions of three doctors including a psychiatrist to attest to the fact that the person was entirely aware of what they were doing and that their life presently was of unbearable quality. (or qualifications to that effect).  Then the Canberra right to lifers stepped in and overturned the laws.

So what do you think?  There are the obvious arguments against voluntary euthanasia (thin edge of the wedge, a step away from legalised murder etc and similar cliches), but, having watched people die in much pain and with complete loss of dignity, I just don't see why they could not have had an assisted death if such a wish had been made clear by them.

I'm sure we can have this discussion without getting into personal vilification where we disagree.  

Julia


----------



## Happy (4 June 2006)

*Re: Suicide and Vonuntary Euthanasia*

Prolonging life at all cost to me is absurd.

With overpopulation looming, greenhouse problems, possible food shortages in the rest of the World, as some parts of the World never had enough food, especially that party involved wants to end suffering, it almost looks that we are sentenced to live.


----------



## Smurf1976 (4 June 2006)

*Re: Suicide and Vonuntary Euthanasia*

Having had the experience of my grandmother undergoing prolonged suffering and eventual death, I must say that it was both mentally and physically the most stressful situation I have ever been in. There is no way that a human would have allowed a dog, cat or other animal to undergo such prolonged and ultimately pointless suffering.

In the politest possible way I would like to say that those who have not lived with a suffering person with no hope of survival can not possibly understand the issues involved. This is in much the same way as men can not truly understand what giving birth is like. It's something you have to go through yourself.

As far as I am concerned there is no way that any person approaching death should be looked after in their own home completely or predominantly by family members. Been there, done that from the family side and there is no way I would willingly accept being looked after that way myself.

A few thoughts to stir up debate though, all based on consequences from my own family situation. My mother was the predominant carer in this case since I was still in high school at the time.

Direct effects on myself, apart from not being able to have _any_ friends around (or go and see them since there was too much work to do at home) were basically limited to becoming an adult by the age of 13. My friends were worried about pimples and girls. I was more concerned with budgeting to pay the rates, insure the house and keep the power connected. My mother was simply to exhausted from working practically all the time to even think about such things.

1. Physical exhaustion. When you wake up literally driving on the wrong side of the road on the 3km trip home from the shops you do come to the realisation just how physically demanding caring for someone really is. You get a LOT more sleep with young children.

2. Physical safety. When you have to repeatedly lift someone of approx. your own body weight there are serious safety issues. Doing this in a workplace would be illegal under most circumstances and yet it is taken for granted where in-home care is concerned.

3. Economic loss. Given the age bias which exists in Australian workplaces, taking, say, 2 years off to care for someone is effectively early retirement for many. There is no corresponding increase in the dole and then pension to offset this.

4. Children. I contend that it is physically impossible for anyone to simultaneously care for those approaching death and also look after children at the same time. I also contend that doing so is immoral in terms of the psychological impact on the children and the reality that they will have their childhood cut _very_ short.

5. Psychological stress is enormous to say the least. One of the bigger problems is that you don't see friends any more. Not because they don't want to see you, but because you have a 24/7 job and in the event that you do get an hour off then you need that to buy food or sleep.

So I have a very strongly held view that should I need constant care in the year or two before my death (hopefully that's a long time away...   ) it should be in a nursing home, not my own home. Or not all. If it MUST be in the person's own home then, since it's a 24/7 job, there needs to be a paid nurse on duty at least 12 hours a day every day.

Regarding euthanasia, as I said we wouldn't let a dog suffer. So why let a human and their family suffer far worse and far longer? In purely practical terms, where are we going to find enough people to be carers (given the ageing population) if we keep prolonging life beyond the point where someone can look after themselves?


----------



## noirua (5 June 2006)

My own view of euthanasia is that we must get to a legal position that safeguards the person who is suffering, from the thieves and vagabonds, at all levels, who would seek that you and I go to an early grave for their financial gain.

http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/ve.htm

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/euthanasia/eu0021.html

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/


There is discussion about the point of decision and death a person can choose. Do they have to wait - in the Netheralnds - until they have already suffered a great deal or can they choose to die when still in quite good health, as their fate is definitely sealed.


----------



## coyotte (5 June 2006)

Amazing creatuers arn't we !

brutally kill and injure thoundands  and boast about it

but one suffering person -- we as a society pretend we care about them !  

making euthanasia illegal in a hostpital is nothing more than the STATE showing  us that in the end they own YOU  (slavery)

 the do-gooders are not at least concerned about their victims -- simply their own power play and if you and i have got suffer to satify their ego ,so be it


----------



## macca (5 June 2006)

I feel that we really should be able to make the decision to die if that is what we want.

I think the NT had it about right, you would need more than one opinion on your chances, as so many doctors get it wrong.

I find it a bit odd that you are not allowed to "end it all" but you are allowed to say if I have my another "attack/ bout / crisis" don't revive me.

When you are terminally ill and in great pain, why do you have to experience more pain before you are "allowed" to die.

Surely a few extra sleeping pills is a far more peaceful way than dying in agony to satisfy the beliefs of someone else.


----------



## tech/a (5 June 2006)

> I feel that we really should be able to make the decision to die if that is what we want.




Ever seen a dementia or altzhimers sufferer.

Celias mum and my gran both died from these diseases.

It took 6 and 12 yrs.
Cruelest thing I have ever seen.
Absolutely no quality of life.
Cant even express pain or emotion the brain is just on semi off mode.

No chance to make that decision.


----------



## visual (5 June 2006)

my view of euthanasia is I agree,you should have the right to lessen your suffering if you can do that in a safe way.

However I would never vote for it because I could never trust the people administering it.For example in America where they have the death penalty statistics show that its mainly black,poor,hispanics and jews who mainly get the death penalty if you are white and well off you are more likely to get a time in prison,so ye its not something I`d ever vote for.

This will end up like the abortion law,all you have to show that the birth of your baby will create a psychological problem and the abortion is given,the law from what i understand was never meant to work like that.
Euthanasia will end up being used in the same way,old people made to feel like they are no longer needed and voila,handicapped people who can no longer be looked after,will feel like taking the easy way out for the people who are looking after them,what about old people who will become too expensive to be looked after in the public system ,what will be the motivation to look after them when the money could go to a better cause such as a younger person or a more productive member of society.So thats the reason I would never agree to euthanasia being passed as law.

And lets not forget the killer doctor in the UK,the only reason he got caught was when he falsified one of his victims will,prior to that even thought he was know as doctor death ,he had risen no suspicion but as soon as money became involved he caught the attention of the right people.
People and money dont mix sorry,so if a few people have to suffer thats horrible but a better choice.
Yes I have seen someone die of cancer ,but even though he suffered he absolutely didnt want to die.Imagine if the option was there,he would`ve been given the information about ending his pain,for the sake of his daughter his wife ect ,then he would` ve felt like he had to do it for their sake.No thanks.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 June 2006)

I am completely with Noiru on this. Under Smurf's example the correct course of action is to have proper care supplied by the state. The state should provide all necessary support to the dying. 

It is not for the state to encourage (or help)the person to commit suicide to reduce costs and therefore pressure the participant and their family. If there are large medical bills involved then the "help" may not be wanted.

When the time comes, I would like to go with full medical care and not feel that I should die early to "do the right thing and save money" by my family.
Good care near death removes most of the pain with the use of morphine etc. 

I am sure that someone will think up a particular set of circumstances that mean that death may need assistance. In these cases, their should be the ability of the law to grant leniancy in court. 

If voluntary euthanasia is allowed, then there will be little protection to edrl widows from the deprecations of greedy distant relatives. Threats may be made to their person if they don't release moneys. Wills will have to be very carefully made. And if you did get murdered, then not only does the jury have to work out whether your death was hastened but whether you gave permission.

So, as have many others who have studied the issue closely and are well informed, I am generally against Voluntary Euthanasia under most situations.
It is up to the state to ensure that the correct resources are supplied so that we may each in turn when our time comes, die peacefully.

The alternative is to allow it so the government can slacken up on looking after the dying,  putting stress on the dying and their loved ones and maybe spend the money saved on a tax cut.


----------



## bullmarket (5 June 2006)

Hi Julia

My reasons, logic and arguments supporting pro-life are more that adequately covered in the RU486 thread.

For me, nothing changes in this thread.......sure there will be people who disagree with my views just as there will be people that agree with me....and I don't have a problem with that.....I'm not trying to change anybodys' views but just giving food for thought to those who might be undecided one way or the other.

But a sobering background thought I pose to those who might be considering supporting suicide and/or euthenasia is that I bet they hope they are right and that I and those who support my views are wrong because eternity is a very, very, very long time to be suffering in hell or whatever for getting it wrong for the relatively miniscule 80 odd years on average we spend in this life   

Anyway, just my   food for thought and if anyone would like to discuss my views any further then all I can do is refer them to the RU486 thread because I cannot add anymore here than what I posted there.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Mouse (5 June 2006)

Hi Julia,

Difficult question. I agree with voluntary euthanasia, but at the same time I would hate to be the one to make the decision on who lives and who dies and where to draw the line.

cheers
Mouse


----------



## Happy (5 June 2006)

We have to start it, iron out some unforeseen issues, and get used to it.


Alternatively we can wait until we, as community cannot afford to support growing army of people who require 24/7 care.


Similar to saving newborn at all cost.
Belgium drew a line at 26 week or 25  ½ (not sure if I remember it right).

For argument sake, let’s imagine that it would cost $500,000 to save every second child, despite all good intentions, sooner or later we would run out of money.

Also, if we believe that add with claim of 1 child dying of hunger every so many seconds and they could be saved for $1 a day, the same $500,000 could save 500,000 beings for 1 day, or 685 kids for 2 years.

Bit off the track, but same issue – who can live and who could/should die?


Death is part of living, off track again, some cells commit suicide so we can have 5 fingers, after infection white fighter cells commit suicide, as they are not longer needed.


----------



## visual (5 June 2006)

Point one,thats why I would never vote to legalise euthanasia




			
				Happy said:
			
		

> Alternatively we can wait until we, as community cannot afford to support growing army of people who require 24/7 care.
> 
> 
> Similar to saving newborn at all cost.
> ...


----------



## coyotte (5 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> But a sobering background thought I pose to those who might be considering supporting suicide and/or euthenasia is that I bet they hope they are right and that I and those who support my views are wrong because eternity is a very, very, very long time to be suffering in hell or whatever for getting it wrong for the relatively miniscule 80 odd years on average we spend in this life




Interesting view
So Christ is in HELL


----------



## visual (5 June 2006)

yep sorry Happy I really stuffed that up,commenting on your post through point form.


----------



## Happy (5 June 2006)

If abuse of system is the only worry, stopping us to create and implement system to shorten suffering and stop unnecessarily prolonging of quality-less life?

We should try to fix the PROBLEM; not stay fixated that abuse prevents us from fixing suffering problem.

This just an excuse – well, different point of view.


----------



## bullmarket (5 June 2006)

Hi Happy

no offence but imo it is very easy to say:



> We should try to fix the PROBLEM; not stay fixated that abuse prevents us from fixing suffering problem.
> 
> This just an excuse – well, different point of view.




Instead, why not post some some of your suggestions on how to guarantee the problem will be fixed and if they pass scrutiny here then maybe you can submit them to your member of parliament and see what happens   

Good luck

bullmarket


----------



## visual (5 June 2006)

Happy,
unfortunately you cant fix human nature,
how does the saying go ,
something about power corrupts and something corrupts absolutely.
sorry maybe someone else can fill the gaps of this saying.


----------



## Happy (5 June 2006)

No offence, but I wouldn’t want my bright idea being pinched and implemented without reward for me, but jokes aside, as I am not that bright, my ideas were mentioned before.

But if we want something to change, we have to change it, simple as that.

I’ll give an innocent example with plants and maybe not as innocent with animals.

If we want to achieve certain characteristics, we breed it in, or breed it out, and unfortunately this is another can of worms if anybody suggest any interference with trying to eradicate enhance certain traits of human race.

So far human race is the only domesticated animal to breed willy nilly.

Hope my post will be taken for its novel idea and poster will be spared abuse, thank you.


----------



## bullmarket (5 June 2006)

Hi Happy 

I am pro-life and so for me personally, trying to come up with solutions to guarantee friends, relatives etc would not abuse the system for their own personal and/or financial gains dosen't come into it.

I haven't seen any proposed solutions anywhere at all that would guarantee, what I accept would be a minority of cases, some people not getting away with essentially 'legalised' murder for their own personal gains.......and I doubt very much that anyone will ever come up any solutions if euthanasia was ever legalised here.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Happy (5 June 2006)

You say:

“I haven't seen any proposed solutions anywhere at all that would guarantee, what I accept would be a minority of cases, some people not getting away with essentially 'legalised' murder for their own personal gains.......and I doubt very much that anyone will ever come up any solutions if euthanasia was ever legalised here.”


Well, one day anarchy might set in, which can be seen daily from Dili, and our youngsters are capable to be cruel too, so time might come, that nobody will guarantee anything, we will be just pushed aside to starve or perish or we will be helped with brutal helping hand.


----------



## Smurf1976 (5 June 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> I am completely with Noiru on this. Under Smurf's example the correct course of action is to have proper care supplied by the state. The state should provide all necessary support to the dying.



Agreed in principle. 

But one question immediately comes to mind. Government health services are already struggling to keep up with demand, a situation which seems likely to worsen given the aging population. So if we're going to have the state looking after the dying then I can't see that it could be done in any other than the most efficient (in terms of human resources needed) manner. That likely means putting the dying in nursing homes rather than having nurses in private homes. There just aren't enough nurses or other carers for the latter to be an option IMO.


----------



## bullmarket (5 June 2006)

no problem Happy 

As I said in my original post, I'm not out to change anyone's views but to provide food for thought to those who are undecided one way or the other.

I am pro-life and so we'll just have to agree to disagree - but in case you are trying to change my views then you or anyone else will have to come up with something significantly more substantial to back up your arguments than you have so far before I would even consider changing my views.

At the end of the day, I'm not the one you have to convince   

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Bobby (5 June 2006)

What seems right for me would be just going down to the local check out station when you think its time   .

If I still have my mind , then its my choise to get out before the pain !
Local vets could give me the green dream ( the dose like a huge dog ) .

Every one will suffer Death, you need to plan yours !

Bob


----------



## Julia (5 June 2006)

There seem to be three general responses to the question:

1.  Those who are convinced we should have the right to choose our time of dying given that our lives have become intolerable for whatever reason.  This should not have to be just the control of pain:  yes, morphine et al can control much pain, but for me personally I would be at least as devastated by being dependent on others to carry out personal care, feed me, etc as by pain itself.  I would find it intolerable not to be able to look after myself.

2.  Those who can mostly agree with the principle of being able to choose to die when life has become intolerable, but who do not trust either the system or their own families to administer the appropriate law without corruption.

3.  Those whose religious beliefs preclude them even participating sensibly in any discussion of this nature as they are totally unprepared to consider any view other than their own.  Such a view is respected, but please hold it as true for yourself and do not feel you have the right to have this view adopted for the population as a whole.

OK, so to those like Visual who come into category No. 2 (hope I have that right Visual?), would you feel reassured if there were stringent qualifications and conditions attached to anyone's right to end their life?  To refer back to the short lived Northern Territory law, e.g., if a person had made clear their own personal wish to end their life, their permanent GP who had treated them for some time agreed that it was for that person the best solution to an intolerable situation, a consultant psychiatrist had interviewed the patient and their family to ascertain (a) the person's soundness of mind, (b) the consent by the family if any, and a third person, either an ethicist, lawyer or another doctor had been in agreement with all concerned, would you then feel it was OK to allow that person to end his/her life?

I do think a lot of the comment about voluntary euthanasia being "the start of the slippery slope" etc is somewhat hysterical.  It need not be at all if the appropriate medical and legal parameters are worked out.  It seems to be working well in the Netherlands, and indeed it seemed to be successful for the limited period it was used in the Northern Territory.

Seems extraordinary to me that we can be prosecuted for allowing an animal to suffer when death is inevitable, but we can't apply the same sensible rationale to ourselves.

Above all, I feel that for each individual it is his or her own life.  We should not feel obligated to provide succour to anyone else's beliefs or obsessions.
If at some stage in the future I feel my life has become intolerable I simply cannot see why any other person should decree that I must continue to persist with it,

Julia


----------



## Bobby (5 June 2006)

Julias last paragraph is the Paramount realization for those that still have their own mind.

As for You religious people, those two young kids that drowned recently in a tank.
Where was your god to help them ?  

Bob.


----------



## coyotte (5 June 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> As for You religious people, those two young kids that drowned recently in a tank.
> Where was your god to help them ?




In HELL with Christ


----------



## wayneL (6 June 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> 3.  Those whose religious beliefs preclude them even participating sensibly in any discussion of this nature as they are totally unprepared to consider any view other than their own.  Such a view is respected, but please hold it as true for yourself and do not feel you have the right to have this view adopted for the population as a whole.




Good comments Julia,

Equally, the atheists/agnostics skould tone it down also.

Let's be sensitive to other views and beliefs, eh? Discussion not doctrine.

Cheers


----------



## professor_frink (6 June 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Seems extraordinary to me that we can be prosecuted for allowing an animal to suffer when death is inevitable, but we can't apply the same sensible rationale to ourselves.




My thoughts exactly.


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

Julia,
it might be paranoid but nothing and no qualifications would make me agree with euthanasia being law.You could have the best people and the stringent laws in place but how would you legislate against human nature.An elderly mother being convinced to end her life,sure it would be her decision but how could you prevent the idea being placed in the first place,an accident victim left a parapligic,his parents might think that he be better off dead,using the dog analogy.Again he might then think that it was a good idea.Sorry when you make this thing into law it will always be abused.I dont trust people,with good reason.


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

Hi Julia 

I probably fall into your option 3. 



> 3. Those whose religious beliefs preclude them even participating sensibly in any discussion of this nature as they are totally unprepared to consider any view other than their own. Such a view is respected, but please hold it as true for yourself and do not feel you have the right to have this view adopted for the population as a whole.




*But imo people with religious beliefs are no less prepared to consider views other than their own than people without religious beliefs are prepared to consider beliefs other than their own.*  

What I see in this thread is simply people posting various views and I agree 100% with Visual's previous post.

I stated in my original post that I am pro-life and that I am not trying to change anyone's view but simply providing food for thought to those that are undecided one way or the other 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## ghotib (6 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> *But imo people with religious beliefs are no less prepared to consider views other than their own than people without religious beliefs are prepared to consider beliefs other than their own.*



Agreed. But you've demonstrated many times that you are not one of those people. You have never shown the slightest sign that you consider any views at all. You don't even consider your own; you just hold them no matter what.

Cheers,

Ghoti


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

Hi ghotib 

I disagree with you.

If you look back at my posts in the RU496 thread and in this thread you will see that I posted on several occasions that I am not trying to change anyone's views but simply providing food for thought to those who are undecided one way or the other.

*Everyone is entitled to their own views and I don't have a problem with that at all. * _All I am doing is posting and sticking up for my views just as others have posted and stuck up for theirs_....so I'm not sure what issue you might have with my posts......if you disagree with my views, that is fine by me 

Obviously I disagree with some other peoples' views just as they disagree with my views, but that is fine by me because as I said I'm not trying convince anyone to change their views 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Happy (6 June 2006)

Off track again, but I think, that sooner or later, of course if we all don’t get wiped out before, by some catastrophic event like terrestrial collision or 100% wipeout terrorist attack, there will be a breakaway group, which will start to use genetic technology to eradicate genes responsible for certain cancers or blood or any disorders.

If it can be done, one day somebody will say - heck with natural selection lets give it a nudge.
And it will be breakaway, as they will not be willing to carry the financial burden of heart disease; diabetics infested population to mention a couple.

Wen we look at certain groups, they have capacity to carry out the task, if not, new group will be formed.
Some people are anxious to get the ball rolling already to have perfect babies.

So, irrespectively of if we like it or not. It is gonna happen.

And that’s no Bull.

As to me, I am not that interested in perfection, but would be nice if I could one-day post: I told you so



Back to topic - 
Say for example it would by run by Centerlink and almighty Mr Jorgman or any other fearless bureaucrat.
And people have to hop hoops
Like: cognition, language skills, mobility, ability to take up food, drinks, defecate, urinate
Say best score 100% lowest score to live 1%, 0% gets the chop.

Say, suffering people, with terminal illness, in pain, immobilised, without will to live could opt to ask for 0%.

Of course too simplistic, but a start.

Why, one might say?
Well, for little population as Australia, we have 500,000 unemployed, so for starters we have 500,000 spare people, minus dole bludgers I suppose.

Also emergency departments in hospitals are choco block of old people 

We have Medicare crisis, hospital crisis, with Medicare run dental services have up to 12 years waiting lists.

We have shortage of housing commission accommodation, about 2 to 5 years waiting lists, with current system according to needs, which means that some can wait indefinitely.

There are long term forecasts that retirees will make 25% of general population in 10 years or sooner.


And just a thought on comments above - 
If religious people have strong beliefs, they can look after their own and not leave it to Medicare.


I think that sooner or later there will be formal segmentation of services, now everybody is lead to believe that there is equality.
But if in doubt look at benefits provided with Prime Ministers Medicare Gold card FOR NATURAL LIFE at everybody else’s expense.


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

and thats what i`ve been saying about human nature,
already Happy is targeting old people and the unemployed for selection,
so regardless of whatever tests he himself has advocated he already knows who to go after.


----------



## Happy (6 June 2006)

I know you are Visual, but have your vision checked my friend.

All I said that -

WE HAVE 500,000 SPARE PEOPLE TO TAKE UP THE SLACK IF GIVEN OPPORTUNITY, of course minus the dole bludgers who will do anything to do nothing.

And if anything I would give them opportunity to excel.


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

Happy,
dont understand the relevance of euthanasia with the unemployed,sorry


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

hi Happy

Imo we are at virtually full employment atm and so your argument falls down imo.  

I think you'll find that any reputable economist will tell you that it is actually healthy, economically, to have a small percentage of the work force in unemployment because, amongst other things, if we had 0% unemployment then wages/salaries etc would go through the roof because employers would have to pay ever increasing wages/salaries and who knows what other benefits to attract or poach employees from other employers......and if wages/salaries sky rocket then so will inflation and if inflation shoots up then so do interest rates and we all know what happens then.........the  :fan      : 

But I think we are going off topic now.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

you guys lost me,whats unemplyiment got to do with euthanasia.


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

Hi visual 



			
				visual said:
			
		

> you guys lost me,whats unemplyiment got to do with euthanasia.




I'm with you - I don't think unemployment has got anything to do with euthanasia at all.

I was just explaining why imo Happy's argument using unemployment breaks  down even though it has nothing to do with euthanasia.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Happy (6 June 2006)

Sorry, I lost you, thought too fast.

There are 2 aspects of euthanasia, first to end suffering of concerned person.

Later on, when resources become scarce (say 100 years from now or 100,000 ), necessity will appear to look at how to share available resources.

If we think about costs of keeping community, unemployment is competing drain on resources, which have to be shared between, to provide support for people with different needs.


It might come to the point, when we will have to earn the right to live, but this is conceptual issue and not relevant to our current healthy rat race, so excuse my little rant.


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

so I wasnt wrong when I connected your argument ,
Happy your idea will become a part of euthanasia method of delivery before you can blink or before the ink is dry on the legislation ,sorry but this apologies for getting things wrong ten years down the track annoys me,so if people cant be trusted ,lets not trust them,sorry have to go now.


----------



## Knobby22 (6 June 2006)

The point is that suffering can be greatly eased with good terminal care.
This is a known and proven fact.
We should be provided rooms with good conditions to spend our last days.
People say NOW that they would not want to live with other people looking after their needs however if done with compassion and dignity then what is the problem?   
That is what we should aim for.

Not create pressure for the dying to hurry up and get out of the way to save family costs and reduce the cost to the state.

And I definitely don't want my last days in pain dealing with numerous underfunded beaurocratic departments, waiting in queues to see lawyers, doctors, psychologists, clerks, etc as Julie suggests in case and I say in case because if you are still well enough to deal with these people then how do you know that you will really want to go through with it when the time comes? 

There is the famous case of the women in Australia a few years ago who felt obliged to go through it as a statement with Dr Death and when the autopsy was done she wasn't dying at all!

The law should be as minimally involved as possible in our last days except as a form of protection.


----------



## Julia (6 June 2006)

Happy:

Let's hope human morality will not descend to the level you have suggested at any time in the future.  We can probably agree that the question of people being involuntarily considered for "death row" is not a concern at this stage!

Visual, I can completely appreciate your concerns in principle, but perhaps you haven't given enough thought to my suggestion that intensive interviewing would be carried out with anyone requesting euthanasia, and that such questioning would include the family.  Any competent psychiatrist should be able to determine whether the wish to die was genuinely held by the patient and not influenced by others.

Presently we are making people endure painful and undignified slow deaths simply because we are afraid of some remotely possible repercussions of carefully legislated voluntary euthanasia.

If you were to apply that principle across all areas, then you could say that we shouldn't, e.g. have a social security system because some people might abuse it.  That's not a very good example but I think you'll understand what I mean.

I've said before that I absolutely respect the right of any individual to believe in whatever sort of religious concept they like - God, Satan, Heaven, or Hell.
And no one is suggesting that people for whom voluntary euthanasia is an unacceptable solution, should be denied all the palliative care they ever want.
I am happy for my tax dollars to be spent on caring for people who want to die at what they consider to be "God's will".

But I do have a problem with those people making decisions that I should be forced to do the same.  I don't want to deny them what they want, so why should they want to deny me what I want?

Julia


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

Hi Julia 

I'm not sure what you are getting at with: 



> But I do have a problem with those people making decisions that I should be forced to do the same. I don't want to deny them what they want, so why should they want to deny me what I want?




I could be wrong, but my interpretation of your statement is that you feel that people should be allowed to do whatever they personally feel is the right thing to do irrespective of the law of the land.

Taken to the nth degree that would imply that if someone felt it was right to punish someone ,say for robbing their house, colliding with their car etc etc, by killing them then they should be allowed to do it.  Whether we like it or not, we are all obliged to abide by the laws of the land and I don't see the laws on euthanasia changing any time soon. 

If you feel so strongly about it, why not approach your MP about it or stand for parliament yourself........but imo, if a referendum was held today on whether to legalise euthanasia I would definitely vote no and the fact that there is strong resistance in general to legalising it suggests to me that the overwhelming majority of the population would also vote against it.

Good luck 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## visual (6 June 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Visual, I can completely appreciate your concerns in principle, but perhaps you haven't given enough thought to my suggestion that intensive interviewing would be carried out with anyone requesting euthanasia, and that such questioning would include the family.  Any competent psychiatrist should be able to determine whether the wish to die was genuinely held by the patient and not influenced by others.
> 
> 
> Julia



Julia, you are assuming competent will mean someone who cares,sorry my personal experience dictates that people simply dont care,and if they do care then they are simply swallowed by the people around them until they have to decide is this really worth it,and maybe I should concentrate on changing something I can.I know,sounding a bit bitter and twisted at the moment... one of those days,sorry.


----------



## bullmarket (6 June 2006)

I agree with you visual 

Imo it would be too easy for family and/or friends, especially if they were good at hiding their true emotions and intentions, to play the sympathy/hardship card infront of a psychiatrist or whoever, to hopefully con them into granting them their wishes.

It goes back to my challenging Happy or anyone else who supports euthanasia to come up with suggestions that would guarantee that mistakes would not be made let alone allowing someone to get away with legalised murder for their own personal/financial gains.....and so far absolutely no-one at all has come up with anything ...and I doubt very much anyone ever will..

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Prospector (6 June 2006)

*Re: Suicide and Vonuntary Euthanasia*



			
				Smurf1976 said:
			
		

> 4. Children. I contend that it is physically impossible for anyone to simultaneously care for those approaching death and also look after children at the same time. I also contend that doing so is immoral in terms of the psychological impact on the children and the reality that they will have their childhood cut _very_ short.





WHile I agree with most of your post, I disagree with your idea about the impact of a family death on children.  My MIL died with cancer being cared for in her home by me and nurses - I had a four year old at the time.  Yes it was damnably difficult but not impossible, and my four year old, who saw his grandmother (and as a teeenager, his Grandpa) on the day of their deaths has an acceptance of death as an inevitable part of life.   

For me, there is no way I want to end up in a nursing home, being spoon fed, dribbling away, having to be washed by someone on a permanent basis, and in pain.  No dignity, no life.  I have yet to sort out how I will fix that up, but it should be my right alone to choose the manner of my death when life has no more to permanently (ie it is NEVER going to improve) offer me.

Billy Connelly did a great scene about this and white bread - the moral being why sacrifice eating white bread if you love it, just to try to extend your life by two years when your life at that time is about being spoon fed at the age of 84!  Enjoy life now


----------



## Prospector (6 June 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> when you make this thing into law it will always be abused.I dont trust people,with good reason.





Yes, have to agree with that too - and I am paranoid too because I refuse to put organ donor on my drivers licence as I dont want to be labelled as a donor.  However, if my family after discussion with my friends who are Doctors, feel there is no hope, then I would be happy for this to happen.

Yep, I dont trust the system either!


----------



## Happy (6 June 2006)

Many people feel that way as in quote below - 



> there is no way I want to end up in a nursing home, being spoon fed, dribbling away, having to be washed by someone on a permanent basis, and in pain. No dignity, no life. I have yet to sort out how I will fix that up, but it should be my right alone to choose the manner of my death when life has no more to permanently (ie it is NEVER going to improve) offer me.




Until we can make decision ourselves it is our decision, but as it is now, we cannot decide to peacefully slip away, if we don’t want to travel to Europe as it is now.

It can be done in Australia, if we decide to refuse take fluids and after 6 to 10 agonising days in excruciating thirst we can snub the authorities and go.

Bigger problem starts when we let it go too far, and we no longer function the way that we legally are able to make any decision, and our cognity will not function properly, when we don’t know we are alive.

Luckily whether we like it or not we have to die one day, despite all the medical help sitting there to prevent it from happening.


----------



## Julia (6 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what you are getting at with:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




On the contrary.  I think the law should be changed to allow any person whose quality of life had become intolerable to choose the time of their dying.
If it has been determined that they are dying anyway, why should they be forced to endure ongoing pain, loss of dignity and independence, merely to satisfy the preferences of people who think they should await "God's Will" or whatever.

Bullmarket, can you please say exactly what purpose you feel is served by forcing someone who wants to die, and who has been determined to be rational in that wish, to continue living?  I simply don't understand why you feel this should happen so would genuinely appreciate your explaining.

I've already said that I (and I'm sure other proponents of voluntary euthanasia) have no wish to influence your capacity to die as you wish.
What I don't get is why you endorse the current laws which dictate that people who wish to end their intolerable suffering should not be permitted to do so.  Why do you want to dictate what others do?

My late father lived a full and independent life into his 80's.  He mowed his own lawns and cared for a large garden including dozens of fruit trees which were his passion.  He suddenly developed an acute medical condition, required surgery and subsequently was admitted to a nursing home.  From being a fully functioning individual, he became dependent, and in constant pain and embarrassment.  He was acutely miserable and repeatedly asked me to assist him to end his life.  For obvious reasons, I could not assist.

Eventually, after a couple of months he was found dead on the beach just down from the nursing home having drowned himself.  When I identified the body he was badly injured from being thrown against the rocks and coral.

I simply cannot understand why anyone would suggest he or anyone else should have to die in this way when they have reached to stage where their life has become to them completely intolerable.  Such dependence and pain may be acceptable to some.  But no one can be the judge of what is acceptable for any other human being.

Julia


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

Hi Julia 

I have already answered the questions you asked here in my posts in the RU486 thread and in this thread and so I believe you are actually already aware of why I am pro-life and anti-abortion and anti euthanasia....and so I'm not sure why you are asking me to re-hash what I have already posted.

But if you are genuinely interested in my reasons then the time it took you to type up your previous post would have been more than enough time to search my posts in this and the RU486 thread to refresh your memory.

You didn't agree with my views in the RU486 thread, and that is fine by me as everyone is entitled to their own views and to make their own choices.  

I just posted my views here and in the RU486 thread and gave my supporting reasons......I can't be any fairer than that.....so we'll just have to agree to disagree like we did on RU486 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Julia (7 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Julia
> 
> I have already answered the questions you asked here in my posts in the RU486 thread and in this thread and so I believe you are actually already aware of why I am pro-life and anti-abortion and anti euthanasia....and so I'm not sure why you are asking me to re-hash what I have already posted.
> 
> ...



No, bullmarket, sorry that's a total cop-out.  I have asked very specifically what purpose you feel is served by forcing a dying person to continue their existence when they want to peacefully end that suffering.

You have not answered this specific question either in this or any other thread.  I am not being disingenuous here:  I am really trying to understand what people with your religious beliefs feel is the point of prolonging suffering unnecessarily.

Julia


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

Hi Julia 

I don't think it's a cop out at all.  I posted my views on pro-life, anti-abortion/euthanasia with supporting reasons in the RU486 thread and in this thread which take into account the scenario you posted.

It appears to me that you are not accepting them as valid responses to your questions...and if that is the case then so be it.  

You also seem to be upset that I don't directly answer your specific questions and yet you are being hypocritical because I haven't seen a reply from you regarding the specific challenge I posted earlier in this thread to all those that support voluntary euthanasia...and you appear to be supporting voluntary euthanasia

If you want me to take you seriously then you'll have to firstly answer my specific questions first, and you haven't done that in this thread yet.  

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Julia (7 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Julia
> 
> I don't think it's a cop out at all.  I posted my views on pro-life, anti-abortion/euthanasia with supporting reasons in the RU486 thread and in this thread which take into account the scenario you posted.
> 
> ...




I give up!  Trying to have a genuinely thoughtful discussion with you is less rewarding than talking to a tape recorder.

My thanks to all those members who have offered their responses with such clearly thought out reasoning.

Julia


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

no problem Julia 

but you would have much more chance of me taking you seriously if you practised what you preached by answering questions I pose to you, as I did earlier in this thread, before becoming frustrated at my not answering your specific questions directly.

another option you have if you have a problem with my posts is to put me on your ignore list like I suggested to you some time ago....simple really 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## The Mint Man (7 June 2006)

My opinion is fairly clear cut, I do support it. 
Why?
well, if someone is in that much pain and it is obviously affecting their quality of life to the point that all they do is lie around looking sickly then yes I do support it in that case. However they *must have the capacity to make this decision*.
I agree with others that have said that there should be a number of professionals that assess the persons condition and if they have made the correct decision, to die.

on another note:
Bull market,
If one of your family members (say your mum or children) was in a bad car accident ending up on life support, and the doctors told you that there was  extremely little chance that your loved one would wake (The machine essentialy keeping them alive) However if they ever did wake they would have severe brain damage on top of the missing legs.
would you turn it off?


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

Hi Mint Man 

Firstly I'm not sure why you are directing your question to me personally and not also to others in here who expressed views against euthanasia.   

Secondly, I said to Julia that I saw her as being hypocritical by expecting me to answer her questions when she was not prepared to answer the question I posed earlier to all who support voluntary euthanasia....and I see you doing exactly the same thing as well now 

If you are genuinely interested in my answer and if you want me to take you seriously why not go back in this thread and first answer the question I asked to all those who support voluntary euthanasia _otherwise you are just wasting my time expecting me to answer your question when you are clearly not willing to answer mine first atm _ 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## The Mint Man (7 June 2006)

I am directing it to you as you want to be or at least seem to be the authority on your side of the fence!

Also my last question had nothing to do with euthanasia   I was simply asking you what you would do in that situation.


----------



## The Mint Man (7 June 2006)

Bull market,
I am having trouble finding a question mark in any of your posts which would suggest that you havn't actually asked a question.
Could you please refresh my memory? what was the question again?


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

Hi MM

question = challenge ...I'm not into spoon feeding so I assume even you will be able to find the challenge/question I posed earlier to all who support euthansia 

as i said in my earlier post, you can ask me questions all you like but unless you answer the question I asked first to all those who support euthanasia - and you stated you support euthanasia - _you're simply wasting my time expecting me to answer your question, whether it is related to this thread or not, when you clearly are unable to answer my earlier question._

if you genuinely want a reply to your question, go back and answer mine first.

good luck because my   says you won't be able to come up with a valid answer 

let's see how you go..

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2006)

Buillmarket,

Perhaps you could repeat your questions (or provide the link to them), I for one can't find the questions you are refering to.

Ta


----------



## The Mint Man (7 June 2006)

Bull market,
read my last post. actually dont worry here it is for your convenience


> Bull market,
> I am having trouble finding a question mark in any of your posts which would suggest that you havn't actually asked a question.
> Could you please refresh my memory? what was the question again?



I may be wrong but I cant see it.

Now would you mind re-posting your seemingly non existant question? so that I can at least decide if I will have a crack at an answer.

I will either try to answer it or leave it alone. 
One things for sure, I wont answer questions directed to me with a question!

You havnt edited any of your post yet so mabey I will look ouit for that question to be edited in somewhere


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

MM, Wayne

<<<edited, breach of code of conduct No2>>>>have a look at post #47.

<<<edited>>>>

Prison Break starts shortly so I'll you in the soup maybe tomorrow 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2006)

Bullmarket,

Tone down the insults mate.

Please, everyone else as well, no personal abuse!!!!

BTW Bull, I have no interest in the topic, just trying to expedite the discussion.


----------



## bullmarket (7 June 2006)

no problem wayne 

if you take anything I said as an insult then so be it, but personally I don't believe I insulted anyone unless you or anyone can post anything that proves anything I said is wrong 

gotta go for tonight 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2006)

Just cut the BS Bullmarket!!!

Everybodies had enough of it, OK!!!!!


----------



## Bobby (8 June 2006)

wayneL said:
			
		

> Just cut the BS Bullmarket!!!
> 
> Everybodies had enough of it, OK!!!!!




Congratulations ! one of the  best posts  by a mod  ever    

Bob


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

hi wayne 

no problem  - I just called it as I saw it and since you or MM couldn't post anything that proved anything I said was not correct *you took the easy way out* and deleted my post.....everything I said is 100% correct 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## StockyBailx (8 June 2006)

I wouldn't like to be the one to argue, if someone offered me the chance, to end thier missary, you'd really have to be buggered, in a pretty bad state to end your excistance. Maybe its the best thing you' could do!
But its difficult to even contimplate the subject, maybe thats what happens when someone has given the world enouth greith, or when they pop the question?
Not a healthy market!

Stocky.....


----------



## The Mint Man (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> hi wayne
> everything I said is 100% correct




which is the reason why I decided not to reply in the end, to your non existant question. You say you dont want to change peoples minds but then say the above.

If your so perfect then I *'challenge'* (wank wank :screwy: ) you to answer your own non question/ challenge. You should have the answer no doubt!

The point Im making is that nothing in the world is perfect but somewhere the line has to be drawn between what is humane and what it not. 
Is keeping some one alive that has no quality of life due to sickness, that wants to die humane? ... I think not! mabey you could change my mind?
As other people mentioned, you wouldnt do it to your dog. so why do it to humans?
oh, thats right, dogs dont go to the after life apparently!   (see quote below)

If it were my dad (for example) I would want to accept his wishes and if he was worried about me getting his money (which seems to be one of your arguments), fine it would all go to charity before hand. Some things are more important then money. 
would you really care about money if you had nothing to spend it on and were dying anyway?



> eternity is a very, very, very long time to be suffering in hell or whatever for getting it wrong for the relatively miniscule 80 odd years on average we spend in this life




As above, One of your first left of field arguments was about having to spend eternity in hell (if you belive that) for making a mistake. 
Well if you have to spend eternity there then does it really matter if you get there a few days, months or mabey even years before? *you would be there for forever anyway*


----------



## Happy (8 June 2006)

Wayne,

Agree with you, and appreciate your swift intervention and I really love this site, it is great place for people with open mind and place that we won’t have to feel intimidated.

Thanks again.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Mint Man 

In an earlier post you asked me a direct question and I subsequently asked you to go back and first reply to the question/challenge I posed to Happy and everyone else that supports voluntary euthanasia......so far from what I have seen, no-one has come up with any suggestions.

_From my point of view you and Julia, who also asked me a direct question, are simply wasting my time expecting me to answer your questions when you clearly are unable and/or unwilling to first answer the question/challenge I asked you - since you both say you support euthanasia....it's as simple as that_....

imo you can't expect me to answer your questions since you won't answer mine so we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## professor_frink (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> so we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one




thats all of bullmarket's cliches out of the way for this thread. I no longer need to watch this one to wait for them.

exit stage left for me!


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

Actully Julia ,i`m going to go off topic here,
but I would like to ask someone like Prospector who has a background in psychology her thoughts on whats happening on this thread,


----------



## The Mint Man (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> hi wayne
> *you took the easy way out*



Ha, are you serious or what? are you the pot or the kettle?
Anyway

Julia,
Your thread has seemed to ignore one side of your question, suicide.
I think suicide is selfish in the context of killing yourself just because your life isn't the way it was ment to be so to speak. Example: If you have a loving family that has done nothing but help you with your drug addiction. For you to end it all is selfish. You leave those same loving people behind.(read my recent post in the 'recreational drugs' thread for an example of this)

However, in the context of not being able to end it all even if your extreamly sick with no quality of life. Then I think the ball is in the other court, it would be selfish for me/us not to let them go. But we are in a catch 22, even if we are not selfish we are forced to be. A great example of this is in post 51 of this thread.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Mint Man 

you seem to be coming increasingly frustrated and so you are now resorting to quoting a portion of sentences and displaying them out of context.

what I said in full was:



> no problem  - I just called it as I saw it and since you or MM couldn't post anything that proved anything I said was not correct you took the easy way out and deleted my post.....everything I said is 100% correct




cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Blitzed (8 June 2006)

Well I'm for Euthanasia but also realise that it's not all black and white.
I also admire people who are happy to choose other option.

Maybe some people need to go spend some time volunteering  in an aged care facility to get some real facts and experiences with what real people are actually going through each and everyday, believe me it can be unbelievable.  
Just seeing people  getting so depressed when they have lost control of their private functions and too scared to leave thier room, some blind and neally deaf so they can't watch T.V or read or even listen to music. They sit in their room all day 99% of the time alone just waiting. Some have all of the above and have lost use of their legs too.
Most of these people are not in pain and some have told me they what to die....so I can only begin to imagine what it would be like when you add pain.

I suppose what really gets me going is people who spend alot of time TALKING PRO LIFE  when they could put their money were their mouth is a save some people who are begging for food and water to stay alive.

Lets all hope we grow old ....never having to go into a nursing home and if we have to lets all hope.... we have enough money to get into a good one....and if we do have enough money lets hope our family will use it on us...and if all works out lets all hope we are pain free and mobile. What are the odds? mmmmm


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Blitzed



			
				Blitzed said:
			
		

> .................I suppose what really gets me going is people who spend alot of time TALKING PRO LIFE  when they could put their money were their mouth is a save some people who are begging for food and water to stay alive............




I can assure you there are many people out there who do put their money where their mouth is, as you put it, and so help make a difference in reducing the pain and suffering of those much less fortunate.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## The Mint Man (8 June 2006)

Bullmarket,
like it or not, you said what you said which included, and I quote 'you took the easy way out'.
With that quote I am just making an observation. I think everyone but you can see what I'm saying.

edit- I have decided to not reply to any more of your posts.
you can have the last word


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

no problem Mint Man 

all I am doing is posting my entire sentence in full and not just a portion of it like you are out of context.



> no problem - I just called it as I saw it and since you or MM couldn't post anything that proved anything I said was not correct you took the easy way out and deleted my post.....everything I said is 100% correct




cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Blitzed (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Blitzed
> 
> 
> 
> ...





True, but we can't even look after all the aged people properly here in Australia now....let alone in 20 years or less if things stay the same.


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

guys,
old people do not have an expiration date,also they are the ones who have paid for all the services you are now saying cant afford to look after them ,by virtue of being old.
Not all old people are old because of their age.

I`ll tell you who I`d euthanase given the choice the old farts who whinge all day about no one caring for them,who sit in the corner of the room and expect you to bloody well look after them because their time has arrived to be looked after by virtue of turning whatever age they deem is old.

Who expect you to live like them even though you are 40 years younger and who expect you to listen while they go on and on and on about how their lives used to be when they were your age.Yes lets uethanase them.I`m sure even God didnt intend for those farts to ever see the light of day,so who knows we may in effect be cleaning up his ,not quite right humans.


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> hi wayne
> 
> no problem  - I just called it as I saw it and since you or MM couldn't post anything that proved anything I said was not correct *you took the easy way out* and deleted my post.....everything I said is 100% correct
> 
> ...




Mr Bullmarket

1/ You post had sections that were deleted because they contravened the code of conduct, pure and simple.

2/ Just to re-iterate, I have no interest in debating this topic. I can see from both sides of the debate, and I can see that both sides are problematical. But you are behaving as if I am disagreeing with you. 

3/ You cannot prove anything you have posted is 100% correct either. This is a discussion of pros and cons, not a court of law.

4/ Joe runs a very fair and open board here and allows people to have their say. But you must realise that you are annoying people with your cliches' and debating style. Many boards would have had you out on your ear by now.
I am asking you to cutting the use of these down to a bare minimum, people would really appreciate it.

Thanks.


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

And on a much brighter note,when the Delezio family went on 60 minutes and told of their horrifying story,my opininion at the time was that they were a very selfish family for allowing the suffering of their daughter to continue,in their position I didnt know what I would do but felt nevertheless that all that suffering maybe wasnt what I`d choose.Given that the family had been given the choice to let her go.Today she is going home again,having survived another horrifying accident.I `m so very happy to have been wrong,well as I said I didnt know what decision I would`ve made,but I`m glad that the only thing I contributed was tears.And am so very glad that Sophie has turned into an inspiratin to all loving families.And that never say never, attitude.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

hi wayne 

I disagree with you that my original post breached any code of conduct.

In my defence, I challenge you to reinstate my original post in its entirety and unedited and then point out which part(s) break any rule of conduct.

I maintain that everything I said in my post is true and you, rather than try to post anything that proved anything I said was not true, chose to take the easy way out (as moderator) and delete the post because you didn't like what you saw....it's as simple as that imo...

Now, if you can't show how my post was not accurate in any way I will take the screen dump of my post (pre-deletion) and other relevant screen dumps and post them on other sites warning others who might be considering coming over here of the unfair censorship and slander/defamation (of me at least) that has occured in the past on this site.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Julia (8 June 2006)

The Mint Man said:
			
		

> Bullmarket,
> like it or not, you said what you said which included, and I quote 'you took the easy way out'.
> With that quote I am just making an observation. I think everyone but you can see what I'm saying.
> 
> ...




Ditto Mint Man's final paragraph for me.  Bullmarket you have effectively subverted a serious discussion where several members have offered genuinely thoughtful responses into a pathetic squabble over who said what when.
I find your cliches and banalities simply boring.  You have added nothing meaningful to the discussion.

Julia


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Julia 

no problem  but what I actually said was:



> no problem - I just called it as I saw it and since you or MM couldn't post anything that proved anything I said was not correct you took the easy way out and deleted my post.....everything I said is 100% correct




you seem to be upset that I didn't answer the question you asked me earlier and the reason I did not answer it is, as I said earlier, because you are either unwilling or unable to answer the question/challenge I issued earlier in the thread to Happy and to all those that support euthanasia.

imo you can't have it both ways.......ie.....you can't expect me to answer your questions when you won't answer mine first...it's as simple as that 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Prospector (8 June 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> And on a much brighter note,when the Delezio family went on 60 minutes and told of their horrifying story,my opininion at the time was that they were a very selfish family for allowing the suffering of their daughter to continue,in their position I didnt know what I would do but felt nevertheless that all that suffering maybe wasnt what I`d choose.Given that the family had been given the choice to let her go.Today she is going home again,having survived another horrifying accident.I `m so very happy to have been wrong,well as I said I didnt know what decision I would`ve made,but I`m glad that the only thing I contributed was tears.And am so very glad that Sophie has turned into an inspiratin to all loving families.And that never say never, attitude.





Yes, a beautiful little girl in pink she was today.  Such a princess.  I must say though, I never would have considered, if she was my child, that I would let her go - I didnt know they had been given the choice but I guess that was an unspoken question by the medical people.  I think it goes back to my original thoughts - Sophie was going to improve - albeit in some pain but she still had a life to look forward to and contribute in her own way.

I think we just need to accept that people here have fundamental differences in their approach to the meaning of life and let it rest.  Some value life above all esle including suffering, others value life without suffering.


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> hi wayne
> 
> I disagree with you that my original post breached any code of conduct.
> 
> ...




Mr Bullmarket,

I am not interested in your challenge, or your misrepresentation of the truth. Move on with the topic please.


----------



## Joe Blow (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Now, if you can't show how my post was not accurate in any way I will take the screen dump of my post (pre-deletion) and other relevant screen dumps and post them on other sites warning others who might be considering coming over here of the unfair censorship and slander/defamation (of me at least) that has occured in the past on this site.




Bullmarket, you have been neither slandered nor defamed on this site. Nor have you been censored unfairly. You have, however, done your darndest to deliberately annoy as many people here as you possibly can.

If nothing else, perhaps you might consider cutting down on the repetition in your posts as a good will gesture to other ASF members who find it annoying and irritating. This is a community and we all have to play our part to contribute what we can to the wellbeing of the community as a whole.


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

Prospector,at the time of the interview Sophie was addicted to painkillers,her survival wasnt assured and the doctors had given her parents the choice to let her go should she slip up again.They`d to make that choice anyway initially when it looked touch and go.Plus if she survived she faced a lifetime of pain because of the ongoing operations that she will need for the rest of her  life,her dad refused ,forcing the doctors to do absolutely everything they had to, to keep her alive,for him any quality of life was worth it.Turned out to be right and Sophie looks absolutely gorgeous for what she has been through.


----------



## Happy (8 June 2006)

We are just bullied by person who says in his signature:


‘Please be aware that I am retired, a passive investor whose main objective is income and I am not a trader. Any views I express are based solely on my personal circumstances and so are not be taken as recommendations.’



Which is good news, actually fantastic news, as with bit of luck can happily experience first hand and be able to see what others are saying.

Best of luck, hope it is not agonisingly slow, and lonely, with no hope, no sight, no hearing and inability to move, or even pass real ****.


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

Guys,I know I`m the last person to be moderating but the ignore button works real well,I`ve got rederob on it,fabulous.You only see the people on the ignore list if you are not signed in.


----------



## Joe Blow (8 June 2006)

visual said:
			
		

> Guys,I know I`m the last person to be moderating but the ignore button works real well




Yes, I advocate the use of the ignore list as well but some members seem reluctant to use it.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Joe 



			
				Joe Blow said:
			
		

> Bullmarket, you have been neither slandered nor defamed on this site. Nor have you been censored unfairly.




I disagree with you and I have screen dumps from other threads where I have been clearly slandered and defamed and I have already passed them on with relevant details to appropriate people.

No offence, but whether you believe I have been slandered/defamed or not is of no interest to me.

Wayne's refusal to reinstate my original post that was deleted and then point out which part(s) he believes are not true or break any conduct rule gives me even more confidence that the post was unfairly deleted....but I have a screen dump of it so it doesn't matter 

Wayne's refusal to show how my post was not accurate or breaks any conduct rule (which I accept is 100% his choice) is also a denial of natural justice in that in this country we are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

I have stated in my earlier post what action I will take as a consequence of Wayne's refusal to account for his deleting of my post.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Joe Blow (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> I disagree with you and I have screen dumps from other threads where I have been clearly slandered and defamed and I have already passed them on with relevant details to appropriate people.




Perhaps you can link to the posts to which you are referring.


----------



## visual (8 June 2006)

Joe,do you think Bullmarket is linked to the Gatto brand of reconciliation
sorry couldnt help myself.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Hi Joe 



			
				Joe Blow said:
			
		

> Perhaps you can link to the posts to which you are referring.




You're now sticking your nose in something that doesn't concern you at all because I don't hold you personally responsible for any of the posts.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Blitzed (8 June 2006)

Joe Blow said:
			
		

> Perhaps you can link to the posts to which you are referring.





Can't this stuff be put on a new thread and others continue with this one? It's a  :swear: shame.


----------



## Joe Blow (8 June 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> You're now sticking your nose in something that doesn't concern you at all because I don't hold you personally responsible for any of the posts.




On the contrary, if there is slander and defamation on ASF I want to know about it as slander and defamation are both forbidden here. I am unable to review all posts on ASF personally so I must have missed the posts to which you are referring.

You may send the links to me via PM if you wish.


----------



## bullmarket (8 June 2006)

Thanks for the offer Joe but I don't see any need for me to involve you.

I already said I have sent off screen dumps with relevant details to the appropriate people.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## StockyBailx (24 June 2006)

Exsactly what are you blokes talking about. Sounds like you have a strong case of Euthanasia yourselfs, and I didn't think the missary could sound so lame Bullmart. I agree with Blitzed. Perhaps you both should submit your missary to part 2 of this thread, (what does Euthanasia sound like?).

Stocky.....


----------



## Happy (3 July 2006)

ABC said:
			
		

> Woman's death renews euthanasia laws push
> 
> 
> There is a new push for voluntary euthanasia to be legalised in South Australia after the assisted suicide of an Adelaide woman in Switzerland.
> ...





Wether we like it or not, others outside this forum, find it could be at least convenient.


----------



## The Mint Man (22 September 2006)

hey everyone,
I know this thread was a long time ago but I thought that everyone involved in here would be interested in the poll on the Optus home page, See link: http://dsl.optusnet.com.au/?brand=ODSL 
Its on the right hand side of the page, you have to vote to see current results.

cheers


----------



## Happy (22 September 2006)

> From ABC, September 22, 2006
> Vanstone maintains stance on voluntary euthanasia
> 
> Federal Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone has spoken out in favour of voluntary euthanasia.
> ...





Not sure if this is the same, but they probably realised that this could free few beds, reduce workload of many people, ease burden on social security and save some medicines.


I was reluctant to post it earlier, but since post was bumped up, decided to take a chance.
- Hope our posts are not going to reincarnate the litigator.


----------



## Butterfly (22 September 2006)

What a load of crock, if you kill yourself are you going to go to jail? Oh yes I can see the pile of stinking corpses in the corner.

No debate necessary, just neck yourself!


----------



## Happy (22 September 2006)

Not that simple, there are legal implications if assisted, problem with insurance and general stigma if suicide news comes out.

Euthanasia sounds different to start with.


----------



## Knobby22 (22 September 2006)

Hospital Administrator to Patient:  Look you are 80, your heart trouble is terminal, you are costing the state and this hospital $1500 a day. We would like you to consider Euthanasia. As a bonus if you agree to it, your family will get the Euthanasia grant of $2000 as part of the government encouragement bonus. You save the state and everyone will be better off!

Patient's nephew: Aunty, it would help my credit card and you know we have a baby on the way, your savings will be a great help. 

Patient (who is awfully sick, feeling a bit guilty for wasting public money and not wishing to argue their last days, with doctors and "caring" relatives): But I will be dead!

Adminstator and nephew leave and go to lounge area of hospital.

Hospital Adminstrator to nephew: "Look just sign here giving your acceptance and we will keep working on her, I think she will break; anyway if she become unconscius we can do it then"

Nephew: Thankyou!


----------



## Happy (22 September 2006)

> From ABC, September 22, 2006. 3:22pm (AEST)
> Customs seizes Nitschke's new book
> 
> Euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke has compared Customs' seizure of his new book with the burning of literature in Germany during the Nazi era.
> ...





Conflicting messages?


----------



## Knobby22 (22 September 2006)

The Nazi's would have found his book useful!


----------



## Julia (22 September 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Hospital Administrator to Patient:  Look you are 80, your heart trouble is terminal, you are costing the state and this hospital $1500 a day. We would like you to consider Euthanasia. As a bonus if you agree to it, your family will get the Euthanasia grant of $2000 as part of the government encouragement bonus. You save the state and everyone will be better off!
> 
> Patient's nephew: Aunty, it would help my credit card and you know we have a baby on the way, your savings will be a great help.
> 
> ...




Knobby:  I appreciate that your post is somewhat tongue in cheek.  However, I feel you are minimising a really important issue.  You know perfectly well that if the law were to be changed, it would be done with appropriate safeguards, as it briefly existed in the Northern Territory.
To suggest otherwise is simply scaremongering and irresponsible.

Good for Amanda Vanstone for having the fortitude to make a statement against her party's general stand in this matter.  Hopefully, it will reignite the debate.

To all of you who make light of the need for a change in the law, I suggest you have never witnessed someone you love go through the physical and emotional agonies of wanting to end a sustained period of extreme pain and suffering, in the sure knowledge that no cure is available and death is inevitable.  Shame on anyone wanting to perpetuate this dreadful misery.

Julia


----------



## Bobby (22 September 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> To all of you who make light of the need for a change in the law, I suggest you have never witnessed someone you love go through the physical and emotional agonies of wanting to end a sustained period of extreme pain and suffering, in the sure knowledge that no cure is available and death is inevitable.  Shame on anyone wanting to perpetuate this dreadful misery.
> 
> Julia



Spot on Julia !

Regards Bob.


----------



## Bobby (18 November 2006)

I need to know how to get hold of Dr Philip Nitschke's plans for his suicide machine.
Ive tried googling it, but no luck to the real plans.

Anyone know ? 
The information of how to make the machine =  for the exit,    please.

Bob.


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 November 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> I need to know how to get hold of Dr Philip Nitschke's plans for his suicide machine. Ive tried googling it, but no luck to the real plans.  Anyone know ?



Bob, If you're serious, (such a sobering post, man), I'd be trying to get a copy "under the radar" of the authorities - still illegal etc - just a thought.    Then again - I suppose you could argue freedom of info   
Could always contact him via "Exit"  http://www.exitinternational.net/director.htm  ?


----------



## Julia (18 November 2006)

Bob,

2020 has given the address for Philip Nitschke.  Have you tried contacting him?

I do know that laws passed a few months ago in Australia (being such a forward thinking, enlightened country) meant he was very restricted in terms of sending information over the internet.  Might be best to try to get a phone number for him.

I'm not sure what you mean when you refer to a machine.

I went to one of his meetings a few years ago, and he demonstrated the use of the bag which he says provides a peaceful end.   It wouldn't be hard to make.

See PM

Julia


----------



## jollyfrog (18 November 2006)

Well Well, there's some interesting comments on who pulls the plug! 
  NO ONE has mentioned its an act of LOVE to send your loved ones to the otherside.... or am I mistaken?
  I for one could send my Mum there GLADLY, ...& I've often said the same to my Sister!
  Seeing your loved ones laying there day after day....& rembering the good times they gave you as a child.... & the PROMISE you gave to Dad..... Its VERY BAD let me tell you I for one would hold my hand up for the syringe or pills or whatever! 
  I swear I'll not wait till I'm in "care" all of you people who condemn helping the elderly or infirm to Gods care ....... just wait till you see your loved ones waiting for DEATH as release its a VERY CRAPPY way to end your life let me tell you! I'M DEFINITELY FOR IT!!!!


----------



## Julia (18 November 2006)

jollyfrog said:
			
		

> Well Well, there's some interesting comments on who pulls the plug!
> NO ONE has mentioned its an act of LOVE to send your loved ones to the otherside.... or am I mistaken?
> I for one could send my Mum there GLADLY, ...& I've often said the same to my Sister!
> Seeing your loved ones laying there day after day....& rembering the good times they gave you as a child.... & the PROMISE you gave to Dad..... Its VERY BAD let me tell you I for one would hold my hand up for the syringe or pills or whatever!
> I swear I'll not wait till I'm in "care" all of you people who condemn helping the elderly or infirm to Gods care ....... just wait till you see your loved ones waiting for DEATH as release its a VERY CRAPPY way to end your life let me tell you! I'M DEFINITELY FOR IT!!!!




Many of us would completely agree with you, jollyfrog.  But the reality is that it's just not that easy unless our government agrees to a change in the law.

Philip Nitschke has been incredibly determined and resilient in the face of all the opposition from the right to lifers and our fundamentalist Christian MP's.
He passionately believes that if our lives have become intolerable, we should have the right to seek a humane and peaceful death.  Our fearless leaders prefer that we should suffer loss of dignity, and ongoing pain.

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Many of us would completely agree with you, jollyfrog.  ... Our fearless leaders prefer that we should suffer loss of dignity, and ongoing pain.



And the other thing that our fearless leaders would prefer is that no one tells THEM of the miriad ethical decisions made daily (by doctors) which are virtually equivalant to this, but (THANKFULLY) the pollies are not asked to rule on. (bludy hypocrites).  "make a decision, don't tell me, and have a nice day !!" (why is it that I'm reminded of George W teeing up to hit a golf ball? )

- or sheesh - sometimes - the incompetence in hospitals where ....
the whole thing becomes a farce - but I wont go there.  I'm almost 100% confident that most of us have been there anyway.   I could be cruelly sarcastic, and suggest, Jollyfrog,  that next time your mother gets a cold, send her to a hospital - they'll probably feed her, despite a "nil by mouth" card above her bed - 

or maybe let her die by stroke, when you've been able to keep control of such things in the relative medical backwaters of a suburban home - or

- send her to Bundaberg - they have hundreds of options !

apologies Jollyfrog - I hope you appreciate the fact that I hear every word you said back there


----------



## Dink (19 November 2006)

From the point of view of someone working in healthcare and who deals with these issues on an everyday basis I understand a lot of the views that have been put forward (some are very misinformed). From the outset I will say I am against euthanasia in the sense many of you are discussing.

Definitions are important when talking about euthanasia...

- involuntary euthanasia - aiding the death of someone against their wishes. Difficult to argue in favour of this one.
- active voluntary euthanasia - performing an act that brings about a persons death according to their wishes. Probably the most contentious form. However there are important issues related to this which I will discuss later.
- passive voluntary euthanasia - withdrawal of treatment to bring about death according the patients wishes. Essentially you can't make someone do something they don't want you to do. 

Essentially every case of human suffering can be dealt with in a humane manner which does not have legal consequences for health practitioners. Involuntary euthanasia is never appropriate and brings concepts such as eugenics into play. 

Voluntary euthanasia is ethically and legally straightforward as every person has a right to self-determination. However, the person must be deemed to competent when making such a decision. A competent person understands the risks/benefits, alternatives etc. of their decisions. Any person can refuse treatment. This decision can be made at the time if competent. However, a lot of people aren't competent when these decisions have to be made so the decision can be made prospectively in the form of an Advanced Health Directive (AHD). Every person (no matter what your age) should see their GP about doing one of these. Essentially it means if your mental capacity is somehow impaired that you cannot make decisions for yourself in the future this document will help ensure your wishes are still respected. If the patient does not have an AHD decisions can be made by a power of attorney or guardian. This decision is made in conjunction with the health care team and is made in the best interests of the patient. It should also be consistent with what the patient would have wished if they were competent. It should not be made with the best interests of the substitutive-decision-maker (e.g. POA, carer) a priority.

Passive euthanasia is straightforward and ceasing or withholding therapy at the patients wishes is commonly done.

Active euthanasia does occur (and much more frequently than you would think). Doctors are protected by the Doctrine of double effect. Essentially this is increasing the amount of pain relief to relieve suffering which may as a consequence hasten the onset of death. Doctors are protected because their primary aim was to relieve suffering. Usually in such cases other medications that may sustain life will be withheld which may also bring about a hastening of death. It is difficult to ascertain whether the pain relief or disease process brings about death. 

Essentially I think there are very few cases where doctors cannot act in a humane and ethical way. Every attempt should be made to ensure patients do not suffer in the terminal phase of their illness. This involves family, carers, doctors, nurses, psychologists etc. Relieving suffering does not necessarily require death. The pain that people endure is not always physical and there is a large psychological component which in turn worsens physical pain. It is a very scary time for people and worries about being a burden on their families and friends should not be an issue but unfortunately in todays very selfish society often is. Remember that you were probably a burden on someone for the first 16 years of your life (for some people much longer). Make sure you give a little back. Incapacitated people being a burden on society is no argument for euthanasia. 

Sorry for the long post. I could keep writing for much longer. In summary, please talk to close ones as to what you want to happen. Nominate someone who you believe will make decisions for you similar to those you would make. Please please please fill out an AHD. If all these things occur and you have a good doctor and close family and friends you should not suffer and your wishes should be respected. 

Dink


----------



## Julia (19 November 2006)

Dink,

Great post.  Thank you.

However, not all situations work out as easily as you suggest.  My late grandmother had a very healthy cardiovascular system, no cancer or other disease, but was completely incapacitated by a form of arthritis which meant she was in pain all the time, couldn't wash or feed herself, or get to the toilet.

Her doctor told her she could live for many more years like this.  What pleasure did she have in life?  All our reassurances that she wasn't a burden were completely irrelevant.  She was in her late 80's and simply had had enough.  What would you suggest as a solution for her?

NB  She eventually managed to crawl outside to where a discarded old laundry tub had filled with rainwater and drowned herself.  I found her some hours later with the flies crawling all over her.

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Dink,  Great post.  Thank you.   ... grandmother ... What would you suggest as a solution for her?  Julia



Dink - thanks for clearing up voluntary, passive, active - you're right - unless we define our terms, it's useless to argue.

BTW   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia  gives:-
Euthanasia (from Greek: ευθανασία -ευ, eu, "good", θανατος, thanatos, "death") is the practice of terminating the life of a person or an animal because they are perceived as living an intolerable life, in a painless or minimally painful way either by lethal injection, drug overdose, or by the withdrawal of life support. Euthanasia is a controversial issue because of conflicting religious and humanist views.

BTW also, I just wish that this thread was simply called "Euthanasia", (implying merciful release) - important that we downplay the S word - "unnecessary euthanasia".  Happening every 4 days in the bush   
Please, folks out in the bush - keep hope.

A bloke at work scribbled down some notes (not even complete quotes) he'd collected.    Maybe some are relevant to folks in distress?.
- for whereever life can be, it is
- 'precisely', he said,  'precisely'! And he really seemed to mean it.
- the fate of a puddle on a summer's day
- we would better call our planet not earth but water 
- like a whirlwind spinning through a junkyard and leaving behind a fully assembled jet
- over and over , year after year. 

Now these are not even complete thoughts !! - (intentionally so ) - but maybe you can fit em together in a constructive way. 

Here's a concept as well:-  from a quote I found and posted on the depression thread. (where there are many excellent positive thoughts expressed.)



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> Found a quote on http://www.wisdomquotes.com "The best remedy for those who are afraid, lonely or unhappy is to go outside, somewhere where they can be quiet, alone with the heavens, nature and God. Because only then does one feel that all is as it should be and that God wishes to see people happy, amidst the simple beauty of nature...."
> 
> If I tell you the author I think it will mean more....(Anne Frank)


----------



## Knobby22 (19 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Dink,
> 
> Great post.  Thank you.
> 
> ...




That is a very sad story, but isn't the question really what could have been done to make her life more bearable? 

She should have been offered better pain therapy and government help. For instance it is a well known practice in Canada to adjunct the pain medicines with marihuana (not yet legal in Australia unfortunately). 

Unfortunately for your grandmother treatments have improved greatly over the last ten years but she world have had the disease well before that so the disease would have progressed cruelly.

Like anything serious, the answer to the euthanasia question is grey. I am very scared of lawyers, pschycholigists and burocrats ruining my last days, so I am afraid I agree with commentators like Terry Lane of the "Age" that governments should not be involved with personal issues such as death but need the power to prosecute evil people who kill their elderly to gain money.
Maybe this gives a clue as to how it gets resolved. 

The other problem is where families do not want a relative to go and yet have to be complicit in their death and have all the guilt associated with their failure to make the persons life bearable.

Another example is where a person may be suicidal and she should be encouraged to seek treatment. 

Possibly there is a way to legalise euthanasia, maybe we could have special locations where it happens so that protocols could not be abused. It is such an issue fraught with dangers, abuses and problems. 

It is a difficult problem requiring a great understanding of human nature, we are getting closer to a solution but I would need to be convinced that the solution is the right one.


----------



## Julia (19 November 2006)

Knobby,

The short lived legislation in the Northern Territory some years ago was working well until the fundamentalist Christians in the Federal Government over-rode the Territory's laws.

Re my grandmother:  She could tolerate the pain.  What she could not tolerate was the loss of her dignity with every minute function having to be assisted.  She had been an active, capable person all her life, and found her complete dependence intolerable.  There was nothing wrong with her mind or her capacity to make rational decisions.

Other than religious convictions, I simply don't see why anyone would want to deny a person of this age, a peaceful, assisted death.

Julia


----------



## Knobby22 (19 November 2006)

Julia

I have no religous convictions and maybe the NT leglislation was the answer.
In any case, even if I did have religous convictions, I do not see why they should be forced on to other people. 

Maybe the way forward is a trial such that occurred in the NT where the results could be analysed and peoples fears (such as mine) could be shown to be false. 

This to me would be a great way for a political party to go forward on this issue rather than an out an out allowing euthanasia to occur and uninteded consequences occurring.  

Governments often get it wrong before they get it right.


----------



## nioka (19 November 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Governments often get it wrong before they get it right.




That should be "governments get it wrong more often that thay get it right"????????


----------



## Julia (19 November 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Julia
> 
> I have no religous convictions and maybe the NT leglislation was the answer.
> In any case, even if I did have religous convictions, I do not see why they should be forced on to other people.
> ...




Knobby

Agree entirely.  If the NT legislation and practice had been allowed to continue for a few years, then a reasonable determination could have been made as to how ethically it was working.

Julia


----------



## Dink (19 November 2006)

The only benefit to legalisation (or decriminalisation) is that it promotes greater consultation between treatment teams (and possibly families) without the risk of legal action. From memory I believe studies have shown that the rate of euthanasia in the Netherlands decreased following decriminalisation and may in fact be less than in countries in which euthanasia is not decriminalised. However I reiterate that doctors in Australia have enough legal protection to act humanely and in the best interests of their patients.

In response to Nioka's post I am sorry to hear that her grandmother sufferred as she did. Every case must be treated on an individual basis. I will not comment on your grandmothers situation as I simply do not know enough. 

Essentially all cases are very complex. I would like to think in this day we would treat any persons pain effectively and keep them comfortable. Manage any psychological problems. Have infrastructure and services in place to care for them without giving her any suggestion that she is a burden on society. If they still wished to bring upon their death quicker they could request life sustaining measures etc. be ceased (which includes nutrition).  

Our understanding of pain and acknowledgment of it has improved greatly over the last 1 to 2 decades. Gone are the days when pain was expected and to be endured until it subsides. Pain is treated promptly and often without question (unless drug seeking is possibly). Studies have shown that if acute pain is treated effectively the development of chronic pain (and the psychological component that makes it much worse) is much less. 

Another point that is often overlooked is who will perform the act of euthanasia if it is legalised? Would there be specialists (maybe euthanologists). You must remember that while some doctors are more altruistic than others, all (well I hope all) entered medicine with the aim to help people. The hippocratic oath itself states "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect". I for one did not get into this profession to perform such acts or have it expected of me to do so.


----------



## chops_a_must (19 November 2006)

Dink said:
			
		

> Essentially all cases are very complex. I would like to think in this day we would treat any persons pain effectively and keep them comfortable. Manage any psychological problems. Have infrastructure and services in place to care for them without giving her any suggestion that she is a burden on society. If they still wished to bring upon their death quicker they could request life sustaining measures etc. be ceased (which includes nutrition).



So anorexia patients are allowed to refuse food are they? I didn't know that.


----------



## Dink (19 November 2006)

No unfortunately. I forgot to add the competent part. A competent patient can refuse anything they want. Anorexia nervosa is an extremely complex condition which is primarily a psychological illness with severe physical manifestations. They are not aware of the risks/benefits and consequences of their actions. Their beliefs about their own self worth and physical appearance are erroneous. If their psychological issues are corrected their aversion to food resolves.


----------



## Dink (19 November 2006)

Just as we would not simple allow someone who is depressed to commit suicide if we could prevent it. We would treat the depression...


----------



## chops_a_must (20 November 2006)

I knew that. But really, when it comes down to it, doctors can pretty much put a treatment order on anyone if they are doing harm to themselves. Technically, they should even if someone is dying.


----------



## coyotte (20 November 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Julia
> 
> My reasons, logic and arguments supporting pro-life are more that adequately covered in the RU486 thread.
> 
> ...





Well my answer to the question you pose is YES !
By the very description you offer , I must be AWARE  to be suffering -- hence I must be alive ! --- hence ETERNAL LIFE , compared to the opposite which by your argument must be obliviation .

Cheers


----------



## Happy (20 November 2006)

Setting bait to find out who BullM is now?


----------



## Julia (20 November 2006)

Dink said:
			
		

> The only benefit to legalisation (or decriminalisation) is that it promotes greater consultation between treatment teams (and possibly families) without the risk of legal action. From memory I believe studies have shown that the rate of euthanasia in the Netherlands decreased following decriminalisation and may in fact be less than in countries in which euthanasia is not decriminalised. However I reiterate that doctors in Australia have enough legal protection to act humanely and in the best interests of their patients.
> 
> In response to Nioka's post I am sorry to hear that her grandmother sufferred as she did. Every case must be treated on an individual basis. I will not comment on your grandmothers situation as I simply do not know enough.
> 
> ...



Dink

It was my grandmother, not Nioka's.

I appreciate your point of view as a doctor.  However, I'd sincerely suggest that your quoting of the hippocratic oath is somewhat of a "cop-out" for your own personal stand on this question.  And you are absolutely entitled to such a stand.

You have previously said that a form of euthanasia is commonly carried out by means of increasing doses of pain relief which as a side effect only may cause death, presumably largely because of respiratory failure.
The fact that you are completely happy with this, because it can be seen to be "justified" seems to me to be somewhat unfair to the patient who is suffering from a condition for which narcotics would not normally be prescribed.  So effectively you are deciding which category of patient may be assisted to die (and yes, that's what is happening) and which may not.
Is that really fair?  Did you become a doctor in order to have this sort of power over who may suffer and who may not?

And, underneath all of this quasi symptomatic treatment there is the fundamental question of a perfectly rational person simply deciding that they have made their contribution to this life, have nothing more to offer, are old and will never get better, and would just like a dignified and peaceful end.
If someone is determined to die, they will do so.  I simply don't feel they should have to resort to such dreadful means as I described with my grandmother.  And for you to suggest that starvation is an acceptable alternative is astonishing to me.  (Remember the fiasco with the Terry Shiavo case in the USA?)

Your point about "who will be the "euthanologist" is well made.  Where a patient is past the point of being able to swallow tablets or liquid, the involvement of a physician would seem necessary.

How do you feel about the Northern Territory legislation?  Was that, with all its referrals and safeguards, acceptable to you.

Julia


----------



## Bobby (21 November 2006)

Well Dink,

Whats you thoughts to Julias post, many are waiting your responce.

Times are going to change we hope , don't let yourself fall into the hystere'sis area   

Bob.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 November 2006)

Maybe Dink - (in addition to Julia's questions) - your opinion of Nitschke - who to me comes across as a very ethical and empathetic person.



> ......http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/03/1038712920730.html   This ffrom Dec 2002:-
> "The commonest way people over 75 die in our society is by hanging themselves," Dr Nitschke told ABC Radio today.
> 
> Machines such as the COGEN would not be necessary if governments changed laws on euthanasia.
> ...


----------



## Dink (21 November 2006)

Hi Julia,

First I would like to apologise for the mix-up and hope this did not offend. 

I do not think euthanasia (or assisted suicide) laws need to be changed in Australia. I am not against decriminalization/legalisation of euthanasia or assisted suicide and I am not ethical opposed to euthanasia. My indifference is more from a practical standpoint. Prior to studying medicine I was definitely in favour of the NT laws. But I believe this was largely due to ignorance despite writing a couple of essays on the topic. However as you move through the profession you start to see the various options available and the various other ways in which you help people that does not involve active euthanasia. I think people are scared about dying in pain and dying without dignity. This is understandable. I believe Dr Nitschke plays on these fears. Legalized euthanasia gives people the sense that their wishes are more taken into account but this is not the case and people should be made aware of this. I worry that some doctors, families, and patients will take the course of action that is easiest and not the one that is necessarily the most appropriate. Despite this view I believe it is only a matter of time before legislation legalizing euthanasia gets enacted and I will change my practices accordingly. 

Active euthanasia does occur (not that I have been involved) but very few doctors have been charged and I do not believe any have ever been found guilty of murder in Australia (in other countries it has occurred but these have been in cases of gross malpractice). So rest assured that there are doctors willing to put their careers on the line for their patients even if not as openly as Nitschke (hence they can keep doing it with less scrutiny).

I believe if, as you called it, “quasi symptomatic treatment” is effective there would be very few cases in which a patient would want to end their lives. Your grandmother’s case may very well have been one of these. People with motor neurone disease are another example. In such cases mental faculties are maintained but patients are physically incapacitated. These are the most difficult cases to deal with. I believe in this day your grandmother’s case would be much better managed (including dealing with depression which would have most certainly have been a confounding factor). I do not believe euthanasia was the only other option for your grandmother and the fact that she so tragically took her own life shows that society and the health system failed her in numerous other ways.

In terms of the starvation issue it is a widely practiced method of hastening ones death. If you ever fill out an advanced health directive it explicitly asks whether you would like artificial feeding if you were not capable of feeding yourself. This is predominantly employed in the terminal phase of an illness. Some doctors will even cease fluids but maintain enough to keep the patient comfortable. The main issue from recollection about the Terry Schiavo fiasco was who made the decision to cease life-sustaining therapy and the motives behind the decision not the method. If she had an advanced health directive there would not have been the uproar. The issue of starvation was not at question within the medical fraternity and I believe was more likely propaganda put forward by pro-life advocates to try to swing public opinion in their favour. It was terrible to see what would have been a very distressing situation for the family and friends played out in the media. 

Julia, I did not quite understand the questioning on my power to decide who suffers and who doesn’t. I do not want any of my patients to suffer. If someone is in suffering I will relieve the symptom and attempt to correct the cause. This is regardless of what the symptom or cause is. If you could give me examples of the suffering (i.e. other than pain requiring narcotics) that you had in mind I would be happy to comment further.

Dink

PS. Sensationalist comments like the one in 2020hindsights post supposedly said by Nitschke “The commonest way people over 75 die in our society is by hanging themselves” are an example on how he plays on peoples fears. I strongly reject such a statement until someone can give me evidence to the contrary.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 November 2006)

Dink said:
			
		

> PS. Sensationalist comments like the one in 2020hindsights post supposedly said by Nitschke “The commonest way people over 75 die in our society is by hanging themselves” are an example on how he plays on peoples fears. I strongly reject such a statement until someone can give me evidence to the contrary.



ahhh - yes - obviously in the context of euthanasia  - clearly people who qualify for the discussion he was on about - and the sort of people who approach him for help. 

The more important point was that he'd been to court defending his principles, - and the rights of others to a merciful release - and close to being put in jail for it.  Splitting hairs between exact techiques of hanging vs others - (or drowning as in Julia's grandparents case ) wont advance the argument far .. 

I'm sure EXIT could give you stats of how many people approach them, how many die this way or that.  Then again - they have to be careful that they're not dobbed in to the authorities.
http://www.exitinternational.net/director.htm

PS it's probably easier to get those stats than the number of people who die by ... negligence ( I'll be polite) .. in our hospitals.  Bundaberg is just a tip of the iceberg Dink.


----------



## Dink (21 November 2006)

Obviously in the context of euthanasia - I still strongly disagree. Never once seen someone older than 75 who has attempted to hang themselves. Not that this means it doesn't occur. Maybe it means they have a high sucess rate. Overdoses and refusal to eat and take medications I certainly have seen... and more difficult to get good statistics on. Less shock value as well. I would imagine hanging oneself would be quite a tricky thing to do when a 75 year old who is so physically ill they think they have nothing to offer. Unfortunately these are probably those who are depressed but still physically capable. I'm not sure if I've made myself clear yet... major depression is not a justified reason for euthanasia (or suicide) on the background of organic disease or not. That is why when someone has suicidal ideation we treat them against their wishes if need be because they are deemed not of sound mind to make decisions for themselves and depression is treatable. 

PS. Had a look at EXIT. Couldn't find the statistics. Interesting the references to Nancy Crick. People do realise that she didn't actually have cancer don't they.


----------



## noirua (21 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Dink,
> 
> Great post.  Thank you.
> 
> ...




We have a member of our family who is in a similar situation and all the comments about pain killers are really unhelpful as the different forms of arthritas incapicate people in different ways. 
Also, pain killers have different side affects, the very best can affect heart rythm and have been withdrawn. Others attack the walls of the stomach and further tablets need to be taken to stop this happening. These extra tablets cause severe constipation and various medicines need to be taken to balance the problems.


----------



## Julia (21 November 2006)

Dink,

With respect, I do feel that you are saying all the standard lines.  I suppose you feel you have to.

But this standard stuff - treat the depression, give adequate pain relief etc. -somehow doesn't cut it when you have someone you love begging you to help her end her life, and having to explain that providing such assistance would mean going to jail.

I agree that anti depresssant medication can be really useful in many situations but where any depression is a rational response to a real situation, as opposed to what used to be called an endogenous depression, I personally feel it's the wrong thing.  Giving my grandmother antidepressants would not have changed how she felt about her situation and frankly would have been insulting to her.

My basic point is one I have already made and that is, what point is there in forcing someone old who wants to die to continue a sad existence.  Nothing to do with pain.  Nothing to do with disease.  They have just had enough.  They have made their contribution and done that with love.  They now want to be allowed to go.

I expect you will respond with the theme that "we can't just help people to die because they have "had enough"," and I can see that difficulty also.

I honestly don't know what the answer is, but don't feel that old, ill people committing suicide by violent means is what should be happening.

Julia


----------



## Julia (21 November 2006)

I meant to also say that I feel you, Dink, are being unfair when you label Philip Nitsche and his organisation as sensationalist.  (That may not have been the word you used, but that was the idea.)

I have met him and found him a very realistic, compassionate person.

Julia


----------



## Dink (21 November 2006)

I think what we do agree on is that it is a very complex topic. I believe our aims are both admirable and all options have their positives and negatives. I think society is served best by euthanasia not being legalised. There will always individual exceptions and there are plenty of doctors willing to put their careers on the line to deal with these (they just don't broadcast it to the world). Even the legal system realises this and no doctor would be found guilty (or even charged) if considered to be acting humanely and in the best interests of their patient. Every case has to be managed on an individual basis. People should not have to take their own lives and it as distressing to me as anyone when it does occur. Please do not think that doctors are the enemy and comments like one made previously in reference to negligent doctors and Bundaberg do not need to be made in this thread. Please realise we do have a excellent health system by world standards. 

On the topic of Phillip Nitschke I have no doubts that he is a compassionate person. I just think he alienates himself from the rest of the medical fraternity and is too polarising. I think he is limiting progress in this area rather than improving it. Change will occur with time as our society becomes more secular. While his methods of advocacy are admired by his supporters please realise what the perception of those who are not informed and are undecided must be. His methods just make those who are against euthanasia more resolute. This is largely related to how he is portrayed in the media which is unfortunate.   

Dink


----------



## Happy (21 November 2006)

Dink said:
			
		

> There will always individual exceptions and there are plenty of doctors willing to put their careers on the line to deal with these (they just don't broadcast it to the world). Even the legal system realises this and no doctor would be found guilty (or even charged) if considered to be acting humanely and in the best interests of their patient. Every case has to be managed on an individual basis. Dink




I don’t think the doctor should have to make such decisions.

Doctor’s hands should be free to do what is best for patient and not risk to be first to be prosecuted, for doing so.
What about time consumed to go to court, to answer all the questions, and possible loss of income and some social implications?

What if he-she has family and doesn’t take the non-standard decision and deep down knows that the better option was not taken and the patient suffered just because of that decision?

What about practical issue? 
Global population is ageing and we might run out of money, of carers, or both?


----------



## Dink (21 November 2006)

The decision will be as difficult if not moreso if it is legalised. In the current situation doctors do not end up in court except in very rare cases. 

On the topic of the burden of our ageing population I think that this makes us more aware of euthanasia but should not be used as a argument in favour of euthanasia. Cost and the need for carers will increase undoubtedly. However, in our increasing selfish society I think sacrifices on an individual, community and national level can be made elsewhere before relying on euthanasia to solve our problems. I can theoretically see a time when it could get so desperate but I cannot see it happening in the near future. 

I apologise but unfortunately I have to finish my contributions to this thread. Unfortunately work is too busy. I don't think I can add much more and believe I have given a fairly good account of my views. I hope I have raised some different ideas that you may not have considered. It is a very difficult issue and forums like this are fantastic for discussing different viewpoints. I have certainly enjoyed reading your ideas and own personal accounts and have taken them on board. I think it is fantastic that you are all taking an interest. Please attempt to fill an Advanced Health Directive (Living Will) with your GP in the near future. Talk to your family and friends and discuss end of life issues. Make sure you know what their wishes are and make sure they know yours.  

Take care,
Dink


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 November 2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jgf2FeEe0sI = if you've been to jail for justice  (Peter Paul and Mary - grandparents lol)


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2106 
I've posted a poem #205 on the above thread.


----------



## constable (25 November 2006)

bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Happy
> 
> I am pro-life and so for me personally, trying to come up with solutions to guarantee friends, relatives etc would not abuse the system for their own personal and/or financial gains dosen't come into it.
> 
> ...



This is the crux of the problem , the subject becomes unable to make the decision and relies on the subjective nature of another human being.
      Like everyone else i've been touched by cancer. My adoptive father died of bone cancer. Took him a little over 16 months to go. The last 2 months were unbearable the cancer literally ate him alive. A man who once stood over 6 foot weighing 18 stone was reduced to a skeleton, a frail invalid who's pride dissapated with every breath. He left us a week before he actually passed away, mum wouldn't let us see him because he was mentally incoherent. At this stage, looking back there is no way i was capable of making any informed decision on anything, let alone the future of someone's life. And would i begrudge anyone else who made that decision instead? Of course i would ! That's the weakness of human nature. How would any one feel if they discovered a cure for his condition 2 weeks later ? I know our family hung off every drug that the Peter Mac institute threw at dad. Because that is all you have.... hope for a miracle against all odds. 
How does anyone  know when its the right time for someone to go? I couldn't make that decision........... not for dad.......................


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

Joe Blow said:
			
		

> On the contrary, if there is slander and defamation on ASF I want to know about it as slander and defamation are both forbidden here. I am unable to review all posts on ASF personally so I must have missed the posts to which you are referring.  You may send the links to me via PM if you wish.



The above is a reply to Bullmarket from Joe Blow... way way back. 

mmmmm - suddenly we get quotes referring back to Bullmarket?  
what's the story Constable??  (and Coyotte)  - are you a stooge of some sort??

Why quote Bullmarket?? Why not simply post your opinion!!!  Bullmarket was banned was he not ? wierd lol.

Bullmarket isnt even a current member !!!
Most of his posts presumably deleted.  Yet Constable and Coyotte continue to quote him ??   

Next he'll be telling us (again) what cowards we are  lol - ahh that's right - and somthing about IQ's no better than shoe size.

Here's one way back at #99 (I believe its the most recent, except another at #102 with Joe) - sheesh - imagine jumping past Dink and Julias recent contrivbutions, and quoting bullmarket ?? ( in fact more like #70)



			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Joe  You're now sticking your nose in something that doesn't concern you at all because I don't hold you personally responsible for any of the posts.  cheers  bullmarket


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

2020hindsight said:
			
		

> Next he'll be telling us (again) what cowards we are  lol - ahh that's right - and somthing about IQ's no better than shoe size.




now, THIS one I might agree with 


			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> if brainy people look geeky/ugly then I'm drop dead gorgeous  :


----------



## constable (25 November 2006)

2020hindsight said:
			
		

> The above is a reply to Bullmarket from Joe Blow... way way back.
> 
> mmmmm - suddenly we get quotes referring back to Bullmarket?
> what's the story Constable??  (and Coyotte)  - are you a stooge of some sort??
> ...



Dear 2020hindsight,
    1 -  im not aware bullmarket is banned from the forum.
    2 - nor could i give an excrement
    3 - the beauty of this forum is that i can agree with parts of what people say and not have to deal with the whole picture of who they are!
    4 - i wanted to say your last post sucked but that wouldnt be dealing with the whole picture of who you are, which is what u want me to apply to bullmarket!
    5 - you missed the whole point of my post for your petty differences with bullmarket. Your point may have made, but it is twice as quickly lost.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

constable said:
			
		

> Dear 2020hindsight,
> 1 -  im not aware bullmarket is banned from the forum.
> 2 - nor could i give an excrement
> 3 - the beauty of this forum is that i can agree with parts of what people say and not have to deal with the whole picture of who they are!
> 4 - i wanted to say your last post sucked but that wouldnt be dealing with the whole picture of who you are, which is what u want me to apply to bullmarket!




Constable - ok - you arent Bullmarket - but gee you've got a great memory - post #20  
Personally I think that is pretty much superseded my events yes?


----------



## constable (25 November 2006)

2020hindsight said:
			
		

> Constable - ok - you arent Bullmarket - but gee you've got a great memory - post #20
> Personally I think that is pretty much superseded my events yes?



Yeah look i just started reading the first page of the thread and his post i happened to agree with. i couldnt careless who posted it! But none the less found it relevant to what i'd been thru.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

constable said:
			
		

> Yeah look i just started reading the first page of the thread and his post i happened to agree with. i couldnt careless who posted it! But none the less found it relevant to what i'd been thru.



ok - apologies for any insult.  - I just found Dinks recent stuff far more interesting. - not that I agreed with it.   I find Dr N far more compassionate that the bureaucratic line. 

btw, I have each thread sorted with most recent first  - hence I would never read anything but the most recent (and the old ones are way at the back).  
Not worth getting black eyes over


----------



## constable (25 November 2006)

2020hindsight said:
			
		

> ok - apologies for any insult.  - I just found Dinks recent stuff far more interesting. - not that I agreed with it.   I find Dr N far more compassionate that the bureaucratic line.
> 
> btw, I have each thread sorted with most recent first  - hence I would never read anything but the most recent (and the old ones are way at the back).
> Not worth getting black eyes over



thats ok man.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 November 2006)

Constable - I'll throw in a story about my father-in-law.  He was fine just fine - at home, good GP, kept him on tablets to prevent high blood pressure - diabetic. 

Anyway, he went to hospital for - of all things - prostate.  He would have been much better ignoring the problem!.  

Firstly, the hospital took him off the blood pressure tablets (So that wounds would heal) - I was present visiting him one night when the nurse took his blood pressure and turned white.  She ran away to tell a doctor, who didnt do anything.  That night he had a massive stroke - unconscious for days.   Paralysed in one arm and would never complete a sentence again in his life.  
(his GP was FURIOUS - IDIOTS he said - I keep his pressure under control  for 20 years, and they get him for a few days and screw it up").  Whilst there we saw people with "nil by mouth" above the beds being force fed - sheesh - ABSOLUTE incompetence - CRIMINAL negligence imho.

Couple of days later, he's partly conscious, but very distressed, we were told he was dying.  My wife found the specialist about to leave in the carpark (he'd missed dropping in to see us at the bedside) - "excuse me doctor, but I'd like to discuss my father".  He said "my name is Mister! not doctor!" (seems that when doctors become specialists they get promoted to "Mister" )ok ok - we finally went to see the patient - I said "what a coincidence, they take the catheter out this morning, and tonight he's so distressed".  Sure enough, when they checked,  he had a bladder like a balloon. Catheter fixed that. He lived.  (red faces on the people that had just finished telling us the reason he was distressed was that he was dying). He came home. 

Then over the next few years, he had circulatory problems, had one leg off , then the other.  Don't forget he has a paralysed arm , - and cannot get past the first word in any sentence he attempts.  

Legs by the way were cut off as high as possible.   So he resembled a humpty dumpty, with one arm in a sling - who couldn't talk or really communicate other than with nods etc.

He lived like that for ten years.  read a lot of books.  saw his grandkids born - tried to smile through it all (brave buga) - and finally died in hospital.   His wife attended him 24/7, although getting him between bed and wheelchair and vice versa was a real problem. (he was a big framed- man) 

1. I'm not necessarily saying he qualified for mercy killing, although he would have probably opted for it if he could.
2. But I start to understand where Dr Nitschke is coming from.  I'm sure that there are other worse cases where the case for "a mercival release" would be overwhelming.   2020 

Incidentally , I have contaced EXIT to learn more.  - we could all do that I'm sure.  This debate will rage into the next decade as we all get older no doubt.  My wife and I have both promised each other than we wouldn't want to become a burden.  

Another story - I knew a great man who got cancer - ran into a tree at 150kph with a stack of petrol in the car.  Yet he had always warned me about VW beetles for that very reason (front end petrol tanks).  No question in my mind that he made an early exit.  Poor ambulance drivers - surely a sophisticated modern drug would be better!! - BUT as Phillip Nitschke says "the govt hypocritically bans these", so he is forced to come up with the best of a bad set of clumsy alternatives, carbon monoxide etc. 

And btw, Dinks posts were informative no question - BUT I still dont agree lol.

PS getting back to my father in law , - the hospital ruined his life - and almost carried out the mercy killing themselves by removing the catheter when he had a stroke and was already EXTREMEMLY distressed (and FORGETTING that they'd removed it!!) 
- hence I find Dinks " everythings just fine...- doctors never make mistakes etc" attitude a bit hard to take.  "Doctors bury their mistakes"!, - never a truer statement ! and we rarely get to the facts believe me.


----------



## constable (25 November 2006)

Yeah look sorry to hear that.
 You just cant win on this issue with so many different variables of suffering and death. Who could possibly legislate on the issue and have the definitive answer? F *ck ed if i know and im tipping it will stay this way for some time yet!
Can i just add that ive found doctors to be like mechanics..... if your not happy get a second opinion!


----------



## Julia (25 November 2006)

2020

That's just a dreadful story about your father in law, and yet another example of how our hospitals stuff up the simplest things.  I'm so sorry to hear of all he (and you as the family) went through.  I honestly can't begin to imagine how any human being can remain remotely sane in the condition that man was.

As I've said so often before, I just cannot see the point of people continuing to suffer like this.  No one yet has ever explained to me the positives of continued suffering, other than those who have religious convictions.  

I don't think Dink meant to sound as "programmed" as he did.  I guess doctors, like most professions, have their set speeches for most situations and sometimes get so used to parroting off the same lines that they forget real suffering human beings are what they are actually talking about.

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 November 2006)

Julia, no probs, - a while ago now, and apart from the fact that none of us trust a hospital as far as we can kick one, it's all in the past. 

"we've gotten over it" !!  We have to do that from time to time,  don't we? 

I played this song for a bloke at work the other day - ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmwYpC-s40w&mode=related&search=
"don't laugh at me, dont call me names , dont get your pleasure from my pain" - (I realy like those words) . 
"and I know how it is to cry myself to sleep etc , Im a cripple on the corner etcetc. " 

and guess what he says? , - ruthless buga - " sheesh I'd just tell em to get over it !!" lol

anyways thanks for your post.  I'm sure we all have similar stories - and I'd also pass on my sympathy for you and your grandmother.  She mustve had courage and all   regards, 2020

PS (And Constable too - gee I picked the wrong bloke for a fight there lol - apologies man)


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 November 2006)

Ahh, I guess Joe won;t object if I post that poem twice... (he can always delete this one later )  btw I wrote it when I got outta bed this morning. and fniished it off when I took the dog to the beach this afternoon.  If you ever see a bloke walking along the beach writing poetry, and occasionally throwing a ball for a dog, it's probably me 

A KIND RELEASE AMONGST FRIENDS

we’re Gathered here, my final test, to let me hold your hand,
one Final heartbeat in a breast that’s brave but undermanned,
I’ve Lost all strength, my mortal soul can’t face this savage land,
- I’ve Seen God through this portal hole unmanned,
- how Fast my footing sinks, how quick the sand.

we’re Gathered here, no more no less, to watch my curtain draw,
my Soul seeks haven from this mess, these whips that leave it raw,
a Gentler place where slopes are easy, walking’s not a chore,
- my Knees are tired of crawling cross THIS floor,
- i See a roadway west, and mercy’s law.

they Say that men are thankful when our wings take off at last,
they Say that its more tranquil when our standard flies half mast,
but Please my friends, no flags for me, no tears, no cannon blast,
- i Smile to think of days of laughter past , 
- just Think of me some times - when reel is cast.

just Think of me when you -  perhaps - do things we used to do,
or When we walked through life’s strange maps – or how to tie your shoe,
or How we used to watch the stars  - or maybe make a brew ,
- or Maybe when you advertise for crew,
- i’ll Be there should you need a tip or two. 

i’m Dying here much prouder, flanked by friends - I’ve made my peace,
and Heaven’s call is louder, thanks, this merciful release,
i’m Passing through these clouds and banks of cumulus and fleece,
- now Flanked by friends, soon flanked by winter geese,
- and Pure white doves with halos in the breeze.

i Watched the sunrise dawning – but  I can’t do that a-gen,
there’s Something bout the morning – when the pain is ten times ten,
and Add to that the conscience pains I cause to fellow men,
- how Many lives can my life here upend,
- though Friends like you are oak that never bend.

i Heard the laughing kookaburra - farmer’s dawn refrain,
but Couldn’t plough my crooked furrow – though you took the strain,
i’m Fitted now with wings of love, and taken off the chain , 
- you’re Free my Clydesdale friends, take off your rein,
- i Move on now to find a higher plain.

i Love you folks, I love your jokes, I love your salty eyes,
i’ve Loved my life, with all its strife, to Hell with shy goodbyes!
FAREWELL my friends, here’s luck, adieu, where I go peace will lie,
- and When we meet again in time, I’ll try
- to Recall all the jokes I’ve learnt on high. 

Yes, surely, I’ll run into you, in time,
and surely then we’ll laugh again – sublime.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 November 2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkN31ugJiJA - SOMETHING WONDERFUL
btw Julia, I posted the words to this one on the poetry thread (way back when) - and put forward the concept that it was possibly written for "carers" - like my mother-in-law over those 10 long years 
Or hundreds of others who look after "difficult" kids , or patients at home etc - some of whom also require attention 24/7 - AND the total commitment of the carer who gives up his/her life as a result.

"but every now and then he'll say ... something wonderful"
"but all at once he'll do... something wonderful"    

Please note Im not suggesting euthanasia here.  (though a few might qualify). Just reminding myself that these people exit out there, and plenty of em. 


SOMETHING WONDERFUL 
(Lady Thiang) King & I

This is a man who thinks with his heart, His heart is not always wise. 
This is a man who stumbles and falls,  But this is a man who tries. 
This is a man you'll forgive and forgive,  And help protect, as long as you live... ...

*****
He will not always say  What you would have him say, 
(but now and then he'll say something wonderful)
the heartless things he'll do will hurt and worry you
But all at once he'll  do  Something  Wonderful. 

He has a thousand dreams , That won't come true, 
You know that he believes in them , And that's enough for you. 

You'll always go along, Defend him where he's wrong 
And tell him, when he's strong , He is  Wonderful 
He'll always Needs your love 
And so he'll get your love. 
A man who needs your love 
Can be   Wonderful. 

She'll always go along , Defend him when he's wrong 
And tell him when he's strong , He is wonderful. 
He'll always need her love , And so he'll get her love 
A man who needs your love , Can be wonderful


----------



## Philip (28 November 2006)

Dink said:
			
		

> PS. Sensationalist comments like the one in 2020hindsights post supposedly said by Nitschke “The commonest way people over 75 die in our society is by hanging themselves” are an example on how he plays on peoples fears. I strongly reject such a statement until someone can give me evidence to the contrary.




While I understand that Dink has left the forum having given all he can - his comment referring to me deserves a response.

The evidence he is unaware of: 
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Suicides: Recent Trends, Australia, cat. no. 3309.0.55.001, AGPS, Canberra, 2002

"since 1997 hanging has become the most common method of suicide for both males and females"

So, according to Dink, quoting from ABS is "sensational" and "plays on peoples fears"? 

I don't think so. It would have helped if he had read my book "Killing me Softly" where the source material is provided and the explanation given. The fact that suicide by hanging has become the commonest method is a direct consequence of government policies that prevent free and open discussion on the topic. Policies that make advising or assisting a suicide a criminal offence, policies that restrict access to good information (my recent book - _The Peaceful Pill Handbook_ was seized by customs at Brisbane airport), policies that force people to rely on hearsay and misinformation. 

This damning statistic should come as no surprise
Rope is readily available, you need little pre-knowledge, and hanging works.  This situation will remain until more enlightened government policies prevail.

Philip Nitschke


----------



## Rafa (28 November 2006)

Philip said:
			
		

> The evidence he is unaware of:
> Australian Bureau of Statistics, Suicides: Recent Trends, Australia, cat. no. 3309.0.55.001, AGPS, Canberra, 2002
> 
> "since 1997 hanging has become the most common method of suicide for both males and females"




Is the above ABS quote based on general suicide or exclusively those over 75?


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 November 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> Is the above ABS quote based on general suicide or exclusively those over 75?



Rafa ,  can we assume that is the only point you take issue with in Philip Nitschke's post?


----------



## Bobby (28 November 2006)

Philip said:
			
		

> While I understand that Dink has left the forum having given all he can - his comment referring to me deserves a response.
> 
> The evidence he is unaware of:
> Australian Bureau of Statistics, Suicides: Recent Trends, Australia, cat. no. 3309.0.55.001, AGPS, Canberra, 2002
> ...



Welcome Philip,

I think your work is *fantastic !* 
If I can help - Pmail me anytime Sir. 

Regards Bob.


----------



## Julia (28 November 2006)

Bobby said:
			
		

> Welcome Philip,
> 
> I think your work is *fantastic !*
> If I can help - Pmail me anytime Sir.
> ...




Philip,

I absolutely endorse Bob's words and feelings.  I'm astonished at your capacity to continue with what you believe in, given the level of government and other opposition.

I did meet you some years ago at one of your meetings in Queensland.  Your empathy and compassion, amongst a completely realistic approach, was impressive.

Thanks so much for participating in our discussion.

Best wishes
Julia


----------



## Rafa (29 November 2006)

2020, to be honest, i don't profess to know much about this topic, or have had any first hand experience, hence i have not contributed before. 

May i just say, i have been reading some of the posts... all of which are excellent.

i am just interested to know the background of the stats...
I am sure you are aware for the old saying about statistics   

Once i have that answer, i will return to just being an observer on this thread, simply becuase i don't know enough about it to make a valuable contribution.


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 November 2006)

Rafa said:
			
		

> i am just interested to know the background of the stats...
> I am sure you are aware for the old saying about statistics   Once i have that answer, i will return to just being an observer on this thread, simply becuase i don't know enough about it to make a valuable contribution.



Fair enough Rafa,  - I dont know much either.  It is a tough one.  On the one hand people who are totally dependent on carers, but don't qualify - perhaps a severely spastic child - and those carers are so bravely taking on the hand that god has dealt them - one mustn't insult them, assuming they have opted to look after the child to the end - but even there, many worry themselves to an early grave about who will care for the child when they are gone.   Hence I thought I'd add that song about "every now and then he'll do something wonderful" - and by that i as thinking of the rare moments of relief for many of these carers.  Answer here might include a bit more help from the govt? would seem appropriate?.  My guess is that in more compassionate societies like sweden, there is more sharing of this load. (?) sorry I'm guessing here.  Wouldn't it be GREAT if Canberra put its money where its mouth is on this one !!!

But I would also be confident that there are many cases where the patient is seriously beyond hope, and is totally committed to a desire to leave with some dignity.  For these people surely the law comes across as a clumsy enforcer of uncaring policies.

As far as I'm concerned , the good doctor Nitschke has shown the sort of courage of his convictions that only comes around once in a blue moon - he is being foiled by Canberra bureaucrats and politicians.  Surely (imho) it was one of the most unnecessary interferences by Canberra into States rights when they overruled Darwin.  

There are checks and balances, and these can be debated I guess.  There have to be those.  But let's at least hear the case for the rights of people who plead to be released from some painful mortal coil, - that they also have rights (imho).   

PS Personally I'd be more interested in how other counrties approach this question.  - where euthanasia is legalised etc.   So we could compare ourselves with other civilised societies - I'd be more interested in that sort of statistics than what age people were when they they committed self harm (whether suicide or euthanasia)  by hanging.


----------



## Julia (29 November 2006)

Here is a very rational overview of the current state of voluntary euthanasia legislation.  It is presently legal in The Netherlands, Belgium and Oregon, USA.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/


Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Here is a very rational overview of the current state of voluntary euthanasia legislation.  It is presently legal in The Netherlands, Belgium and Oregon, USA.



Thanks Julia, great summary, under the name of Plato and Latrobe Uni and all.



> Voluntary Euthanasia
> Five Individually Necessary Conditions for Candidacy for Voluntary Euthanasia
> Advocates of voluntary euthanasia contend that if a person
> 
> ...




I guess we add another

(f) can afford a one-way airline ticket to Netherlands, Belgium or Oregon.


----------



## Julia (30 November 2006)

Coincidentally, I was watching an ABC TV programme I'd taped (it was screened a week or so ago) about three people who wanted to die, all for excellent reasons.  

One of these people said something that I have heard before (your remark about the one way ticket reminded me, 20-20), and that is that you can buy Nembutal over the counter in a pharmacy in Mexico, but would be breaking the law by bringing it back into Australia.  

Julia


----------



## Knobby22 (30 November 2006)

Interesting article.

The Federal Government used the experience of the Netherlands as an argument as to why they decided against it. Obviously the Netherlands knew there was a problem (though it does not appear to be a major problem) and have given doctors lengthy prison sentences for not following protocols.

I would be greatly reassured if euthanasia was permitted, that resources were committed to enforce the law and enforce it strongly. Australians have been shown to be weak at this on other issues so the government would have to assure me that they would police the issue properly.


----------



## Julia (30 November 2006)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> Interesting article.
> 
> The Federal Government used the experience of the Netherlands as an argument as to why they decided against it. Obviously the Netherlands knew there was a problem (though it does not appear to be a major problem) and have given doctors lengthy prison sentences for not following protocols.
> 
> I would be greatly reassured if euthanasia was permitted, that resources were committed to enforce the law and enforce it strongly. Australians have been shown to be weak at this on other issues so the government would have to assure me that they would police the issue properly.




That's a good point, Knobby.  I don't think any of the proponents of voluntary euthanasia would be anything but supportive of the laws being rigorously policed and enforced.  As a supporter of voluntary euthanasia, I'm very conscious of risks of abuse if the appropriate precautions are not maintained.

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 November 2006)

> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/ ..... The motive of the person who commits an act of euthanasia is to benefit the one whose death is brought about. .......
> 
> Our concern will be with voluntary euthanasia ”” that is, with those instances of euthanasia in which a clearly competent person makes a voluntary and enduring request to be helped to die. ..
> 
> ...




It is worthy of note that a Will (and/or driver's license)  to the effect that you 
(a) would like to donate organs in the event of an accident
(b) would like your life terminated in the event of certain preconditions
(c) would like your pet cat given to your niece etcetc

will only help to sort out these matters SHOULD you suddenly go gar-gar.    

(sorry if this comes across as a gruesome topic - but hek - we are in a philosophical debate here, where people will argue that because you become demented, then your reasoning cannot be relied upon - HENCE!! only if you went into print when you were compos-mentis, do they take any notice of your written requests !!  imho, Treat is as something to state in your will !! 

(Plato would have downed several bottles of red just "exploring the topic" )


----------



## Julia (30 November 2006)

2020hindsight said:
			
		

> It is worthy of note that a Will (and/or driver's license)  to the effect that you
> (a) would like to donate organs in the event of an accident
> (b) would like your life terminated in the event of certain preconditions
> (c) would like your pet cat given to your niece etcetc
> ...




I don't think including your request re organ donation in your Will would be very helpful.  If you have an accident and are admitted to Hospital, you're somewhat unlikely to be carrying your Will with you.  And if you're unconscious you can't tell the staff to obtain the Will.  Often time is of the essence in this situation.

More practical is to include the information in something you always have with you.  I carry in my wallet a directive as to who should be contacted in the event of an accident, my willingness to donate organs if I'm not going to survive, and an instruction to access my Advance Health Directive (Living Will) which is on file at the hospital, in my file at home, and each of my contact people have a copy of it.

I think it's also a good idea to discuss your wishes with anyone you may have named as contacts, family members etc.  Then the hospital staff have confirmation that whatever you stated in the Advance Health Directive (which could by then be several years old) is still applicable.

If I ever regain consciousness and find that someone has cut off my legs to save my life, some hospital will get sued bigtime!

Julia


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 January 2007)

speaking of that one-way ticket to Switzerland ..   

"an open hearted country (  ) a wilful lavish land (and unenlightened)...
...Whereever I shall die (switzerland?), I know to what brown (and insensitive) country my homing thoughts will fly"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200701/s1834669.htm Doctor hoped death would spark euthanasia debate


> Euthanasia advocate Dr Philip Nitschke says the family of a terminally-ill Sydney doctor who took his own life in Switzerland hope his death will prompt discussion in Australia about euthanasia laws.
> 
> John Elliott, 79, from the Sydney suburb of Rose Bay, died on Thursday at a euthanasia clinic in Zurich with his wife by his side.  His trip there was organised by Exit International, the group run by Dr Nitschke.  Dr Nitschke was with Dr Elliott during his final moments.
> 
> ...



..dying wish was that the Federal Government would re-examine its decision 10 years ago to overturn the Northern Territory's right-to-die legislation.
Be interesting to see where the Labour party are with this one, although it seems to be one of those things that no-one wants to consider - until it affects them or their family i guess.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 February 2007)

There is no need to die in pain
 Odette Spruyt
February 5, 2007


articles and letters after the death of Dr John Elliott have presented dying in Australia as a fearful and terrible experience. People are said to suffer not only physically but also a total loss of dignity such that desperate people have no choice but to take extreme measures.

Human dignity is presented as totally dependent on fragile externals. We lose our dignity in the face of suffering, be it physical, emotional or social. We lose our dignity if we lose control of our decision-making capacity, our bowels, our mobility, our mind. We lose our dignity if our loved ones can't or won't care for us and we refuse to let others do so.

The subversive practice of giving patients lethal doses of morphine is portrayed as commonplace and indeed necessary for pain-free dying within the constraints of what is inferred to be archaic, inhumane and ineffective health care for the dying.

I have worked as a specialist palliative care doctor for 13 years. The exposure to death and dying daily has taught me many lessons. When I read the story of Elliott, some apparent absences are disturbing: the absence of an extended care network, the absence of any mention of palliative care/pain management expertise, the absence of the will to live (portrayed as somehow heroic). This is one man's story. It is certainly not everyman's story.

In Australia over the past 10 years, there has been an impressive increase in the range of pain management drugs. We now have more than 10 strong pain killers (opioids) that can be given in many different ways so that finding the right drug for the individual is now possible. In addition, we have a vast array of supportive pain-relieving drugs that can be combined with the opioids, to safely minimise the dose of opioid and optimise pain relief. Combinations often achieve more than one drug alone but are more complex for the patient, carer and doctor to manage, hence the need for specialist palliative care/pain management assistance.

Added to the medications now available are many other treatments such as radiotherapy, specialised anaesthetic techniques for cancer pain relief (such as epidurals), neurosurgical techniques and anticancer treatments, which may reduce the tumour size and activity and so reduce the tumour-associated pain. We also have a national, free palliative care network, available to all, providing care for the dying in hospitals, hospices and at home.

It is simplistic to argue that palliative care can remove all suffering at the end of life. However, why is it that at a time of such greatly improved analgesia and systems of care, the envy of many countries worldwide, there appears to be such a great fear of dying in unrelieved pain and suffering? Our resources have never been better. Why are people being told that there is nothing to help them?


----------



## Prospector (5 February 2007)

With respect Knobby, I have now seen my father and mother in law through a terminal illness.  The only way to manage my fathers pain was through the opiate drip, which effectively put him into an unconscious state for maybe 22 out of 24 hours.  He had to wear a nappy.  He lasted in that condition for seven days.  He was a very intensely private person and as I child I had only ever seen him in a singlet and shorts - never any less than that.  I could cope with my father in the process of dying, but he would have been grossly offended by his treatment at the end.  So why, why should he have had to pass away in a manner that offended everything he had ever done in his life!

Doctors may be able to medically manage the pain, but no-one is able to manage the dignity.  And when you are about to die to me that is all I have left.

I do not ever, ever plan to leave this earth in such a manner.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 February 2007)

Prospector, I didn't copy the whole article and did the writer a disservice.
Read the rest of it.
I am for Euthanasia but I think the arguments are not so cut and dried. Read who wrote the article (at the bottom of the page). I personally would not want to end one of my parents life if a better way was at all possible but it would be there choice. I would hope that it was the correct choice in the circumstances. 


continues:-

As a community, we do need a better understanding of palliative care as specialised health care for those approaching death. Palliative medicine is also not well understood by the medical community, which leads to ignorance in the use of analgesics, even by experienced doctors. For example, it is inaccurate to say that such large doses of narcotic analgesia as would suppress breathing and shorten life are necessary to relieve pain in the dying.

A recent review of hospice practice showed that the norm is modest doses of opioids in the final 48 hours of life. This is evidence that with best total care, extreme dosing is not required for a peaceful death and may in fact achieve the opposite due to side effects. In addition, such rhetoric reinforces the negative stereotypes that abound about the medical use of opioids and prevents many patients from accepting appropriate pain relief out of fear that these drugs will kill them.

However, perhaps it is not the fear of pain and suffering but rather a fear of death itself that drives this issue.

In fact the fear of death may be greater than ever before in our youth-oriented culture. Perhaps we need to slow down. In our rush to the finishing line, we are failing to see:

■The tireless devotion of a young wife for her dying husband.

■The marriage in hospital of a long-together couple two days before his mother dies.

■The exquisite intimacy and tenderness of a mother as she cares for her dying 20-year-old daughter.

■The laughter of families as they reminisce around the bedside of their father.

■The children doing puzzles on the floor of their grandmother's hospice room.

■The daily courage and dignity of the ill in the midst of incontinence, pain, tears and grief.

■The urgency in the steps of the nurses intent on relieving the pain and distress of their patient.

■The friendship and love which grows between staff and patients in the midst of adversity.

■Life renewing in the face of death.

We may crave for a way to circumvent the pain of dying, the grief, the loss and the seeming uselessness of it all. We may prefer a neater exit of our own time and choosing. However, we risk anaesthetising ourselves from life, and losing much of its richness, mystery, beauty and soul.

Instead of running from death, we need to embrace those who are dying within the community of the living and ensure that they know they are a vital part of life until their last breath.

Odette Spruyt is a palliative-care doctor at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre.


----------



## Julia (5 February 2007)

Knobby,

You are in a position to observe humanity at its best and worst.  Yes, we will all admire those who suffer pain and indignity stoically, but when we are dying *to do should be our choice.* 

Some of us will accept such a situation without question, possibly based on their religious beliefs.   Others will accept such a situation also without question, simply because they have gone through their entire lives in a passive fashion, not seeking to change what happens to them.
But others of us find the concept of loss of dignity, loss of choices completely unacceptable.  I am one of these people and am with Prospector here.  

It has nothing to do with pain and pain relief.

 Apart from the legal difficulties involved, I simply cannot understand why someone who is dying anyway should be forced to spend their last days in a situation which is the antithesis of how they have conducted their entire life.

And, speaking for myself, it's not about the fear of dying.  It's much more about loss of independence and control, of having other people make decisions for me.  Why should they?

Julia


----------



## Knobby22 (5 February 2007)

As I said I am for euthanasia if done for the correct reasons but to me it is not black or white but a shade of grey. 

It should be our choice, though our loved ones will be very much involved, but it should be an informed choice.

(by the way, I'm not Odette).


----------



## Prospector (5 February 2007)

Hey Knobby, I thought you were the Dr!


----------



## Knobby22 (5 February 2007)

Naah, though I do watch Dr Who when its on. 

(And hey, with a name like Knobby I must be a member of the dumber and hairier sex)


----------



## Julia (3 April 2007)

Excellent discussion on "Insight",SBS, this evening on "The right to die".

Christopher Pyne - Minister for Ageing - copped a well deserved serve from a feisty elderly lady who had actually been to Mexico to buy Nembutal.  For those who didn't see the programme, she said it was just stupid to have such a young man in such a role and she didn't doubt he'd never suffered extreme pain, etc etc.  

I'd be interested in comments from anyone else who may have seen this programme.


----------



## bvbfan (3 April 2007)

What really gets my goat is these politicians acting on their beliefs.

They are there to represent the community, I would like to see a fair referendum on this and I'll support the consensus view.

I hate religious nut jobs in all forms...


----------



## Knobby22 (4 April 2007)

bvbfan said:


> What really gets my goat is these politicians acting on their beliefs.
> 
> They are there to represent the community, I would like to see a fair referendum on this and I'll support the consensus view.
> 
> I hate religious nut jobs in all forms...




In other words, you hate others who don't share your beliefs.


----------



## BIG BWACULL (4 April 2007)

i like one about the polies in NZ when asked about euthenasia, the reply came Forget The youth in Asia we have to worry about the youth in new zealand (heard this off a mate so not sure if it was a joke or for real) DuMB politicians NO IDEA


----------



## Taurisk (4 April 2007)

Julia said:


> Excellent discussion on "Insight",SBS, this evening on "The right to die".
> 
> Christopher Pyne - Minister for Ageing - copped a well deserved serve from a feisty elderly lady who had actually been to Mexico to buy Nembutal.  For those who didn't see the programme, she said it was just stupid to have such a young man in such a role and she didn't doubt he'd never suffered extreme pain, etc etc.
> 
> I'd be interested in comments from anyone else who may have seen this programme.





Hi Julia
Yes, I also saw this program, tend to watch out for Jenny Brockie.  I had a little laugh when Minister Pyne got the serve from the 'feisty elderly lady'. - he really is too young and - also - political parties have fixed positions on sensitive issues and the Ministers simply have to toe the party line; otherwise a majority of their voter base gets upset, in the case of the Liberal Party, probably a religious majority.  Labor also have a problem, insofar that a substantial part of their voting public is Catholic.  I cannot see Australia introducing an Euthanasia Bill anytime soon, unless the demographics of an aging and increasingly sick population will force the issue.

I found Nitschke quite interesting - there is a huge ego there somewhere; did you notice how riled he got when told by the youngish New Zealand woman that his hints on how to suicide were cumbersome?  The Swiss, of course, was strictly a good business man - he protesteth too much; it all fits in with their superb hotel and restaurant industry - at a price, of course.
The paths we all choose to tread .....

However they provide a good service; I personally see a dignified end as desirable to anybody's life. Why is it that we can be kinder to our pets, and save them the agony of a painful death and cannot perform the same service for our loved ones? 

Coming back to youth in a minister - I remember thinking as a 16-year old "when I get older, I will make sure I have a substance on me (poison) that will allow me a death of choice in the case of incurable and debilitating illness." So youth is no bar to understanding an issue, it's just the live experience that's lacking. 

However, the suicide death of a close and still fairly young friend, who thought he was terminally ill (but was in reality just depressed) has had a dramatic effect on me and my friends around me.  Now, that I am older, I am becoming practiced in Yoga techniques - they also seem to help in extremis.  

So, you see, there are many issues involved in this, but I completely agree with the people who take pro-active steps, and I also hope that the silent and positive help of members of the medical profession continues in cases of extreme pain.

Cheers
Taurisk


----------



## Taurisk (4 April 2007)

bvbfan said:


> What really gets my goat is these politicians acting on their beliefs.
> 
> They are there to represent the community, I would like to see a fair referendum on this and I'll support the consensus view.
> 
> I hate religious nut jobs in all forms...




Hi bvbfan (I love your atavar btw)

Politicians eventually 'get it' - but the community has to make its feelings very obvious indeed.  The Pollies are always very good at 
(1) manipulating public opinion and
when that fails
(2) giving in to it, because they want to stay in Government.

I just have a feeling that public opinion on this issue is still very much in the ruminative phase here in Australia - give it time and an aging and increasingly sick population will eventually put enough pressure on the pollies to change the legislation.

Cheers

Taurisk


----------



## Julia (4 April 2007)

Re politicians' claims that they are there to represent the people, in the case of euthanasia polls have repeatedly recorded about 80% of the population as being in favour.


----------



## Julia (4 April 2007)

Knobby22 said:


> In other words, you hate others who don't share your beliefs.




Knobby, I'm not sure that's quite fair.  I took Bvfan's comments to mean he objected to a politician's personal/religious beliefs influencing his decisions and policies.  Another good example is Tony Abbott's stand on abortion.
I simply don't think there's any place for personal religious beliefs in members of parliament's decisions which are supposed to be representative of the community's wishes.

Taurisk makes some good points.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (4 April 2007)

In my view any body has the right to end their own life.

What gives you the right to say they can't end their life!


----------



## Happy (4 April 2007)

Julia said:


> Re politicians' claims that they are there to represent the people, in the case of euthanasia polls have repeatedly recorded about 80% of the population as being in favour.




One lady said that straight into face of young minister for ageing.

Maybe minister for ageing should be the oldest person in parliament, to be remotely connected personally with the function.

This hot shot got on my nerves, luckily federal election is closer than he thinks.


----------



## Julia (5 February 2008)

Phillip Nitschke's book "The Peaceful Pill" is banned from sale in Australia.

It is, however, freely available via Amazon.com.

Does anyone have any idea whether an Australian citizen ordering a copy of this book from Amazon to be posted to their home address would be (a) breaking the law, and (b) if so, likely to be prosecuted?


----------



## disarray (5 February 2008)

download it over the internet and its not an issue. go to a net cafe and do it there onto a thumb drive if you are paranoid. you can probably find a torrent of it if you look or you'll be able to download it from http://www.peacefulpillhandbook.com early this year.


----------



## Julia (5 February 2008)

disarray said:


> download it over the internet and its not an issue. go to a net cafe and do it there onto a thumb drive if you are paranoid. you can probably find a torrent of it if you look or you'll be able to download it from http://www.peacefulpillhandbook.com early this year.



Exit International cannot now say when the download version will be available.
I wouldn't be surprised if our government intercedes somehow to also make that unavailable if such interception is possible.


----------



## The Mint Man (5 February 2008)

Julia said:


> Phillip Nitschke's book "The Peaceful Pill" is banned from sale in Australia.



I dont know who that is and I've never heared of that book but that is just plain stupid!!!


----------



## stockGURU (5 February 2008)

Just wondering if anyone else takes issue with the level of government interference with what we (consenting adults in a supposed "free" society) are allowed to see, read and hear. 

Another example: 'Nanny' Rudd censors the internet: http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22990520-27197,00.html

It seems every day we are slipping closer and closer to totalitarianism. 

One day, the apathy of Australians with regard to civil liberties will see a dictatorship rise to power in this country. And we will have nobody to blame but ourselves.


----------



## Happy (5 February 2008)

What a coincidence



> From ABC, 5 Feb. 08
> 
> GREENS TO PUSH EUTHANASIA BILL
> 
> ...




I hardly ever agree with Greens leader Bob Brown, but surprise surprise I must reconsider.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 February 2008)

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=96627&highlight=philip#post96627



Philip said:


> While I understand that Dink has left the forum having given all he can - his comment referring to me deserves a response.
> 
> The evidence he is unaware of:
> Australian Bureau of Statistics, Suicides: Recent Trends, Australia, cat. no. 3309.0.55.001, AGPS, Canberra, 2002
> ...




Not sure if anyone realises / recalls ... but  we had a post from the man himself here.

He does a mightly job of educating and assisting people in hopeless predicaments to exit with dignity! (imo)


----------



## Julia (5 February 2008)

Happy said:


> What a coincidence
> 
> 
> 
> I hardly ever agree with Greens leader Bob Brown, but surprise surprise I must reconsider.



Yes, me too, Happy.  However, I guess he can raise the issue all he likes and it won't make any difference to those in real power with their religious right affiliations.  I just hate that governments can interfere in what should be a purely personal matter.


----------



## Julia (5 February 2008)

2020hindsight said:


> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=96627&highlight=philip#post96627
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, indeed he does.  I wonder how he finds the energy and courage to persist with what he believes in, given the almost overwhelming odds.
He was recently arrested on arrival in New Zealand and his copies of "The Peaceful Pill" confiscated. I'd rather hoped that my native country might be somewhat more liberal and enlightened in its views.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 February 2008)

PS I think I could have chosen better words when I said  "he assisted" ...

perhaps "he assisted them to learn etc etc "


----------



## noirua (16 February 2008)

It appears quite a dangerous subject to discuss, suicide that is, and 16 deaths in the last 12 months in a town called Bridgend in South Wales, UK, and all young teenagers, has raised questions about suicide websites which most were known to have visited:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7247421.stm


----------



## noirua (20 February 2008)

noirua said:


> It appears quite a dangerous subject to discuss, suicide that is, and 16 deaths in the last 12 months in a town called Bridgend in South Wales, UK, and all young teenagers, has raised questions about suicide websites which most were known to have visited:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7247421.stm



The number of deaths in the Bridgend area of South Wales has risen to 17, "Teenager's body found in Bridgend":  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7252732.stm


----------



## Happy (20 February 2008)

Last few posts seem to rather relate to adolescents.

Tragic, but main aim of the original thread was discuss how to allow people who are older and terminally ill to die with dignity, to have reduced pain and suffering.


----------



## noirua (20 February 2008)

Happy said:


> Last few posts seem to rather relate to adolescents.
> 
> Tragic, but main aim of the original thread was discuss how to allow people who are older and terminally ill to die with dignity, to have reduced pain and suffering.



Fair point Happy, with the usual but.  There are many terminally ill people requesting voluntary uthanasia who are not elderly. Just because a person is aged 21, are you saying they do not have equal rights to the elderly if suffering greatly with no hope of recovery.
Some people who suffer severe depression may also be looking for a way out of a dreadful situation for them.


----------



## Happy (20 February 2008)

Fair point, even at this stage of the lowest unemployment percentage in 35 years or so, we still have some 400,000 spare people and those who want to go should be allowed to go, no arguments from me.

Until our living standards drop to that of below third world, when nobody will want to make Australia their home, we can count on migrants to plug the hole should we create one.


----------



## Happy (20 March 2008)

> From ABC, 20 Mar. 08
> 
> DISFIGURED WOMAN FOUND DEAD AFTER COURT REJECTS EUTHANASIA BID
> 
> ...




Looks that we are not alone with our struggles to have dignified death in certain circumstances.


----------



## noirua (20 March 2008)

Happy said:


> Looks that we are not alone with our struggles to have dignified death in certain circumstances.




In a way we might ask why an animal is put down to prevent further suffering when its life is seen as no longer worthwhile.  Humans, however, must live a lingering painful existance which they know themselves to be worthless, but Governments and religious groups continue to condemn them to an agonizing lingering death.


----------



## Prospector (20 March 2008)

One day we will treat people who are in intractable pain, and with no hope of recovery, with the same kind of compassion we give to suffering animals. RIP Chantal.


----------



## Julia (20 March 2008)

Prospector said:


> One day we will treat people who are in intractable pain, and with no hope of recovery, with the same kind of compassion we give to suffering animals. RIP Chantal.



Well, we had a perfectly workable situation in the Northern Territory which the fundamentalist Christian politicians just had to shut down.
In moments of fantasy, I imagine in particular Kevin Andrews and Christopher Pyne enduring something of what the late Chantal must have gone through.
I don't usually wish ill on others, but it's pretty hard to be charitable with such people as these who use their positions of power to deny release from suffering to their fellow human beings.


----------



## Julia (26 May 2008)

A proposal by the government which will "encourage families to let loved ones die if they are unresponsive".

Details here:
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23755540-953,00.html

And then Bob Brown is apparently putting up a new Euthanasia Bill.

Could we possibly be seeing the beginning of a realistic approach to voluntary euthanasia before too long?


----------



## Calliope (11 September 2008)

Julia.    It looks like this thread ran out of puff before I joined the forum Apparently every thing that could have been said has been said, but at this late stage I would like to add a few thoughts.

A friend of mine recently went on a cruise. A long cruise. The majority of the passengers were retired, and some quite elderly. A lot of the women were widows, but quite independant. My friend was surprised at how often the topic the "final exit" was raised in general discussions and around the dining table, and she delved further into the topic. Most of these people were quite keen on the idea of being in control of how they departed this life. They weren't interested in assisted suicide. Their predominant concern was that the decision could be taken out of their hand by debilitating illness, stroke, dementia and the dreaded nursing home. In other words they would lose control over their own lives.

What they would like is a type of final exit kit that they could have on hand as some sort of "just in time" insurance that they could make their own
decision to stay or go before any decision making was taken over by somebody else.


----------



## Julia (11 September 2008)

Calliope said:


> Julia.    It looks like this thread ran out of puff before I joined the forum Apparently every thing that could have been said has been said, but at this late stage I would like to add a few thoughts.
> 
> A friend of mine recently went on a cruise. A long cruise. The majority of the passengers were retired, and some quite elderly. A lot of the women were widows, but quite independant. My friend was surprised at how often the topic the "final exit" was raised in general discussions and around the dining table, and she delved further into the topic. Most of these people were quite keen on the idea of being in control of how they departed this life. They weren't interested in assisted suicide. Their predominant concern was that the decision could be taken out of their hand by debilitating illness, stroke, dementia and the dreaded nursing home. In other words they would lose control over their own lives.
> 
> ...



Calliope, what you have related is exactly what euthanasia advocates all say.  It is about having control over one's life.  Phillip Nitschke, the doctor who has more than any other single person worked tirelessly for people to have the right to choose the time and means of their death, says that when people have access to a peaceful death, they no longer desire it as much, and are able to live in the present.

It is as you describe - the fear of being helpless is the worst situation most people can imagine.


----------



## Happy (12 September 2008)

Severe recession caused by energy crisis and food shortage might come as necessary persuader in future takes on the issue. 

(Remember one British emergency doctor who came to Australia, as he could not cope playing the God in GB with the aid of computer program to determine who has to die and who can occupy trauma bed, only to find that Australia soon will have the same problem.
Not exactly on subject but shows necessity mechanisms kicking in when demand outstrips availability)


----------



## fimmwolf (12 September 2008)

Every individual, of sound mind, should be allowed to determine whether or not their future provides the quality of life any human being should expect to enjoy.

Those that suffer from incurable degenerative diseases should have their wishes respected and carried out with the utmost efficiency.

To even think that anyone else should or could have the power to deny this is folly.


----------



## Julia (14 September 2008)

Happy said:


> Severe recession caused by energy crisis and food shortage might come as necessary persuader in future takes on the issue.
> 
> (Remember one British emergency doctor who came to Australia, as he could not cope playing the God in GB with the aid of computer program to determine who has to die and who can occupy trauma bed, only to find that Australia soon will have the same problem.
> Not exactly on subject but shows necessity mechanisms kicking in when demand outstrips availability)




Yes, that's quite right.   It's happening already in Qld.  Because of overstretched hospitals, people are dying on trolleys in hospital corridors, waiting for treatment.  As the baby boomers age and take up more hospital beds in old age, this situation will become untenable.

And doctors will leave.  Just today there's an account of a Senior Emergency Medicine specialist leaving the Logan Hospital because - as he describes it - it's dangerous and dysfunctional.  He can no longer cope with working in such an environment where he cannot provide the good care he has trained so many years to provide.

Meantime, the politicians are happy to use our taxes to fund their outrageously generous superannuation and travel.


----------



## chops_a_must (2 November 2008)

Didn't know where to put this, but it's kind of appropriate here.

Found out over the weekend that 8 of the people I finished high school with have since killed themselves.

I think there were about 120 graduates in my year, 6-7 years back. Another 3 have died in car accidents. Nearly 10% of the year are now dead.

But to me, it just says a lot about what is happening in our suburbs. I grew up in Leeming, which is just a plain, sprawled middle class suburb in Perth. Absolutely nothing to do. Absolutely nothing. Unless you are into sport, and even then you still need a parent to drive you everywhere. 45 minute walks to buses. The usual crap. Couldn't really imagine a worse place to have been a teen in Perth. Isolated, quiet and sanitised. Just what the oldies love.

Interestingly, it seems to have been the more straight edge and slightly cool kids that have been the ones topping themselves. Still living in the same area they did in school. The ones I would have considered the candidates to be gone are all still here. And I find that hard to reconcile.

I know ever since I was a teen there, they've had massive problems with kids street drinking in the area. Everyone I've met from school accidentally, either has some kind of serious bend or a drug habit. And I guess it's the same for all of the other grades of students around us.

So I guess my point, and I'm sure this is not the only area to have had such obvious problems like this, is are we going to continue living and developing in such a manner that reinforces the paranoid feel? Just block out the rest of the world and expect kids to adjust without an environment conducive to healthy interaction? Trying to sanitise everything, eliminate anything that may result in negative statistical indicators, yet at the same time eliminating those that lead to the positives?

Would we accept 10% of all 30 year olds killing themselves? I wouldn't think so. So why is it acceptable in the younger generation in certain areas?

Cheers.


----------



## mayk (2 November 2008)

................................


----------



## Julia (2 November 2008)

So are you blaming the environment in which you all grew up for the suicide rate?  i.e. the boring part of suburbia where there was nothing to do?


----------



## chops_a_must (2 November 2008)

Julia said:


> So are you blaming the environment in which you all grew up for the suicide rate?  i.e. the boring part of suburbia where there was nothing to do?



To a large degree yes.


----------



## communique (3 November 2008)

Julia said:


> Meantime, the politicians are happy to use our taxes to fund their outrageously generous superannuation and travel.




(Julia, I enjoy your posts, you appear sensible, logical and practical.)

 I am absolutely horrifed that there is talk of legislation to stop people talking about Euthansia.  What a draconian country we live in if this is the case.


----------



## Happy (3 November 2008)

Julia said:


> So are you blaming the environment in which you all grew up for the suicide rate?  i.e. the boring part of suburbia where there was nothing to do?





Chicago in USA is considered to be suicide capital of USA if not the world, supposedly due to very windy weather.


----------



## Calliope (3 November 2008)

Happy said:


> Chicago in USA is considered to be suicide capital of USA if not the world, supposedly due to very windy weather.




For somebody living in the poorer suburbs of windy Chicago, the middle class suburbs of Perth which Chops despises would be heaven on earth.


----------



## MRC & Co (3 November 2008)

I agree, I think it should be allowed and it is rediculous the Government does not allow it.  

Funny how in Roman times suicide was an honourable way to die, now with all the bible bashers, it is the end of the earth and the worst thing possible, guess we can thank some of them for the way the Government is today.  Anyways, that is another debate.  

My Dad had severe depression for countless years (caused in part by chronic pain) and ended his own life.  While I do wish he tried shock treatment, it was in a way, peaceful to see him get out of his pain, considering he had gone through every other avenue known to man.  I was the only family member living with him throughout it all, so I can see why many others were angry, but they did not hear the howling throughout the nights and the debilitation for, days, weeks, months, years on end, so for me, I think I was the only one who could understand.  What a way to live...........not much of a way.  Much better to rest in peace than live in agony IMHO.


----------



## Julia (3 November 2008)

MRC & Co.  I'm really sorry about your father.   Imo it's just beyond belief that a bunch of religious nuts in parliament (and on both sides) can have the utter effrontery to think they can not only refuse to hold a formal referendum on voluntary euthanasia, but now to suggest they will stifle all debate on the subject.   If this violation of our rights goes ahead, I would guess even this discussion we are having right now will be wiped from ASF.

If they get enough in the way of protests, they might reconsider going down this totalitarian path.   

Here is Senator Conroy's website with contact details:

http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/


----------



## Martyn500 (4 November 2008)

Great debate but im confused as to why we are talking about suicide on a stocks and share forum? 
Am I missing something?


----------



## Julia (4 November 2008)

Martyn, you might notice that this topic is in the "General Chat' forum.
Even people involved in the stock market have ordinary lives and are interested and concerned about such topics as euthanasia.

Feel free to stick to the stock related threads if you have nothing relevant to add.


----------



## Julia (8 November 2008)

Part of the US voting included a referendum on the right to die legislation in Washington State.  Below is the result.  Hopefully our politicians will take some notice.






> It has long been assumed that the majority of Australia’s politicians, in opposing right to die legislation, are out of step with community feeling on the issue. And not only in Australia it seems but also in some parts of the US.
> 
> Among the hundreds of ballots conducted in Tuesday’s election day was what is known as Initiative 1000 in Washington State. This Initiative, sponsored by a former Governor of Washington, Booth Gardner, who is suffering from Parkinson’s Disease, permits terminally ill, competent, adult Washington residents, who are medically predicted to have six months or less to live, to request and self-administer lethal medication prescribed by a physician. And the measure protects doctors from being prosecuted under a state law forbidding anyone from aiding in a suicide attempt.
> 
> ...


----------



## James Austin (9 November 2008)

MRC & Co said:


> I agree, I think it should be allowed and it is rediculous the Government does not allow it.
> 
> Funny how in Roman times suicide was an honourable way to die, now with all the bible bashers, it is the end of the earth and the worst thing possible, guess we can thank some of them for the way the Government is today.  Anyways, that is another debate.
> 
> My Dad had severe depression for countless years (caused in part by chronic pain) and ended his own life.  While I do wish he tried shock treatment, it was in a way, peaceful to see him get out of his pain, considering he had gone through every other avenue known to man.  I was the only family member living with him throughout it all, so I can see why many others were angry, but they did not hear the howling throughout the nights and the debilitation for, days, weeks, months, years on end, so for me, I think I was the only one who could understand.  What a way to live...........not much of a way.  Much better to rest in peace than live in agony IMHO.





Thanks for sharing that MRC. I am continually blown away by people’s openness at this forum, a share trading forum of all places. 

In a past life, not so long ago, I did some work in mental health, running a support group for people who lived with anxiety. Depression is often anxiety's twin. I saw a lot of it; its incidence is prevalent and probably on the rise as people increasingly feel isolated and alone, for so many reasons, in this world of ours. 

I’m quite sure that a great deal of depression is socially constructed, ie. anything from too many knocks in life, financial distress, relationship distress, ill health, to not experiencing the favourable conditions which provide the skills to work through depression . . . . the list is long and varied. 

But once depression gets a hold and rewires the brain, its very very difficult to change the circuitry. It can be done of course but when you understand that chronic depression is hard-wired in and the nature of depression is melancholy and hopelessness, well . . . . its not a big leap to want to find a sure way out of that.

Anyway, . . . what can a person say. Words arent that satisfactory in such a situation.


----------



## Knobby22 (9 November 2008)

James Austin said:


> Thanks for sharing that MRC. I am continually blown away by people’s openness at this forum, a share trading forum of all places.
> 
> In a past life, not so long ago, I did some work in mental health, running a support group for people who lived with anxiety. Depression is often anxiety's twin. I saw a lot of it; its incidence is prevalent and probably on the rise as people increasingly feel isolated and alone, for so many reasons, in this world of ours.
> 
> ...




Hasn't the suicide rate increased markedly?
What's going wrong with our society. Is it a social netork problem?


----------



## Sir Burr (9 November 2008)

MRC & Co said:


> I think it should be allowed and it is ridiculous the Government does not allow it.




This is not 100% correct. Voluntary Euthanasia is allowed in situations.

Recently I have been through an experience with a relative. If you are unable to eat with no hope of improving you have the option of palliative care. Hopefully, you have given instructions to your family to make it easier for them to make that decision if you are incapable.

There is a very interesting article here on the subject:
http://www.cbhd.org/resources/endoflife/dunlop_2006-01-27.htm

It was 17 days with no food or water using morphine for my relative to pass away. It is not a nice thing to witness dying slowly day-by-day but would be selfish to have not carried out their wishes.

Speaking to some of the staff at the institution, some family members try to keep their relative alive for possibly a few extra months. It ends up the same  prolonging it with absolutely no life for the person laying in bed, tube for feeding, catheter, crapping in a nappy, nurses washing etc.

In our case, relative had a massive stroke.

SB


----------



## Julia (9 November 2008)

Sir Burr, I'm sorry to hear about your relative.

The decision not to use artificial feeding, however, (which is what I gather happened with your relative) does not constitute voluntary euthanasia in the sense of what is being sought by 80% of Australia's population .

For your relative to die in what would be a very uncomfortable way over so many days is, imo, inhumane.   What proponents of voluntary euthanasia are asking for is medical assistance to die, i.e. the provision of a suitable drug to bring about death in instances where there is no hope of recovery in order not to prolong the patient's suffering.

But back to your original suggestion, i.e. that it does occur here.  Yes, it does in that doctors will increase the dose of morphine et al to hasten a patient's death.  In order not to contravene the law, they have to be very careful to do this "in order to control the patient's pain".  But this is an individual decision by each doctor.


----------



## Sir Burr (9 November 2008)

Hi Julia,

Thank you. Yes I understand.

Regarding _"For your relative to die in what would be a very uncomfortable way over so many days is, imo, inhumane"_.

It was such an overwhelming time. After some research I hoped the suffering may not have be so great with the morphene administered. Although, yes it was way too long.

At the time I had read an interesting thread on the subject here:
http://allnurses.com/forums/f8/morphine-doses-while-dying-340238.html

Regards SB


----------



## Julia (9 November 2008)

Thanks for that link, SB.  Really interesting.   Good to see most nurses contributing there genuinely have the patient's comfort as first consideration.

Much of the dilemma faced by nurses and doctors can be removed by patients completing the Advance Health Directive, making clear their wishes for the dying process.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 April 2009)

James Austin said:


> Thanks for sharing that MRC. I am continually blown away by people’s openness at this forum, a share trading forum of all places.
> 
> In a past life, not so long ago, I did some work in mental health, running a support group for people who lived with anxiety. Depression is often anxiety's twin. I saw a lot of it; its incidence is prevalent and probably on the rise as people increasingly feel isolated and alone, for so many reasons, in this world of ours.
> 
> ...



That's a very good post James.


----------



## Trembling Hand (28 April 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> That's a very good post James.




Snake not a great post to be digging up after the one you just started.

maybe have a look through this,

http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 April 2009)

Trembling Hand said:


> Snake not a great post to be digging up after the one you just started.
> 
> maybe have a look through this,
> 
> http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?




Thanks TH just commenting on a good post which I can get something from in terms of understanding.
Thanks for the link.


----------



## Julia (25 June 2009)

Today I went to Philip Nitschke's public meeting and tutorial.

He's a compelling speaker, very straightforward, no BS, very clear.

He holds these meetings throughout the country so I'd recommend anyone with an interest in this topic to go along when he's in your area.

If anyone wants more detail about what is covered in the tutorial PM me.


----------



## Happy (26 June 2009)

Eventually tables will turn and it is possible that fought for right to die might be replaced with reason to live, once new generations turn their back on old and fragile folk and nursing homes will not have anybody willing to work there.


----------



## MRC & Co (26 June 2009)

Julia,

Interesting to note:  George Soros is actually an advocate of this, and I believe helped put his mother to sleep.

Keep the fight up!


----------



## Green08 (26 June 2009)

We have the right to life, the right to eat, the right to drive, our choices are pretty much all ours.  We should be allowed to leave when we want.


----------



## darkside (26 June 2009)

I apologise for not reading the whole 7 pages before posting but i am about to work my way through it, and this way i  have not had a chance to follow the mood or trend so it's from the heart! If i was in a situation where my quality of life was such that i just could not enjoy my day to day activities and i cursed the days and hated the nights , then i would much rather take a dignified personal exit.
I fear not being able to go out in a painless composed way , far more terrifying than death. 

I would also wish this strategy on a loved one or family member, i feel dreadfull watching someone waste away in pain and torment whilst the medical profession just prolong the inevitable. 

 It must also be hard on the Doctors and nurses who work in this field.


----------



## MrBurns (26 June 2009)

I think the only reason this is not legallised is that it will be abused, not sure how to get round that but it should be possible.


----------



## peterh (26 June 2009)

Legalise Euthanasia. Legalise Suicide. Life is getting pretty cheap. I wonder where all this will end.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7977017.stm


----------



## MrBurns (26 June 2009)

peterh said:


> Legalise Euthanasia. Legalise Suicide. Life is getting pretty cheap. I wonder where all this will end.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7977017.stm




You cant lump them all together, we need to legalise assisted suicide for terminally ill people who would otherwise suffer.


----------



## Happy (26 June 2009)

MrBurns said:


> I think the only reason this is not legallised is that it will be abused, not sure how to get round that but it should be possible.





Just had a thought on "abuse" bit.

Why do they allow us to drive, knowing that we can *abuse traffic *rules and regulations and sometimes kill ourselves and others?


----------



## MrBurns (26 June 2009)

Happy said:


> Just had a thought on "abuse" bit.
> 
> Why do they allow us to drive, knowing that we can *abuse traffic *rules and regulations and sometimes kill ourselves and others?




Thats what traffic cops are for I suppose.


----------



## Julia (26 June 2009)

MRC & Co said:


> Julia,
> 
> Interesting to note:  George Soros is actually an advocate of this, and I believe helped put his mother to sleep.
> 
> Keep the fight up!



MRC, in Australia it's the assistance that's the crime.  Suicide is legal, but helping someone to end their life can in some States result in life imprisonment.

During a break in the meeting I spoke with Dr Nitschke and asked him why he keeps up the fight in the face of the increasing hostility and obstruction by the government.  His reply was that he simply believes human beings need the right to determine the time of their own death, as long as such a right is accompanied by appropriate legislation to safeguard against abuse.

He acknowledges that this is difficult and says that although the short lived legislation in the Northern Territory worked well for the four people who were able to use it, they still had to jump through many hoops when they really were not well enough to do this.  That legislation required the approval of four doctors including one psychiatrist.

He says that if the internet filter does happen, his website will be wiped out.  He's also finding that it's becoming increasingly difficult to hold meetings in some parts of Australia.

This is the second time I've heard him speak and I find him someone of great integrity, energy and determination.


----------



## Julia (26 June 2009)

peterh said:


> Legalise Euthanasia. Legalise Suicide. Life is getting pretty cheap. I wonder where all this will end.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7977017.stm



Peter, thank you for posting that link.

Concern about voluntary euthanasia (or assisted suicide) for people with a psychiatric illness is valid, but I'd say that depended on the nature of the psychiatric disorder.   This is not the venue for discussing that.

I appreciate that your religious views would determine that you would be against any form of assisted suicide.

What I don't understand about people with these views is why you as a group (not getting at you as an individual) are so determined that other people should not have the right to similarly determine their own view?

No one is asking those who are against voluntary euthanasia to participate in it.  I'm more than happy for my tax dollars to support you in a nursing home until you die at a time of your God's choosing.

  But why do you want to deprive those of us who do not want to be in such a situation, the right to determine our own time of death, bearing in mind that we do not share your belief that your God has the sole right to decide when we die?


----------



## Happy (26 June 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Thats what traffic cops are for I suppose.




So we have the answer, all we need is some measures to control inapropriate use, maybe even prevent it.


----------



## peterh (27 June 2009)

Julia said:


> Peter, thank you for posting that link.
> 
> Concern about voluntary euthanasia (or assisted suicide) for people with a psychiatric illness is valid, but I'd say that depended on the nature of the psychiatric disorder.   This is not the venue for discussing that.
> 
> ...




"What I don't understand about people with these views is why you as a group (not getting at you as an individual) are so determined that other people should not have the right to similarly determine their own view?"

Where did that come from? You have your view, I've got mine. I'm guessing we would disagree on most topics but theoretically Australia is a democracy so that shouldn't be a problem.

The point I'm trying to make about euthanasia is that we need to think about where these decisions could possibly take us, and I don't like some (possibly all) of the possibilities.

The doctor-patient relationship can be weakened. When the medical profession becomes involved in the killing, the delicate trust relationship between patient and doctor is undermined. Patients might become more fearful of doctors and health care workers, and doctors and health care workers could become desensitised. The taking of a human life is just another procedure.

Legal euthanasia sends out the message that "some lives are not worth living." To solve the problems of the suffering by killing them does not help the next suffering person, it sends signals of despair and helplessness. Currently very few people request euthenasia, and many then change their mind. But once legalised, it may well seem to be an option to many people, simply because it is legal. Indeed, people may feel they have a duty to be killed.

There are not rights without corresponding duties. If society goes down the path of legalised euthanasia, this right to die will lead to its corollary, the duty to kill. Once a society has said that its citizens have the right to die, it will be forced to provide the means to do so. Once legalised, it is possible that doctors may one day face lawsuits if they violate someone's rights by not killing them.


----------



## dalek (27 June 2009)

Almost any human activity can be extrapolated to it's extreme i.e. riding a bike can be life threatening to both the rider and those nearby, taking vitamins can be dangerous and subject to abuse, but using that type of argument to push your own values barrow to argue against euthanasia is not a strong position of logic in my view.
Watching someone close suffer badly for months before the inevitable and often desperately undignified end is real.
No theology or theory there my friend.


----------



## MRC & Co (27 June 2009)

dalek said:


> Almost any human activity can be extrapolated to it's extreme i.e. riding a bike can be life threatening to both the rider and those nearby, taking vitamins can be dangerous and subject to abuse, but using that type of argument to push your own values barrow to argue against euthanasia is not a strong position of logic in my view.




Well said dalek.

Completely agree Julia.


----------



## Julia (27 June 2009)

peterh said:


> "What I don't understand about people with these views is why you as a group (not getting at you as an individual) are so determined that other people should not have the right to similarly determine their own view?"
> 
> Where did that come from? You have your view, I've got mine. I'm guessing we would disagree on most topics but theoretically Australia is a democracy so that shouldn't be a problem.



Well, that's where you're quite wrong.   Repeated surveys have shown that more than 80% of the Australian population want voluntary euthanasia.
But our politicians are for the most part so called Christians who believe they have the right to impose their views (which are as yours) on the entire population.

The Northern Territory had the gumption to go its own way and instituted legislation about ten years ago.  It had plenty of safeguards as I have previously detailed and was working well.  However, the esteemed Kevin Andrews of the Howard government supported by the Tony Abbott etc cabal, and no doubt Howard himself, decided that the views of Northern Territorians were of no matter, and ditto the legislative capacity of the government, and simply wiped out the legislation.

So, Peter, that is 'where that comes from'.  Plus the fact that the current government is similarly disposed to place their own personal agendas on the population at large, viz just one example the soon to be effected internet filter.   I expect you're completely in favour of any sites which discuss the right to end one's own life being inaccessible when this happens.



> The point I'm trying to make about euthanasia is that we need to think about where these decisions could possibly take us, and I don't like some (possibly all) of the possibilities.



If the law has the necessary safeguards it will take us nowhere other than simply allowing perfectly rational individuals to choose the time of their own death.  Nothing more.  This is a cliche which is perpetually trotted out and means diddely squat.



> The doctor-patient relationship can be weakened.



Nonsense.   No single doctor is ever going to make this decision.  The N.T. legislation had four doctors being required to agree that the ending of the person's life was a completely rational decision.




> When the medical profession becomes involved in the killing, the delicate trust relationship between patient and doctor is undermined.



One of the things I most dislike about you people who are anti the right to choose is your insistent use of emotive terminology.  e.g. Killing.
I have addressed your assertion of the patient/doctor relationship above.

You are ignoring the ironic fact that euthanasia is practised all the time anyway by doctors increasing the dose of life ending drugs.   We simply want this to be made legal.




> Patients might become more fearful of doctors and health care workers, and doctors and health care workers could become desensitised. The taking of a human life is just another procedure.



You could apply this sort of emotive reasoning (?) oxymoron? to anything at all, as Dalek has pointed out.  Silly, really.





> Legal euthanasia sends out the message that "some lives are not worth living." To solve the problems of the suffering by killing them does not help the next suffering person, it sends signals of despair and helplessness.



Ah, you are at least partially correct here.   Some lives are definitely not worth living when the patient has no control over bodily functions, cannot do anything for themselves, endures each day and night in intolerable pain despite the best palliative care available.  Who are you to say that people should have to endure this ?




> Currently very few people request euthenasia, and many then change their mind



How do you know?   Please provide some link to such stats.



> . But once legalised, it may well seem to be an option to many people, simply because it is legal. Indeed, people may feel they have a duty to be killed.



If such a perversion of thinking were to occur, it would be sorted out amongst the psychiatric assessment.
Another red herring.





> There are not rights without corresponding duties. If society goes down the path of legalised euthanasia, this right to die will lead to its corollary, the duty to kill.



Nonsense.  Again, the legislation and safeguards would deal with this.




> Once a society has said that its citizens have the right to die, it will be forced to provide the means to do so. Once legalised, it is possible that doctors may one day face lawsuits if they violate someone's rights by not killing them.



Well, if someone were to resuscitate me when my Advance Health Directive specifically says I do not want this to happen, I would indeed be sueing
the health authority concerned.


----------



## Calliope (27 June 2009)

Excellent post Julia. You certainly demolished petrh's nonsensensical arguments.


----------



## So_Cynical (27 June 2009)

Calliope said:


> Excellent post Julia. You certainly demolished petrh's nonsensensical arguments.




Agreed...Julia said it so much better than i could.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 June 2009)

I was speaking to a local ambo the other day, sorry a paramedic as they are now known. 

I had heard of a doctor who had tattooed on his chest "do not resuscitate" and asked the ambo how he would go with the Queensland Ambulance if they were called to him.

He told me that the doctor is quite famous in ambo circles, but that there is a directive to resuscitate him, as he could have changed his mind a few moments before they were called.

So the compulsory denial of death is another element in this whole debate.

Nobody is allowed to die. What a farce.

gg


----------



## gav (27 June 2009)

Julia said:


> You are ignoring the ironic fact that euthanasia is practised all the time anyway by doctors increasing the dose of life ending drugs.   We simply want this to be made legal.




Do doctors actually do this?  Considering euthanasia is currently illegal, how can this be allowed happen?  Why are they not held responsible?


----------



## darkside (27 June 2009)

_Julia_,  I had just about finished reading this thread and had been putting the dot points on my vitriolic reply to  a post in here when i read your redress to it , i must say it put mine to shame and made me proud to know that there are people in the community like yourself willing to stand up for the basic rights of others in dire circumstances.Keep it real , and don't give up the fight , oh and give yourself a pat on the back .


----------



## MrBurns (27 June 2009)

gav said:


> Do doctors actually do this?  Considering euthanasia is currently illegal, how can this be allowed happen?  Why are they not held responsible?




When you're in pain they sedate you, and they can increase the dose to where you stop breathing, not illegal just a gentle assist.

Whats needed is the right to intervene earlier then that before it gets too bad.


----------



## So_Cynical (27 June 2009)

gav said:


> Do doctors actually do this?  Considering euthanasia is currently illegal, how can this be allowed happen?  Why are they not held responsible?




Its done because that's the reality of life...and death.

Some people have injury's or conditions that make life not viable...think 
advanced cancers, massive head injury's and loss of brain function etc.


----------



## Calliope (27 June 2009)

gav said:


> Do doctors actually do this?  Considering euthanasia is currently illegal, how can this be allowed happen?  Why are they not held responsible?




My wife died some years ago with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Her life was a misery and she was in and out of hospital all the time. At home we had an oxygen concentrator. Her last four weeks were in hospital where she was on a subcutaneous morphine infusion. She drifted in and out of conscienceness.  

Her quality of life was zero. Our doctor and the various specialists who treated her and the nurses were very compassionate people. She probably could have lingered on for another few months, except for the compassion of her pulmonary specialist.

I have no idea whether she died because the morphine was increased or the oxygen was cut off, but I am eternally gratefull to that specialist, for my wife's sake.

I hope that answers your question. I hope you will never be in similar circumstances.


----------



## MrBurns (27 June 2009)

So sorry for you Calliope , very good of you to share it, thanks.


----------



## Medici (27 June 2009)

This is a dilemma which i will find my self later in my life.
I lost my Dat and Mom to cancer, fortunately they did not suffer for long (my mom has been given morphine).
Q ?. 
What should i do later in my life when there is nobody to look after me when i may be seriously ill with no hope at all or in the age when i cannot look after my self. My brain tell me what is going on and i know that my body is good for nothing and i cannot even make to the toilet.
For any outsider i am vegetable.
If i cold put my hand on a pill i would be happy to us it and go with dignity.


----------



## darkside (27 June 2009)

MrBurns said:


> So sorry for you Calliope , very good of you to share it, thanks.




My sentiments exactly , thank you for sharing with us Calliope, i could not for one second imagine how painfull that would be for you .


----------



## Datsun Disguise (27 June 2009)

This is a very modern question - born of the incredible advances in medicine over the last 60 or so years. As we get better at keeping people alive (and that is our default setting - the survival instinct is strong) I am sure that we move past the points in the care where the patient has moved past the instinct to survive to the acceptance that it is time to go. The point being that without our advances in palliative care most people may not have reached this point. They most probably died grasping at life. 

For me, if I can reach the point where I decide that it is time to go, and am able to exercise that choice then I will feel truly blessed.

I would bet my last dollar that everyone here has known of people who have died due to cancer - I've known people who have died quickly and slowly. Whichever path they travelled, the phrase that _everyone_ always uses is something like - "I am just taking comfort knowing that they are no longer suffering / in a better place."

A painful death should not be inflicted on anyone, that's  called torture.


----------



## darkside (27 June 2009)

Datsun Disguise said:


> "I am just taking comfort knowing that they are no longer suffering / in a better place."
> 
> A painful death should not be inflicted on anyone, that's  called torture.




Nice , and so true , if i have heard it once i have heard it 100 times, thank you for reminding us of that.


----------



## Medici (27 June 2009)

A painful death should not be inflicted on anyone, that's called torture.

Thank You Datsun -


----------



## Julia (27 June 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I was speaking to a local ambo the other day, sorry a paramedic as they are now known.
> 
> I had heard of a doctor who had tattooed on his chest "do not resuscitate" and asked the ambo how he would go with the Queensland Ambulance if they were called to him.
> 
> ...



Well, gg, you can tell those paramedics that they are actually breaking the law.  It is a criminal offence to resuscitate a person against their wishes, if there is no hope of a recovery.  Obviously this last phrase is important, and possibly the paramedics could claim they lacked sufficient knowledge to determine whether the person could recover.

The people who care about me know that if ever I'm in such a situation, they are to make it clear to any attending medical personnel that they will be sued to hell and high water if they ignore my legal instructions.





gav said:


> Do doctors actually do this?  Considering euthanasia is currently illegal, how can this be allowed happen?  Why are they not held responsible?



Gav, the notion that they should be 'held responsible' is quite wrong.
We are talking about dying people here.  Doctors commonly are humane enough to - within the bounds of their ethical responsibilities - use medication to a level where death occurs sooner rather than later.
All they are doing is limiting the already considerable degree of suffering the patient has been experiencing.

Calliope's post illustrates this perfectly.

This is a very serious subject but it does have its lighter side.  To that end, I'll relate here the circumstances of my mother's death.

She had a gangrenous leg as a complication of diabetes.  She was 100% aware and rational and had previously completed an Advance Health Directive saying she did not wish any life saving measures to be undertaken.
This was in New Zealand.   I was phoned by the hospital specialist and asked to come on the basis that she had probably four or five days to live.

When I arrived her pain was well controlled and she was able to rationally discuss her situation.  She was just short of 80 and considered that she had enjoyed a great life.  She had done all she wanted to and made a considerable contribution to her community.  She was completely happy to die.   

(One thing I thought wrong and very peculiar was that I was told by the medical staff that I could override her decision if I thought she should have her life saved.  Obviously I declined to do anything so presumptuous.)

That established, she was not treated for the now systemic infection, but given enough morphine to cope with the pain.

After we'd talked for a while and I'd received all her 'instructions' about what to do re the funeral etc., she smiled brightly and said "well, that's all.  You can go and tell the nurses I'm ready to die now."  I laughed and suggested perhaps it wasn't quite that straightforward.  

But in order to honour her wishes I did convey that wish to the nursing staff who took it quite seriously and said that I needed to explain to her that when they next came into the room and asked if she was in any pain, she was to say yes, and they were then justified in increasing the dose of morphine.  OK, I explained this to her.  Fine with her.

A little later the nurse came in and asked the question.  Mother looked quite surprised and said, no, she wasn't in any pain at all.  The morphine had affected her memory.  So we went through it again, and the next time the nurse came in and asked the same question she remembered to say 'yes'.

So by this gentle means which left the staff completely covered, the morphine was increased to the necessary level.

If a death can ever be described as 'good', then I consider that my mother experienced such a death.   When I remember it, I smile, and that's what she would have wanted.

So when we say that euthanasia is currently practised, it's on the basis of the therapeutic level of drugs being whatever is needed to control pain, and if the side effect of that pain control is death, then so be it.
So perhaps not exactly as you may have imagined, Gav.



MrBurns said:


> When you're in pain they sedate you, and they can increase the dose to where you stop breathing, not illegal just a gentle assist.
> 
> Whats needed is the right to intervene earlier then that before it gets too bad.



Yes, exactly right, Mr Burns.
The difficulty lies not so much in the acute and semi-acute situations where drugs for pain control are routinely used, but the more chronic illnesses such as the last stages of multiple sclerosis, injury causing quadriplegia etc where there is no clinical indication for morphine to be used.





Calliope said:


> My wife died some years ago with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Her life was a misery and she was in and out of hospital all the time. At home we had an oxygen concentrator. Her last four weeks were in hospital where she was on a subcutaneous morphine infusion. She drifted in and out of conscienceness.
> 
> Her quality of life was zero. Our doctor and the various specialists who treated her and the nurses were very compassionate people. She probably could have lingered on for another few months, except for the compassion of her pulmonary specialist.
> 
> ...



Thank you, Calliope, for such a contribution to the discussion.  Much appreciated.




Medici said:


> This is a dilemma which i will find my self later in my life.
> I lost my Dat and Mom to cancer, fortunately they did not suffer for long (my mom has been given morphine).
> Q ?.
> What should i do later in my life when there is nobody to look after me when i may be seriously ill with no hope at all or in the age when i cannot look after my self. My brain tell me what is going on and i know that my body is good for nothing and i cannot even make to the toilet.
> ...



Medici, you have summed up the reasons for voluntary euthanasia.   This is what we all fear.  

For some years I was a volunteer visitor in nursing homes, spending time with people who had no family.   Eventually I had to stop it because I found it so distressing.

People are left in their own waste for hours, often more than a day, not because the staff don't care, but because there are simply not enough of them, so lacking is the federal government's funding to the nursing home sector.

Recently in this area patients in a nursing home suffered multiple mice bites to their faces, hands and neck because of an unchecked mice plague in the nursing home.  The old people concerned were unable to move, or brush off the mice, neither could they call for help.

Five years ago my father suffered a serious medical event and was subsequently unable to care for himself, and required constant nursing attention.   His mind was unaffected, other than he was utterly distressed at finding himself dependent and in a nursing home which he hated.
For weeks he begged me to help him end his life.  He wanted me to take him back to his house where his rifle was stored, to leave him there for half an hour, and then come back, at which stage he would have shot himself.
I had to explain that I couldn't do this because I would be deemed guilty of assisting a suicide and would go to jail.

Eventually, on the coldest night of the year, when he had figured that the tide was highest, he told the nursing staff not to disturb him, and made his way out a back door, somehow got the 100metres down to the beach, and drowned himself.   When I was asked the next morning to identify his body, he was covered in lacerations from the rocks and coral.

I would simply ask those who are so determined that their God should decide the time of death for everyone, not just the believers, what right you have to say that people should have to go to such levels to end their desperation and misery.


----------



## darkside (27 June 2009)

Julia . 

I have nothing to say , but after reading your post , and wiping tears from my eyes , no reasonable decent person could ever dispute your reasoning or actions. 
I hope everyone who has contributed to this thread has another good hard look at themselves and what they believe is right and wrong  before they decide that they would begrudge someone a dignified and clinical exit.


----------



## MrBurns (27 June 2009)

Oh Julia what can I say.

I'm sad and angry.

That encapsulates what this thread is all about.


----------



## Calliope (27 June 2009)

> I would simply ask those who are so determined that their God should decide the time of death for everyone, not just the believers, what right you have to say that people should have to go to such levels to end their desperation and misery.




It's a harrowing story Julia. I just hope I am never in the situation your father was in. I have a reliable final exit kit. My only hope is that when the time comes I have the capability of using it. The law makes sure that we can never ask anyone to assist us.


----------



## MrBurns (27 June 2009)

I know someone who plans to open a place where you can take dope when you get to that stage, friends and trusted friends of friends only, marijuana is a great pain reliever I'm told.


----------



## MRC & Co (27 June 2009)

Touching Julia.  Thx for the insight into yourself.


----------



## Green08 (27 June 2009)

Thank you Julia for sharing your beautiful story. The strength of your mother and your repect of her wishes.

I can understand that. My Nana died so unexpectedly and fast from colon cancer which had spread to a malignant stage by the time they operated and said there was nothing they could do, but "close her up again".

So the next 3 weeks she wanted to be with all her family. There were 30 of us camped in the house taking turns to read to her, feed her, I loved giving Nana massages of the hand and feet if made her so happy. Then like your mum, she said one day "I want to go, I love you all so much" she closed her eyes, and her breathing stopped, she passed away when she wanted with alot of love.  27 of us were there at the time and we all placed a hand on her body when she left. We were grief stricken but also happy she had the final days as she wished.

My children were there, my son 4 with autism went up to her when we left and patted her on the head saying "love nana be happy, bye bye" and gave her a kiss on the cheek. I don't fear death from seeing this.


----------



## Bobby (27 June 2009)

Sad to read the story's , E.G. terrible Julia that this  happened in our so called civilized society . 

 I'd like a bottle of Nembutal ready for when the time comes , I will decide my exit .
Not to keen to go to Mexico to get any , but would consider paying top dollar for getting some in the near future .

Stupid stupid stupid ''' when you can take your old dog thats suffering incurable pain down to the local vet for a shot of Nembutal but Can't ask your Doc for same ! 

Notice the price was only $30 US a bottle in Mexico back in 07 , check it out now .


----------



## knocker (28 June 2009)

Yes rather sad to reach the ripe old age of 80 and decide to give it away. Oh well.


----------



## So_Cynical (28 June 2009)

Bobby said:


> I'd like a bottle of Nembutal ready for when the time comes , I will decide my exit .
> Not to keen to go to Mexico to get any , but would consider paying top dollar for getting some in the near future .
> 
> Stupid stupid stupid ''' when you can take your old dog thats suffering incurable pain down to the local vet for a shot of Nembutal but Can't ask your Doc for same !
> ...




Coincidentally i had a look a few weeks ago...something like 600 a vile/bottle i think...and the 
fine for illegal importation into Australia was 200K from memory.


----------



## Bobby (28 June 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> Coincidentally i had a look a few weeks ago...something like 600 a vile/bottle i think...and the
> fine for illegal importation into Australia was 200K from memory.




Yep that sounds about right , seems the Mexicans have noticed how desperate the Aussies are  

As for the fine , who gives a sh*t about that when all your thinking about is a peaceful exit ?


----------



## Julia (28 June 2009)

Bobby said:


> Yep that sounds about right , seems the Mexicans have noticed how desperate the Aussies are
> 
> As for the fine , who gives a sh*t about that when all your thinking about is a peaceful exit ?



The problem is, Bobby, that along with the fine, usually between $300 - $400, they confiscate the Nembutal.  So your plans for a peaceful exit have failed.

Phillip Nitschke discussed this in detail at his meeting.

It can also be bought in a few other countries.  

It's fraught with potential problems.   He discussed other methods/drugs  because of the difficulties of bringing Nembutal back into the country.


----------



## Calliope (17 July 2009)

The following letter appeared in The Australian today.




> YOUR report ("Alarm as death pacts on rise”, 16/7) of how the eminent conductor Edward Downes and his terminally ill wife, accompanied by their two children, travelled from England to the Dignitas suicide clinic in Switzerland where they were assisted to die, gives encouragement not alarm to supporters of voluntary euthanasia in Australia.
> 
> My wife Dorothy and I have enjoyed long, good and happy lives together and are aware that they are soon coming to an end. I’m 83 and Dorothy will be 80 in September. We both have ongoing health difficulties and inevitable ageing difficulties and we have talked about the Swiss option and whether we should seek it out and have that small amount of dignity in death that it offers while it is still open to us, as Edward and Joan Downes did, but why should we have to go to Switzerland? Suicide itself has not been a crime in Australia for years.
> 
> ...




Kep Enderby held several ministries in the Whitlam government, including Attorney General. He was also a Justice in the NSW Supreme Court from 1982.to 1992.


----------



## Knobby22 (17 July 2009)

You have got to admire Edward Downes for this.

This is the type of suicide that you can't criticise. Well done!


----------



## nunthewiser (17 July 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> You have got to admire Edward Downes for this.
> 
> This is the type of suicide that you can't criticise. Well done!




WTF!!!!


bullsheet !

they went with there kids and had a mass suicide?? there kids also ?

if this is the case u guys are bleedin off ya rockers if you think this is to be applauded

please forgive the outburst if it was just the oldies that decided to die as im merely reading that news article posted here and do not know the facts 

BUT if its true that there children joined in the killoff i find it totally sick and think its VERY VERY VERY bloody wrong


----------



## awg (17 July 2009)

Hi Nun,

u can relax, they were elderly and married 54 yrs

the "kids" are alright


----------



## Calliope (17 July 2009)

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-edward-downes15-2009jul15,0,4324364.story



> The longtime BBC Philharmonic and Royal Opera conductor, known for championing British composers, and his wife died at an assisted-suicide clinic in Switzerland. Both were ailing.
> 
> July 15, 2009
> 
> ...


----------



## nunthewiser (17 July 2009)

awg said:


> Hi Nun,
> 
> u can relax, they were elderly and married 54 yrs
> 
> the "kids" are alright





yeah well thats cool with me , if they wanna end it together , fair enough , i was a little bit concerned that the kids were going to also


----------



## Happy (17 July 2009)

Julia said:


> ...
> 
> It can also be bought in a few other countries.
> 
> It's fraught with potential problems.   He discussed other methods/drugs  because of the difficulties of bringing Nembutal back into the country.




I wander how hard is it to make?
Possibly another line of income for certain groups of underworld.


----------



## Julia (17 July 2009)

Happy, I expect if it was easy and straightforward, someone would be doing it here.   Easier to get it from a vet than a doctor.


----------



## Julia (17 July 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> You have got to admire Edward Downes for this.
> 
> This is the type of suicide that you can't criticise. Well done!



The capacity to die in this way is all many people of Mr Downes age want.
At that stage of their lives, people should not have to travel to the other side of the world and die away from everything familiar.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 July 2009)

Julia said:


> The capacity to die in this way is all many people of Mr Downes age want.
> At that stage of their lives, people should not have to travel to the other side of the world and die away from everything familiar.




I have changed my views through this thread and maybe the Dignitis centre is a good model.

If we had separate places set up for suicide  in Australia with proper arrangements and staff such as the Dignitis centre then this would, for me, resolve many of the negatives I can see with practising Euthanasia. 

We would probably ruin it with red tape in this country however and have people filling their last months doing forms.

I know that in India there is a place you can go to when you know you are going to die soon. Though they don't help you on the way, that place is also successful and popular.


----------



## Chris45 (18 July 2009)

Re Garpal Gumnut’s post #260:
I remember hearing a few years ago about a US nurse who had tattooed on her arm, “No life support, pain relief only”.

Recently I asked my doctor if that would work here. (He’s probably got me marked down as a suicide risk now.)

He said similar to what your ambo friend said and that the medics would ignore it because it might have been done while drunk or something.

I asked him, “What about a wristband?”

He said that might work because it would be a conscious decision to wear the wristband each day, but the paramedics are still required to resuscitate and stabilize the patient so that the medics can properly assess the situation.

If I’m wearing the wristband and unconscious and seriously mangled in a car accident and my life is slowly ebbing away, as per "God’s will", I think the last thing I want is for someone to interfere with the process and stabilize me so I can spend my remaining days as a dribbling half-dead quadriplegic in a wheelchair or something. (No offence meant to all those happy life-loving quadriplegics.)

How can we stop the medical profession from interfering with our wishes to be allowed to die when our number comes up?


----------



## Chris45 (18 July 2009)

Recently I saw a 2004 documentary on ABC1 titled “Mademoiselle and the Doctor”. It was about a French born West Australian academic, Lisette Nigot, who terminated her life after deciding she did not want to live beyond 80 years of age, when she felt her mind and body would start to deteriorate. If you missed it you can download the DivX copy via uTorrent. 

She was in good health and apparently not depressed but she feared that if she waited any longer she might not have the ability to suicide when the time came, because of our restrictive laws, so she felt compelled to make a “preemptive strike”.

In her final statement she wrote, “Since lawful assistance to die at one’s chosen moment is not accepted in this cowardly restrictive society, I am taking the matter into my own hands.”

It’s just pathetic that our gutless politicians refuse to face up to the issue and allow people to decide their own fate, and force them to take actions such as this. Instead, they take the easy path and pass legislation to ban the publication of material that could be considered incitement to suicide, and try to censor the internet so people can’t access the information they want.


----------



## veni_vedi_vici (18 July 2009)

Hi,

I think that Euthanasia should be made legal within Australia but with very strict legal guidlines. In saying this, however, there is really more than one side to the argument which makes implementing the laws rather problematic. If Euthanasia was made legal within Australia I believe it would open up loopholes within our legal system, as not everyone is nice and caring within our society.

No sane politician either would pass statutes allowing Euthanasia as they would risk losing a large percentage of their votes from the church who play an influential and rather crucial role in politics and who condemn 'direct Euthanasia'.

Lastly, something which i'm not sure has been mentioned yet, but the psychological effects that will possibly burden the individual who is complicit in the taking of their friend or family members life. 

I know this has been a rather short response to such a contentious issue but I did not really have time to go into any depth.

In the near future, however, I dont see Euthanasia being made legal within the confines of the Australian legal system because of the many disadvantages associated with it.

Veni


----------



## Julia (18 July 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Re Garpal Gumnut’s post #260:
> I remember hearing a few years ago about a US nurse who had tattooed on her arm, “No life support, pain relief only”.
> 
> Recently I asked my doctor if that would work here. (He’s probably got me marked down as a suicide risk now.)
> ...



Completely agree, Chris.  The best we can do in Australia is to have a document which is variously called a "Living Will" or an "Advance Health Directive", depending on which State you live in.  

I'm only familiar with the Advance Health Directive which applies in Qld.
This is a legally binding document which you fill out in conjunction with your doctor who attests to your capacity to make the decisions referred to in the document.

You can, e.g. cover the situation such as you referred to above, i.e. that your life is not to be saved if this will result in your being quadriplegic (or any other stipulation that is unacceptable to you).

However, I've heard of instances where doctors have ignored these documents or have claimed ignorance of their existence.

If you're in a car accident, it's pretty unlikely that you will have your AHDwith you.   I carry with me in my wallet a card which attests briefly to my wishes and stipulates that the AHD must be consulted before engaging in any treatment.  A copy is on file at the local hospital.

Obviously whoever is closest to you needs to be aware of the existence of such a document and be prepared to advocate on your behalf in the event of a serious event.





Chris45 said:


> Recently I saw a 2004 documentary on ABC1 titled “Mademoiselle and the Doctor”. It was about a French born West Australian academic, Lisette Nigot, who terminated her life after deciding she did not want to live beyond 80 years of age, when she felt her mind and body would start to deteriorate. If you missed it you can download the DivX copy via uTorrent.
> 
> She was in good health and apparently not depressed but she feared that if she waited any longer she might not have the ability to suicide when the time came, because of our restrictive laws, so she felt compelled to make a “preemptive strike”.
> 
> ...



The case of Lisette was discussed at length during Philip Nitschke's workshop.
Clearly, an intelligent, thoughtful woman whose decision made complete sense.


----------



## darkside (18 July 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Recently I saw a 2004 documentary on ABC1 titled “Mademoiselle and the Doctor”. It was about a French born West Australian academic, Lisette Nigot, who terminated her life after deciding she did not want to live beyond 80 years of age, when she felt her mind and body would start to deteriorate. If you missed it you can download the DivX copy via uTorrent.
> 
> She was in good health and apparently not depressed but she feared that if she waited any longer she might not have the ability to suicide when the time came, because of our restrictive laws, so she felt compelled to make a “preemptive strike”.
> 
> ...




Chris45, i also watched that program and my greatest fear is definitely not death , but the act of dying in pain and without dignity chills me to the bone.

What i got out of it was , The definition of Voluntary is acting at one’s own choice. Euthanasia means a good death

On behalf of all those that are suffering or have suffered without the respite of a legally sanctioned Voluntary death, let it be known that we who have escaped the mind-numbing effects of religious mumbo-jumbo, hold all those blocking the introduction of Legal Voluntary Euthanasia in absolute contempt.

Legal Voluntary Euthanasia is a personal right of everyone in need, the most important and final right that any of us may one day have to call upon.


----------



## Julia (18 July 2009)

> I think that Euthanasia should be made legal within Australia but with very strict legal guidlines. In saying this, however, there is really more than one side to the argument which makes implementing the laws rather problematic. If Euthanasia was made legal within Australia I believe it would open up loopholes within our legal system, as not everyone is nice and caring within our society.
> 
> No sane politician either would pass statutes allowing Euthanasia as they would risk losing a large percentage of their votes from the church who play an influential and rather crucial role in politics and who condemn 'direct Euthanasia'.



Well, the politicians who passed such a statute in the Northern Territory a decade ago seemed pretty sane to me.  And that law had multiple safeguards and was working well.  Then Kevin *****Andrews of the Howard government (a godbotherer of course) had to interfere and strip the Territory of its perfectly OK law.

You make a reasonable point about the church.  However, that doesn't really stand up in the face of 80% of the population being in favour of voluntary euthanasia.   It's far more about the religious convictions of individual politicians than a concern about the church as an institution.

One of the few pluses of Bob Brown and the Greens in general as far as I'm concerned is that they have a sensible view about voluntary euthanasia.
But I don't see either of the main parties coming to share this view in the immediate future.
Perhaps as the economic reality of all the ageing population dragging on the public purse begins to bite, some modification of the godbotherers' idealistic rubbish might occur.





> Lastly, something which i'm not sure has been mentioned yet, but the psychological effects that will possibly burden the individual who is complicit in the taking of their friend or family members life.



Such complicity is fraught with the main problem of it being illegal to assist suicide in any way.   It's possible for a life sentence to be imposed on conviction.   

From a personal point of view, I'd have been far less adversely psychologically affected if I had been able to help in the suicides of two family members .   When someone you love is in absolute desperation and distress, feeling helpless and unable to assist is simply devastating.



> In the near future, however, I dont see Euthanasia being made legal within the confines of the Australian legal system because of the many disadvantages associated with it.
> 
> Veni



I agree that it's unlikely at least in the next decade.
What are the other 'disadvantages' you see associated with voluntary euthanasia?
Btw I think "voluntary" is an important descriptor.  One of the hysterical claims that is made by opponents is that cliche about the 'slippery slope' wherein every second person over the age of 70 will automatically become a victim of the law if legislation is passed to allow voluntary euthanasia in limited circumstances.


----------



## veni_vedi_vici (19 July 2009)

Julia,

I'm sorry disadvantaged was really not the word i was looking for its more problematic.

Really under Rudd he wont legalise it or push to legalise it especially when you look at his own religious beliefs (you can make a loose assumtion as to what they may be as he is quite open about his religious views and beliefs).

In regards to the psychological burdens, i'm not criticising or taking anything away from ur statement, but you really cant know how it will effect you in the long term until you have done it, although everyone is unique. I do agree, however, that the psychological burdens whilst the person is ill are great (I have had a direct experience of this without going into to much detail I am 18 now and when i was 15 a member of my family was seriously ill and for the time i wasnt at school i would spend every waking moment with her even taking time off school to care for her. She eventually died and even though she wasnt in the state in which i would like to have remembered her in and even though she may have been in pain i cherished every last moment. selfish you may say, but not in my mind.), the pope has called for more rights be given to those in this position such as a mother with her new born baby taking time of work. I think this may be a good idea.

Lastly, i'm not sure out of this whether you have ascertained as to my position on voluntary Euthanasia. I am actually pro voluntary Euthanasia but only so far as it is enacted under very strict confines so as not to allow exploitation of the system.

Very kind regards to you Julia.

(on a lighter note, you dont happen to be a teacher do you?)

Veni


----------



## communique (19 July 2009)

I am extremely passionate about this subject.  I watched someone very close to me completely degenerate to wearing a nappy, unable to do anything for himself he was fed, moved and cleaned by someone else.  This person strongly believed in Euthanasia but because of our draconian laws this person was not allowed an assisted suicide.  For five years he existed in this state with absolutely no dignity. Having been very involved with EXIT, the options available were not suitable because he could not travel. Finally, he realised that he was susceptible to pneumonia and did everything in his power to get it.  Finally, he succumbed.

Eighty percent of our population agrees with Euthanasia! The only way we can change the laws in this country is by people power and the media.  I would gladly support a national march highlighting  this cause?


----------



## Chris45 (19 July 2009)

Julia said:


> Completely agree, Chris.  The best we can do in Australia is to have a document which is variously called a "Living Will" or an "Advance Health Directive", depending on which State you live in.



Thanks Julia. I must do something about that.  ... However, the news about doctors ignoring them is a major concern.

Something to consider about wallet cards: I saw an episode of the ABC's MDA series where the enthusiastic young doctor sneakily removed the card from his patient's wallet and then proceeded to treat him regardless of the instructions.

It might be worth considering a difficult-to-remove wristband or tattoo saying, "Before any treatment, consult my AHD".


----------



## Chris45 (19 July 2009)

communique said:


> I am extremely passionate about this subject.  I watched someone very close to me completely degenerate to wearing a nappy, unable to do anything for himself he was fed, moved and cleaned by someone else.  This person strongly believed in Euthanasia but because of our draconian laws this person was not allowed an assisted suicide.  For five years he existed in this state with absolutely no dignity. Having been very involved with EXIT, the options available were not suitable because he could not travel. Finally, he realised that he was susceptible to pneumonia and did everything in his power to get it.  Finally, he succumbed.



This is exactly the sort of situation I fear more than death itself!!!


----------



## awg (19 July 2009)

Julia said:


> I agree that it's unlikely at least in the next decade.
> What are the other 'disadvantages' you see associated with voluntary euthanasia?
> Btw I think "voluntary" is an important descriptor.  One of the hysterical claims that is made by opponents is that cliche about the 'slippery slope' wherein every second person over the age of 70 will automatically become a victim of the law if legislation is passed to allow voluntary euthanasia in limited circumstances.





At the risk of poking my head up, after making some comments regarding preventing suicide in depressed persons on another thread, that didnt seem to come across the way I intended them to.

I am firmly in favor of peoples right to choose Euthanasia, which may seem contradictory, however;

In response to your inquiry, some issues;

I have been in the same position you were when an elderly relative begged me to fetch a rifle and allow him to shoot himself.

Everyone, me included, thought he was sure to die, but he recovered, and lived several more years with quite reasonable quality of life.

I am of the opinion that, whilst he certainly wished to be euthanased at the time, he was, on balance, glad that didnt happen 

Also, it is my belief that that many people with serious illness, become extremely depressed, which then means technically, that the psychiatrists wont agree to euthanasia.

Family members (and medical professionals) do not agree on the course of action.

"Involuntary" euthanasia...a very complex issue, I'll leave it at that.

I give no credence to religious prohibitions, but many do

You can pluck some really hard ones out, say for instance a case of Anorexia Nervosa, when do you give up?


----------



## Julia (7 August 2009)

Two news reports in thelast 24 hours which further demonstrate the need for open discussion (and hopefully law change) on the right to die.

A man in his 70's who developed septic shock, all his organs shut down, and he was placed on life support.  He had a document making clear his wish not to be kept alive in such a circumstance.
Did the hospital respect his clearly defined wishes?  No.  They applied to the Court for a decision.  Fortunately the judge ruled that the patient had made his wishes clear and the hospital must remove the life support.

A patient in a nursing home, a quadriplegic, who is being kept alive by feeding into a tube in his stomach.  He does not want to live like this and has requested the feeding cease.  The nursing home continues to force this and he, of course, is helpless to do anything about it.

I simply can't think of any more gross violation of our basic human rights than what is happening in both these cases which probably are replicated hundreds of times across the country.


----------



## Mr J (7 August 2009)

I don't understand why people would insist on keeping them alive.


----------



## MrBurns (7 August 2009)

Julia said:


> A patient in a nursing home, a quadriplegic, who is being kept alive by feeding into a tube in his stomach.  He does not want to live like this and has requested the feeding cease.  The nursing home continues to force this and he, of course, is helpless to do anything about it.




Saw that report and the grinning do gooder taking delight in running other peoples lives, " oh we should be showing him why he has reasons to live - big grin " pull his spine out and see how fast the optimism fades.

Tragic case.


----------



## skyQuake (7 August 2009)

Julia said:


> Two news reports in thelast 24 hours which further demonstrate the need for open discussion (and hopefully law change) on the right to die.
> 
> A man in his 70's who developed septic shock, all his organs shut down, and he was placed on life support.  He had a document making clear his wish not to be kept alive in such a circumstance.
> Did the hospital respect his clearly defined wishes?  No.  They applied to the Court for a decision.  Fortunately the judge ruled that the patient had made his wishes clear and the hospital must remove the life support.




They just wanna cover the a$$e$, didn't want to get sued for negligence. Also with the document about not wanting hospital treatment, that opens a can of worms. Was he sane when he wrote that? Does he want to change his mind now facing imminent death? Was it a forgery so his heirs can claim his assets? etc




> A patient in a nursing home, a quadriplegic, who is being kept alive by feeding into a tube in his stomach.  He does not want to live like this and has requested the feeding cease.  The nursing home continues to force this and he, of course, is helpless to do anything about it.
> 
> I simply can't think of any more gross violation of our basic human rights than what is happening in both these cases which probably are replicated hundreds of times across the country.




This on the other hand is just plain wrong. Nursing homes syphoning money from the edlerly, then the hospitals syphoning the rest (and prob into debt) before they die.


----------



## Trevor_S (7 August 2009)

Julia said:


> A man in his 70's who developed septic shock, all his organs shut down, and he was placed on life support.  He had a document making clear his wish not to be kept alive in such a circumstance.
> Did the hospital respect his clearly defined wishes?  No.  They applied to the Court for a decision.  Fortunately the judge ruled that the patient had made his wishes clear and the hospital must remove the life support.




That's a little disnegious isn't it ?  My understanding was they applied to the court to make sure it was okay to follow his wishes.  Once the Court said it was okay, away they want.  Last thing the hospital would want is some 1/2 ass'd relative taking them to court for being callous ?  No harm in a double check IMO.

I am all for euthanasia, always have been, it's an affront to have other people make that decision for me.  As was my Dad, who ended up riddled with cancer, rotting him and his body and brain away away, imploring to be let go but kept on the edge until he succumbed.


----------



## Julia (8 August 2009)

Trevor_S said:


> That's a little disnegious isn't it ?



What does 'disnegious' mean?

Re applying to the court, imo whether it was reasonable or not depends on how long it took.  I sure as hell wouldn't want to be enduring the machinery of life support while days or weeks went by waiting for a court opening.

And this question goes back to the absolute need for a properly executed document like the "Advance Health Directive", regularly reviewed with the person's doctor, thus providing assurance to medical staff that instructions contained in said document are made by person of sound mind etc etc.


----------



## Happy (10 August 2009)

Julia said:


> Two news reports in thelast 24 hours which further demonstrate the need for open discussion (and hopefully law change) on the right to die.
> 
> A man in his 70's who developed septic shock, all his organs shut down, and he was placed on life support.  He had a document making clear his wish not to be kept alive in such a circumstance.
> Did the hospital respect his clearly defined wishes?  No.  They applied to the Court for a decision.  Fortunately the judge ruled that the patient had made his wishes clear and the hospital must remove the life support.
> ...




Removing life support and stopping supply of food in my opinion is quite cruel in itself if one wants painless clean death.

Animals are put to sleep to die, but for some reason Australia all is warried about is ABUSE OF THE SYSTEM.

It tells me only one thig, Australia is corrupt to the core and we have no hope that this will not be abused. Wrong?


----------



## Julia (10 August 2009)

Happy said:


> Removing life support and stopping supply of food in my opinion is quite cruel in itself if one wants painless clean death.



Agree, Happy.  It's far from ideal.  But better than force feeding to keep alive, surely?


----------



## veni_vedi_vici (10 August 2009)

Julia said:


> A patient in a nursing home, a quadriplegic, who is being kept alive by feeding into a tube in his stomach.  He does not want to live like this and has requested the feeding cease.  The nursing home continues to force this and he, of course, is helpless to do anything about it.




There was actually a case in I think the UK I cant re-call the name (dont have time to go through my notes) where a lady was involved in a car crash. She was taken to the hopsital where the surgeon began to work on her. One of the nurses found a card in her pocket saying that, "under no circumstances am I to recieve a blood transfusion" and it was also signed by the lady. The doctor, to save her life did a blood transfusion disregarding the note which in turn saved her life. Once the lady had recovered she sued the hospital for battery and was sucessful in claiming damages (quite problematic as with compensation they try to put the plaintiff in the position they would have been in had the tort not occured - which in this case would have been death).

Just reading your post made me think of that case, and im quite sure that if this was brought to the courts they would find for the plaintiff and enforce an injuction or w/e he/she is seeking.

(ino its a bit of a random rant I had there but just came to mind)

Kind regards,

V


----------



## Julia (10 August 2009)

That's a good example of what can happen, vvv.   But I guess all the successful court outcomes in the world aren't going to make up to the person for a living hell of a life when they did their best to ensure their life would not have been saved in the event of not being able to fully recover.


----------



## gav (13 August 2009)

Julia said:


> A patient in a nursing home, a quadriplegic, who is being kept alive by feeding into a tube in his stomach.  He does not want to live like this and has requested the feeding cease.  The nursing home continues to force this and he, of course, is helpless to do anything about it.




It has been revealed in todays news that this man tried committing suicide in the early 90's because he was depressed - this is before he became a quadriplegic.  

Not the clear-cut case it first appeared to be...


----------



## Happy (13 August 2009)

gav said:


> It has been revealed in todays news that this man tried *committing suicide in the early 90's because he was depressed *- this is before he became a quadriplegic.
> 
> Not the clear-cut case it first appeared to be...





Naughty boy, but also reflection of his surroundings that allowed him to slip into depression.

People start to be depressed most of the time when something goes wrong, then every next step is sort of different, but all lead to similar end if there is no helping event or helping hand to snap out of it.

Being 90 years old is alone good reason to be depressed, wrong?


----------



## James Austin (7 September 2009)

did anyone see this? 

just 3 days remaining if you want to view it.

go to http://www.abc.net.au/iview/
and select "the suicide tourist"

understandably a subject few wish to think about, . . . . . but we all stand in the same queue


----------



## stocksontheblock (8 September 2009)

My view: its an individuals choice, and thus an individual should have the right - without question - to make his or her own decision about what to happen to him or her when the time comes.

Personally, this is irrespective of the nature for the decision. This is not to say that the person should be able to make this sort of decision while in a straight-jacket, locked in a padded cell and doped to the eyeballs. They should be of a reasonably sound mind when the decision or the request is made - whether this be at the time of wanting it done, or when a declaration is made - such as a will.

I guess it’s the last real taboo, and while the majority want it, I don’t think anyone person (or political party) has the balls to be the one to implement it.

My choice should be respected, regardless of the reason for it, and especially regardless of your own values and morals.

If you wish to live/carry on then do so, if I wish to die/end it then I should be allowed to do so.


----------



## gav (8 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> My view: its an individuals choice, and thus an individual should have the right - without question - to make his or her own decision about what to happen to him or her when the time comes.




Well then an individual should also have the right - without question - to make his or her own decision about what they put in their own body.  Just because the govt says smoking dope is illegal (or any other illegal drug for that matter), who are they to say what I can/cannot do with my own body?  ESPECIALLY when there are legal drugs that cause massive health problems in society Eg. ciggies and alcohol... 



stocksontheblock said:


> Personally, this is irrespective of the nature for the decision. This is not to say that the person should be able to make this sort of decision while in a straight-jacket, locked in a padded cell and doped to the eyeballs. They should be of a reasonably sound mind when the decision or the request is made - whether this be at the time of wanting it done, or when a declaration is made - such as a will.
> 
> I guess it’s the last real taboo, and while the majority want it, I don’t think anyone person (or political party) has the balls to be the one to implement it.
> 
> ...




So a healthy person who is sound of mind wishes to die, that's OK?  

stocksontheblock, I'm not against euthanasia but it's not as simple as you make it sound...


----------



## Julia (8 September 2009)

> stocksontheblock, I'm not against euthanasia but it's not as simple as you make it sound...



That's true, it's not simple.
And even finding a foolproof means of dying isn't easy.
(With apologies to anyone who finds this comment too graphic.)


----------



## So_Cynical (8 September 2009)

James Austin said:


> did anyone see this?
> 
> just 3 days remaining if you want to view it.
> 
> ...




I saw the last 25 minutes of it when it first aired a week or so ago...great doco
and a great, proper outcome for all concerned...the way it should be the world over.


----------



## Happy (9 September 2009)

gav said:


> ...
> 
> So a healthy person who is sound of mind wishes to die, that's OK?
> 
> stocksontheblock, I'm not against euthanasia but it's not as simple as you make it sound...





People who commit suicide make it OK, euthanasia trick would merely reduce the pain factor, also hit and miss in some circumstances and sometimes horrifically disfigured rest of life.


----------



## stocksontheblock (9 September 2009)

gav said:


> Well then an individual should also have the right - without question - to make his or her own decision about what they put in their own body.  Just because the govt says smoking dope is illegal (or any other illegal drug for that matter), who are they to say what I can/cannot do with my own body?  ESPECIALLY when there are legal drugs that cause massive health problems in society Eg. ciggies and alcohol...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think you missed the point, the person should be healthy and of sound mind when making the decision that that's what they want, whether ill or not, the decision to end their life should be made when "sane".

So, if you are in a bad way now then to die you should at least be of a sound mind. If you wish to die later in life due to certain circumstances yet you are preparing for it now, then again you should be of sound mind.

As for as simple as that, yes it is. Why should it not be as simple as that. My choice, my choice is a simple one. How is it not that simple, it only becomes complicated when other people are involved in making or changing or objecting to my individual decision.

As for your other comment about drugs and the like, I'm not going to argue that one with you. I guess there are just a few more consequences to those elements of choice that have a broader effect.


----------



## gav (9 September 2009)

stocksontheblock said:


> As for your other comment about drugs and the like, I'm not going to argue that one with you. I guess there are just a few more consequences to those elements of choice that have a broader effect.




Young healthy sane people killing themselves does not have any consequences? 

And why won't you argue about the use of illegal drugs?  Your words, and I quote:



stocksontheblock said:


> My view: its an individuals choice, and thus an individual should have the right - without question - to make his or her own decision about what to happen to him or her when the time comes.






stocksontheblock said:


> My choice should be respected, regardless of the reason for it, and especially regardless of your own values and morals.
> 
> If you wish to live/carry on then do so, if I wish to die/end it then I should be allowed to do so.




If you believe an individual has the right to end their own life, why shouldn't they have the right to do what they want to their body when they are alive???  After all, it is their own body - they should be able to do what they like with it...


----------



## stocksontheblock (10 September 2009)

gav said:


> Young healthy sane people killing themselves does not have any consequences?




I'm not to sure where you think I said this was OK? Nor, did I say it didn’t have any consequences. However, the consequences are what? The consequences are insular, in so far as a society may wonder why someone would do it, the real and net effect is to those, and those only who have a direct relationship with this person – not the community as a whole, apart from any moral or value inputs that community has towards such actions.

I think your comment in itself is somewhat spurious, in broadly speaking terms, a "healthy sane" person would not kill themselves, so I’m not sure what that has to do with anything I have said?



gav said:


> And why won't you argue about the use of illegal drugs?  Your words, and I quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Once again, you have completely missed the point of what was said. Try focusing on all I said, and the context, and not the words you think I said.

What I said was that I was not going to argue that - either for or against - as in principle I agree. However, drugs as a social issue have broader consequences than those of someone who wishes to take their own life, or, where the case may be, be assisted to end their life.

You most certainly have the right to snort, inject or take whatever it is you like. However, the broader consequences of those actions can, and often in many cases lead to consequences that effect other people, such as crime, prostitution etc. These are consequences which affect others outside of the circle of ‘family & friends’, which is the only consequence of my right to live, or in this case, die.

Whether or not drugs were to be legalised or decriminalised etc would make very little difference to the consequences of taking those drugs. Drugs are, broadly, an inherently individual choice to take and hence you become addicted to them you will quite possibly become dependent on the State or charity to ‘support’ you. I don’t know, yet I would suspect that those who wish to end their life are there as a result of events that might be beyond their control and thus are dependent on a system which otherwise they would not want to be – sure drug takers don’t want to be, yet theirs is always self inflicted.

To allow a person to end their life how, and when, and as they wish would also allow those – family & friends – who are affect by this decision to possibly accept it, understand it and support it. Hence, possible consequences could be reduced by ensuring communication and ‘inclusiveness’ is a primary part of my right to die.

In saying that, I don’t see your examples of consequences that reach beyond family & friends. What are the consequences, why is it that you say this is not simple? What makes this so hard, or difficult?


----------



## Julia (15 December 2009)

Despite less than satisfactory results from the internet filtering trial, Senator Conroy is apparently determined to proceed with this.  Even if we don't care about pornography being blocked (though this should still imo be the individual's right to choose), it seems we will now be blocked entirely from accessing any information about right to die options.



> Voluntary Euthanasia Advocate and Director of Exit International, Dr Philip Nitschke, has slammed the Government’s announcement of the mandatory Internet Clean Feed proposed by Communications Minister Senator Stephen Conroy today.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What right do the government have to so interfere in our lives?


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 December 2009)

Suicide is looked upon as an irrational decision to end ones own life. He should have only used the word euthanasia. Attracted the wrong attention.


----------



## communique (16 December 2009)

I recommend that anyone reading this forum who supports Euthanasia to contact the organisation on the bottom of Julia’s post to show your support.  80% of people in this country agree with Euthanasia but the controlling minority are constantly eroding the rights of the majority.  It is time to speak up for what you believe in !!!!


----------



## Julia (16 December 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Suicide is looked upon as an irrational decision to end ones own life. He should have only used the word euthanasia. Attracted the wrong attention.



Where does Phillip Nitschke use the word 'suicide'?
To use the word 'euthanasia' not prefixed by 'voluntary' conjures up way more horrible visions.

And, in the absence of voluntary euthanasia being available, I'd disagree that suicide is necessarily an irrational decision.  If you are old, in pain, knowing you will never get better and every day is an ordeal, it seems to me like a completely rational decision.  It just shouldn't be necessary.

Perhaps you could explain why you think it's necessarily irrational?


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 December 2009)

Julia said:


> *Where does Phillip Nitschke use the word 'suicide'?*
> To use the word 'euthanasia' not prefixed by 'voluntary' conjures up way more horrible visions.
> 
> And, in the absence of voluntary euthanasia being available, I'd disagree that suicide is necessarily an irrational decision.  If you are old, in pain, knowing you will never get better and every day is an ordeal, it seems to me like a completely rational decision.  It just shouldn't be necessary.
> ...



Perhaps you should look at the front page of the website you so fervently support. 

Just in case you haven't looked at the website, which you surely must have being such a strong supporter, I have provided a screen shot so as everyone can see.

In dealing with the public and bureaucracies, it does pay to think about what sort of reaction certain words would provoke. Suicide is evident in all age groups and is attached to a poor mental state.


----------



## Julia (16 December 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Perhaps you should look at the front page of the website you so fervently support.
> 
> Just in case you haven't looked at the website, which you surely must have being such a strong supporter, I have provided a screen shot so as everyone can see.



We were not talking about the website.  You were, presumably, responding to the passage I had quoted from Phillip Nitschke.  This did not contain the word suicide.
However, that's unimportant.

Again, you omit what it doesn't suit you to quote.  The phrase is "assisted suicide" which is the whole point of the voluntary euthanasia movement. i.e. that when there is no hope of recovery, it's reasonable to assist people to painlessly end their lives.



> In dealing with the public and bureaucracies, it does pay to think about what sort of reaction certain words would provoke. Suicide is evident in all age groups and is attached to a poor mental state.



*Assisted *suicide is an honest expression.

I'll ask you once again why you think it's irrational to want to end a life which consists only of suffering?   That is all voluntary euthanasia is about.


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 December 2009)

Julia said:


> *Assisted *suicide is an honest expression.
> 
> I'll ask you once again why you think it's irrational to want to end a life which consists only of suffering?   That is all voluntary euthanasia is about.




Suicide is evident in all age groups and is attached to a poor mental state.


----------



## Julia (16 December 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Suicide is evident in all age groups and is attached to a poor mental state.



Again, you parrot off the same stuff.  If you are going to make claims such as that you should provide a reference for such an assertion.

And again, you fail to answer the question I have asked.

I give up.  Readers will draw their own conclusions.


----------



## condog (17 December 2009)

Irrispective of your views, the bigger issue here is the government which is meant to serve the community, is now so actively trying to impose the extreme views of a power broking minority upon us all.....

Sure censor out podophilia and certain levels of extreme sexual or violent behaviour that are deemed by the thought police to be unsavoury or non-essential to life..... But to censor intelligent discussion is outrageous.....whether you believe in the right to life or the right to end life, surely you deserve the right to read about it, discuss it and have public and open debate on the issue....

This is outrageous....in any other counrty they would be marching in the streets.....but us good old aussies all work to hard to be bothered standing up for our rights....


----------



## ThingyMajiggy (17 December 2009)

condog said:


> This is outrageous....in any other counrty they would be marching in the streets.....but us good old aussies all work to hard to be bothered standing up for our rights....




Exactly why they do it, they know that Aussies are useless, all talk about it but no one does a thing. The Government and the people forget that the Government works for us, not the other way around.


----------



## alphaman (17 December 2009)

I've always found terms "government" and "public servant" contradictory.


----------



## Julia (17 December 2009)

You're all quite right.  Have you sent an email to Conroy and for that matter other politicians protesting about this?

This is Senator Conroy's email address:

minister@dbcde.gov.au


----------



## Fishbulb (17 December 2009)

I hears a lot 'bout de yoofs 'n asia, but I ask; what hav de yoof 'n asia done wrong?


----------



## Logique (29 June 2010)

ABC radio were talking about this today:  http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/22/2934139.htm?site=northtas  Tasmania the progressive state! Finally something useful from the greens.



> *New bid to legalise voluntary euthanasia*
> Updated June 23, 2010
> 
> The lobby group Dying With Dignity says it is thrilled the Tasmanian Government plans to look at legalising voluntary euthanasia.  Greens leader Nick McKim introduced a voluntary euthanasia private members bill last year but it failed to win support.
> ...


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 June 2010)

During my news rounds the other day I noticed Germany has most recently introduced euthanasia but for terminally ill and not personal reasons... 

Friday, 25 June 2010


> Germany's Justice Minister, Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, said the Karlsruhe federal court ruling brought clarity to cases involving terminally ill patients.
> 
> *The ruling does not legalise active assisted suicide, which is punishable by up to five years in prison in Germany, the news website Spiegel Online reports.*
> 
> *The ruling applies to passively assisting death through the removal of artificial life support. It makes this legal if the patient has given clear consent.*


----------



## tech/a (29 June 2010)

Wysiwyg said:


> Suicide is evident in all age groups and is attached to a poor mental state.




I have a wonderful friend Kath who is terminally ill with cancer.
It is now in her spine in the area which carries the nerves.
It is a solid mass growing constantly.
The pain is un imaginable.
Even fulltime morphine pumps dont come close to relief.

The diagnosis is Paraplegia,highly likely quadraplegia---eventual death.
It is very slow growing and hasnt at this stage moved to other parts of her body.
Frankly I hope it does and quickly to the liver and all over!
It may not and will be a very slow painful death over years.

This is cruel,in humane and bloody heart breaking not only for Kath but her husband/kids/close friends.

*Wysiwyg* how would your mental state be???


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 June 2010)

That is sad to read Tech/A. I had minor surgery for BCC four months ago and will be seeing a specialist for a near eye operation next Monday at 9.15 am. What would my mental state be in this ladies circumstance? I don't know for sure, but I am a fighter.


----------



## Ruby (29 June 2010)

I have just come across this thread - have had a 'whizz through' read - and wish I had found it earlier because it is a subject about which I feel strongly.

Firstly, Julia, I would like to thank you for introducing the discussion and for your insight, balanced viewpoint and compassion.   I am in complete agreement with you, and I have the greatest respect for Dr Nitschke and the work he is trying to do.

I firmly maintain my right to go at a time of my own choosing if I am old and life is no longer bearable.  It is not death I fear; it is pain, loss of dignity, dependence, etc.   Not all people wish to make that choice, preferring to allow nature - or medical science - to take its course, and I respect that; but I resent having the views of those same people imposed on me.

If I live to old age I will certainly be making preparations for the final exit, which I will determine (I hope).  There is an organisation called "Dying with Dignity".   The website is well worth a visit, and I believe they hold meetings in all capital cities.

Regards,

Ruby


----------



## vincent191 (29 June 2010)

People talk about the quality of life but they avoid the question about the quality of death.


----------



## pixel (29 June 2010)

> Firstly, Julia, I would like to thank you for introducing the discussion and for your insight, balanced viewpoint and compassion.



I wholeheartedly second that - Thanks, Julia.

WA has introduced a "Living Will", which also takes a step in the right direction. At least, the doctors are no longer obliged to prolong my agony if I don't wish to. Ever since an accident in the early '90s, when a particular operation was deemed necessary though risky, have I been carrying a document with me, instructing the medical staff to NOT force me to continue to vegetate in an undignified, passive state. While that was never enforceable, the new laws give it some more solid foundation.

We have also registered as organ donors, but getting to an age where major organs are rapidly approaching their use-by date. That's where body donation can plug in: we have registered with the Medical Faculty of UWA, who are most welcome to teach med students the basics of their handiwork, using our dead bodies for which we no longer have the slightest use.

Those three items in combination, we hope, will provide a little less incentive for medical staff to persist with unwelcome, useless treatment, and increase our chances of getting the necessary signatures when it's time to switch the life support off.


----------



## Calliope (29 June 2010)

Ruby said:


> If I live to old age I will certainly be making preparations for the final exit, which I will determine (I hope).  There is an organisation called "Dying with Dignity".   The website is well worth a visit, and I believe they hold meetings in all capital cities.




Ruby, as you are probably aware Philip Nitschke's book "The Peaceful Pill Handbook" is banned in Australia, thanks to Ruddock and the Right to Life organisation. I recently purchased it from Amazon from only to find out it could be downloaded on the internet. 

It is well worth reading. If you are interested go to;  

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false


----------



## Julia (29 June 2010)

Wysiwyg said:


> During my news rounds the other day I noticed Germany has most recently introduced euthanasia but for terminally ill and not personal reasons...



That article simply refers to the withdrawal of artificial life support.  I can't see how that's 'euthanasia'.   It is already a given throughout the world and happens all the time.
What do you mean when you say "personal reasons"?



tech/a said:


> I have a wonderful friend Kath who is terminally ill with cancer.
> 
> The diagnosis is Paraplegia,highly likely quadraplegia---eventual death.
> It is very slow growing and hasnt at this stage moved to other parts of her body.
> Frankly I hope it does and quickly to the liver and all over!



I'm so sorry to hear that, Tech.  Has Kath given any consideration to taking matters into her own hands before she is incapacitated?
Certainly, such a thought should absolutely not be necessary, but until politicians get some sense about this, that would seem to be her only alternative.



Wysiwyg said:


> That is sad to read Tech/A. I had minor surgery for BCC four months ago and will be seeing a specialist for a near eye operation next Monday at 9.15 am. What would my mental state be in this ladies circumstance? I don't know for sure, but I am a fighter.



Good luck for your surgery, Wysiwyg.
When I read comments like "but I am a fighter", I get very disturbed.
It implies that all it takes to cope with any sort of terminal and/or painful disease is a determined attitude.  It's like the people who say when their treatment for e.g. cancer is successful that it was really all due to their having had a 'positive attitude'.  It actually implies a choice on the part of the patient which is often absolutely wrong.

It's pretty easy for anyone who is basically healthy and never experienced devastating illness or disability to suggest to others who are less fortunate that they should just learn to cope with the pain, loss of dignity, and all round suffering.  Why should they?  Because you say so?

The thing that most upsets me about this whole debate is that those of us in favour of voluntary euthanasia absolutely do not want to imply that those who elect to endure their illness and die without assistance should in any way moderate such a view.  But the anti-euthanasia brigade are so insistent that their way is the only right way.  Why?



Ruby said:


> I have just come across this thread - have had a 'whizz through' read - and wish I had found it earlier because it is a subject about which I feel strongly.
> 
> Firstly, Julia, I would like to thank you for introducing the discussion and for your insight, balanced viewpoint and compassion.   I am in complete agreement with you, and I have the greatest respect for Dr Nitschke and the work he is trying to do.



Thanks, Ruby.  As is obvious, I also feel very strongly about the subject.
I've watched two loved family members suffer dreadfully before they both committed suicide in the most horrible way.



pixel said:


> I wholeheartedly second that - Thanks, Julia.
> 
> WA has introduced a "Living Will", which also takes a step in the right direction. At least, the doctors are no longer obliged to prolong my agony if I don't wish to. Ever since an accident in the early '90s, when a particular operation was deemed necessary though risky, have I been carrying a document with me, instructing the medical staff to NOT force me to continue to vegetate in an undignified, passive state. While that was never enforceable, the new laws give it some more solid foundation.



Pixel, I think I heard recently that WA is also putting up some voluntary euthanasia legislation.  Do you know any detail about this?

The "Living Will" is also known in some States as an "Advance Health Directive".  It's important to be aware that this is a *legal document*and the directions therein are binding on the medical personnel. 

Few of us find it comfortable to think about the possibility of any sort of medical event - or even an accident - that could leave us incapacitated.
But it can happen to any of us.  I found that once I'd completed the documentation and placed copies with all the appropriate people, local hospital included, I was able to stop worrying about what could happen.
Ideally, such a document should accompany a Will, and an Enduring Power of Attorney.



> We have also registered as organ donors, but getting to an age where major organs are rapidly approaching their use-by date. That's where body donation can plug in: we have registered with the Medical Faculty of UWA, who are most welcome to teach med students the basics of their handiwork, using our dead bodies for which we no longer have the slightest use.
> 
> Those three items in combination, we hope, will provide a little less incentive for medical staff to persist with unwelcome, useless treatment, and increase our chances of getting the necessary signatures when it's time to switch the life support off.



Good to hear about the organ and body donation.  Australia has one of the lowest rates of organ donation in the world.
You might be surprised at how many organs can still be used when the donor is old, perhaps not for a young person, but you could still extend the life of an older person.


----------



## Ruby (29 June 2010)

Calliope said:


> Ruby, as you are probably aware Philip Nitschke's book "The Peaceful Pill Handbook" is banned in Australia, thanks to Ruddock and the Right to Life organisation. I recently purchased it from Amazon from only to find out it could be downloaded on the internet.
> 
> It is well worth reading. If you are interested go to;
> 
> http://books.google.com.au/books?id...&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false




Thank you Calliope, I will check it out.

Cheeers,

Ruby


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 June 2010)

Julia said:


> That article simply refers to the withdrawal of artificial life support.  *I can't see how that's 'euthanasia'*.   It is already a given throughout the world and happens all the time.



I can find more definitions but really it is definitive in bold print.

"According to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics, the precise definition of euthanasia is "*a deliberate intervention undertaken with the* *express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering".*"

It can't be implied, construed, interpreted any other way, can it?  


> What do you mean when you say "personal reasons"?



Personal reasons such as sadness, depression, lonely, lost partner and want to go to, drug addiction. 


> Good luck for your surgery, Wysiwyg.



No sweat. These cancers have manifested in the last few years and this is the second visible one. Being 3 mm from my eyeball requires some finesse to remove and hence the specialist. 


> When I read comments like "but I am a fighter", I get very disturbed.
> It implies that all it takes to cope with any sort of terminal and/or painful disease is a determined attitude. It's like the people who say when their treatment for e.g. cancer is successful that it was really all due to their having had a 'positive attitude'. It actually implies a choice on the part of the patient which is often absolutely wrong.



Really Julia it is fine if anyone wants to roll over and accept whatever happens. Several billion people have come and gone on this planet and while our personal journeys are unique to each and everyone, how people handle life experiences is for the most part up to them.


----------



## Ruby (29 June 2010)

Wysiwyg said:


> I can find more definitions but really it is definitive in bold print.
> 
> "According to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics, the precise definition of euthanasia is "*a deliberate intervention undertaken with the* *express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering".*"
> 
> It can't be implied, construed, interpreted any other way, can it?




Withdrawal of artificial life support is not the same as "a deliberate intervention".   It is the *absence *of intervention, which then allows nature to take its course.  In my view there is a difference.


----------



## Logique (29 June 2010)

tech/a said:


> The pain is un imaginable. Even fulltime morphine pumps dont come close to relief...This is cruel, inhumane and bloody heart breaking, not only for Kath but her husband/kids/close friends.
> *Wysiwyg* how would your mental state be???



This is one of the most moving things I have ever read, thanks tech/a.  How can any person, with even the remotest shred of human compassion and basic decency, deny such sufferers a dignified end. It beggars comprehension.  

Stand aside Kevin Andrews and all such religious demagogues. The 21st century has arrived, there is no place for you here.


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 June 2010)

Ruby said:


> Withdrawal of artificial life support is not the same as "a deliberate intervention".   It is the *absence *of intervention, which then allows nature to take its course.  In my view there is a difference.




German court opens door to limited euthanasia.

You really don't understand what the ruling is but if you wish to see it another way then so be it.


----------



## Bushman (29 June 2010)

I must say this thread has never registered with me before now but it is compelling and thought provoking reading. 

From my own personal experience, I believe that the option for a peaceful and dignified death at one's choosing rather than a painful and pointless death should be a basic human right. Much is made of the fact that 'healthy' individuals could potentially opt out due to issues with anxiety and/or depression. Surely this is not an insurmountable challenge? In the case of cancer, the views of oncologists and/or psychologists could be taken into account to ensure the option is only available to those with temrinal conditions and in severe physical or psychological pain. 

From my own personal experience, my grand parents resorted to using a rifle to end their suffering. My grandfather had been suffering from prostate cancer and my grandmother had suffered a stroke and was completely incapacitated. They were also caring for a great aunt of mine who was 97 and in the advanced stages of dementia. 

The shock and pain my family experiened from having to deal with the sudden violent death of three adored family members is with me to this day. I wish they had had the legal euthanasia option open to them because then we could have seen them one more time to say good-bye and make our peace. 

To be human is to be compassionate and have empathy for the suffering of others. It disgusts me that people with no prospect for a peaceful death should be forced to kill themselves in secret or suffer an excruciating and futile death.


----------



## pixel (29 June 2010)

Bushman said:


> It disgusts me that people with no prospect for a peaceful death should be forced to kill themselves in secret or suffer an excruciating and futile death.



Agree 100%, Bushman;
And while I've been spared the kind of trauma that you were subjected to, I feel a shadow of your hurt and despair by just reading about your experience.

It utterly disgusts me that total strangers, "out of the purest motives and most pious convictions" as they usually stress, want to subject me to their own way of thinking and force their views on life, universe, and morals on me.

Nobody asked my advive and opinion whether I wanted to be born - now there's a good reason for that not happening. But now I have been born and grown to be alive and presumed fully responsible for for my actions, that must imply that I'm also presumed capable of making my own decisions.

So, to all those well-meaning do-gooders and right-to-lifers (whom I rather refer to as "forced-to-sufferers"):* I haven't asked your advice and opinion, and I never will! So bugger off and stick to your own affairs. Don't interfere with my freedom of choice.*


----------



## Julia (29 June 2010)

Ruby said:


> Withdrawal of artificial life support is not the same as "a deliberate intervention".   It is the *absence *of intervention, which then allows nature to take its course.  In my view there is a difference.



Exactly right, Ruby.  Surely you can see the difference Wysiwyg?
Without the intervention of artificial life support, the person would be dead.
Voluntary euthanasia refers to the active intervention toward ending a life which would otherwise continue in unbearable suffering.



Bushman said:


> I must say this thread has never registered with me before now but it is compelling and thought provoking reading.
> 
> From my own personal experience, I believe that the option for a peaceful and dignified death at one's choosing rather than a painful and pointless death should be a basic human right. Much is made of the fact that 'healthy' individuals could potentially opt out due to issues with anxiety and/or depression. Surely this is not an insurmountable challenge? In the case of cancer, the views of oncologists and/or psychologists could be taken into account to ensure the option is only available to those with temrinal conditions and in severe physical or psychological pain.



Bushman, I'm so sorry to hear about your family members.  That is the sort of shocking event we should be able to prevent.

About a decade ago, there was perfectly functional legislation introduced by the Northern Territory government.  I'm a bit hazy about the details now, but I think three medical opinions had to be obtained before a person was given assistance to die.  It was Dr Phillip Nitschke who essentially engineered this legislation with the full assistance of the then Territory government.
The patient had to be referred by their GP or treating doctor, and then had to obtain two further specialist opinions, one of which had to be from a psychiatrist.   Surely that's enough of a safeguard.

The legislation was working well, allowing a few people to die peacefully, when the federal government, inspired by ****** Kevin Andrews, intervened and wiped the law.  

The anti-euthanasia lobby likes to portray right to die legislation as meaning every faintly depressed person will just rock up to their local pharmacy and buy some lethal medication and off they go to die.  Little objectivity or common sense is applied.  Empathy and understanding of the suffering of so many people is dismissed as able to be coped with by palliative care.

I think palliative care is certainly better than it used to be, but the best pain relief in the world (and that's essentially all it offers, if that) can't remove the loss of dignity in needing to have someone toilet and wash you, feed you etc.
Why on earth, in an overpopulated world, do we need to keep people alive in this condition, using up valuable and expensive resources, when they would give everything they have to be allowed to die peacefully?



> I wish they had had the legal euthanasia option open to them because then we could have seen them one more time to say good-bye and make our peace.



This is an aspect of suicide which is little discussed, but so very important.
To be able to be with the loved person, just to perhaps hold their hand as they die, would make so much difference both for the dying person and the remaining family.



> To be human is to be compassionate and have empathy for the suffering of others. It disgusts me that people with no prospect for a peaceful death should be forced to kill themselves in secret or suffer an excruciating and futile death.



Bushman, you may like to become a member of Phillip Nitschke's "Exit".
The annual subscription is very modest, and it helps to support his continuous travelling all round Australia holding meetings to assist and advise people.
Ruby has also brought up "Dying with Dignity" which I gather performs a similar service.

The government's internet filter will, I gather, render some of these sites inaccessible.  I have no words for Conroy et al.
I see today Ms Gillard has declared she is an atheist.  Perhaps she will also display an enlightened view regarding voluntary euthanasia.


----------



## pixel (30 June 2010)

> I see today Ms Gillard has declared she is an atheist.



Subtle difference, Julia:
Ms Gillard said she does not believe in God and won't pretend a faith she does not feel. Rather than A-theist = "god-less", I'd call that attitude A-gnostic = "no definite knowledge".
While the difference may not matter much to someone, who professes to know the one and only Deity (variously called Allah, Jahwe, Rainbow Serpent, Wotan, or Ishtar, Isis, Kali), it does matter to someone who has approached the subject with an open and critical mind. 

All I can say with certainty is "I do not know whose concept of a superior being is coming the closest." That, I've been taught, makes me an Agnostic. I do not say, and neither (to my knowledge) did Julia Gillard, that we're sure there is no God. That would make us indeed Atheists.

btw, even if such hypothetical beings existed, gifted with equal parts of omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence, I fail to imagine that they nevertheless depend on humans' sacharine adulation; even become petulant and vindictive if someone fails to believe in the apparently impossible.

Back to the subject of this topic: Given the assurance that "All men (and women) are free and equal", I therefore deny any fellow man (or woman) the right to decide for me how I continue my life or end it - all under the guise of their specific idea of a mythical Ubermensch.


----------



## Julia (30 June 2010)

pixel said:


> Subtle difference, Julia:
> Ms Gillard said she does not believe in God and won't pretend a faith she does not feel. Rather than A-theist = "god-less", I'd call that attitude A-gnostic = "no definite knowledge".



I'm going to disagree, pixel, on this.  If she has said she does not believe in God, then that renders her an atheist, i.e. she does not believe a God exists.
She didn't say:  "I don't know whether or not a God exists" which would have made her agnostic.
It would be interesting to have her define herself as one or the other perhaps.


----------



## pixel (1 July 2010)

Julia said:


> I'm going to disagree, pixel, on this.  If she has said she does not believe in God, then that renders her an atheist, i.e. she does not believe a God exists.
> She didn't say:  "I don't know whether or not a God exists" which would have made her agnostic.
> It would be interesting to have her define herself as one or the other perhaps.




Good suggestion  Let's ask her to define herself.

Apparently, she was asked by an Anglo-Keltic journalist with an implied tendency to postulate only one specific Capital-Gee God. That's why I took her admission to mean "I don't believe in this single one."

Seems we both interpret her statement on the basis of our personal make-up. Meaning you interpret "... don't believe in God" as "... don't believe a(ny) God exists"; whereas I leave the question of "any" open and read it as "... don't believe in (this particular) God's exclusivity".

Whichever opinion the PM may hold in this matter, I feel very strongly about segregation of State and Church matters. Consequently, the debate whether she is "a fit and proper person to serve this country as a Prime Minister", should be answered without the slightest regard of her religious beliefs or non-beliefs. You mentioned Kevin Andrews overruling a democratically created Law in the NT. That stinks to high heaven and is exactly the kind of bigotry that I detest as vehemently as any unilateral usurption of superiority.


----------



## Julia (1 July 2010)

pixel said:


> Whichever opinion the PM may hold in this matter, I feel very strongly about segregation of State and Church matters. Consequently, the debate whether she is "a fit and proper person to serve this country as a Prime Minister", should be answered without the slightest regard of her religious beliefs or non-beliefs. You mentioned Kevin Andrews overruling a democratically created Law in the NT. That stinks to high heaven and is exactly the kind of bigotry that I detest as vehemently as any unilateral usurption of superiority.




I couldn't agree more, pixel.  Her agnosticism/atheism is a real plus for her imo.
There will be a lot of people who will not vote for Tony Abbott because they believe his personal religious views will determine policy.


----------



## Ruby (1 July 2010)

pixel said:


> Whichever opinion the PM may hold in this matter, I feel very strongly about segregation of State and Church matters. Consequently, the debate whether she is "a fit and proper person to serve this country as a Prime Minister", should be answered without the slightest regard of her religious beliefs or non-beliefs.




I'm with you and Julia here Pixel.   Religious beliefs, or lack thereof, are purely personal, and should not be allowed to impinge on political, business, or any other public matters.


----------



## Mofra (1 July 2010)

Logique said:


> This is one of the most moving things I have ever read, thanks tech/a.  How can any person, with even the remotest shred of human compassion and basic decency, deny such sufferers a dignified end. It beggars comprehension.
> 
> Stand aside Kevin Andrews and all such religious demagogues. The 21st century has arrived, there is no place for you here.



It is a sad state of affairs that an animal suffering incredible pain and degradation of life can be euthanised, yet the same courtesy is denied human beings in this country due to being held as political ransom by special interest religeous types.


----------



## Ruby (1 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> It is a sad state of affairs that an animal suffering incredible pain and degradation of life can be euthanised, yet the same courtesy is denied human beings in this country due to being held as political ransom by special interest religeous types.




Too true Mofra!   I have had several cats euthanised when their quality of life has gone.  I take them to the vet; they have The Needle; painlessly dead in less than 30 seconds.   I would like to be able to request The Needle if my life replicated some of the very sad cases mentioned in this thread.

I think it is honouring life to grant people a dignified death if they request it.


----------



## Judd (1 July 2010)

Wysiwyg said:


> Personal reasons such as sadness, depression, lonely, lost partner and want to go to, drug addiction.




So the 33-year old lass who didn't turn up for work and we got the police to her place, took her own life for personal reasons.  We noticed that she was very sad and depressed on occasions.

Pity she was suffering from multiple sclerosis, had great difficulty with mobility and function and knew what the final outcome of the condition would be.  I feel she showed great courage.

And tech/a, sad to hear about your friend.  Been there with relatives and it is just so, so difficult.  Bring back heroin for palliative care (they stopped using it in the 1960's at the instance of certain overseas governments..  Beats morphine hands down for pain relief.


----------



## gordon2007 (1 July 2010)

I’ve been watching this thread closely. Due to the decline in my mother-in-laws health I have not really been able to get myself up to writing anything. However things have changed. 

I can honestly say, from the bottom of my heart, that euthanasia should be allowed.

Mum has suffered from dementia for several years now. During the last 10 months though, it has gone from bad to considerably worse. The last 5 weeks has been absolutely hell though. 

Mum had a fall. Being in full time care we weren’t freaked when hearing about this because, as we get older, these things do happen. However, upon having a few more falls in the next few days we knew something was up. Mum was rushed to the hospital for tests and observations. 

It was determined she had a UTI. However, upon the necessary meds given there was no recovery. It was then they discovered she had had a massive stroke in her brain stem. 

We were told there would be no recovery. We decided to take her off all meds and let nature follow its course. We were told death would happen within 4-7 days. Nature was not good to mum. 

Mum could not eat, drink, speak or use her body functions properly. Her only sense of communication was waking up every 2 hours saying she had to wee. She begged and begged to get out of bed and use the toilet. Her body had failed her though. She could not use her legs any more. All the modern nursing equipment could not make her pee. You could see the fear in her, thinking she was going to wee the bed. All the care in the world and all the talking in the world could not convince her it was OK to wee in bed with her special nappies on. She was too dignified to wee in the bed, too demented to realise she was in the hospital on her death bed. 

For 29 days, mums only thoughts were trying to get out of bed to wee. Her fear of wetting herself was so strong she offered sexual favours to me if I were to take her to the toilet. Where is the dignity in that? 

For 15 days, she survived with no food, barely a drop of water here and there, but yet still very much in fear. 

You can give someone all the morphine you want, but in this case, and many others, there was no dignity in dying. Only pain, suffering and anguish. The physical pain and suffering she endured with, I was sad for her but I handled it.

The emotional pain and suffering, the fear and lack of dignity, will hurt for a very long time.

I gave serious consideration in finding drugs on the street I could have given her to die. I would of. I thought heroine. Don’t know, maybe if I pump her full of heroine she’ll OD and die quick. Sadly, my fear of getting caught and going to jail prevented me. 
It’s a very sad state of affairs that we let a dog, cat, horse and many other animals be put down with dignity. But we can’t do this for a human. 

We buried her Thursday. RIP.


----------



## Ruby (1 July 2010)

Gordon2007, this is such a sad story, and you have my deepest sympathy.  However, it is all too common.  I do not understand how anyone who has seen a loved one die in pain or with loss of dignity, could NOT be in favour of voluntary euthanasia.

Ruby


----------



## Logique (2 July 2010)

Mofra said:


> It is a sad state of affairs that an animal suffering incredible pain and degradation of life can be euthanised, yet the same courtesy is denied human beings in this country due to being held as political ransom by special interest religeous types.



Too right Mofra. We are all of us going to have to lay down the law to our elected representatives.


----------



## Mofra (2 July 2010)

Gordon, my condolances. It must have been a very difficult time for you, and you have eloquently described a circumstance where the choice for euthanasia should (in my opinion) be available.


----------



## Julia (2 July 2010)

gordon2007 said:


> You can give someone all the morphine you want, but in this case, and many others, there was no dignity in dying. Only pain, suffering and anguish. The physical pain and suffering she endured with, I was sad for her but I handled it.
> 
> The emotional pain and suffering, the fear and lack of dignity, will hurt for a very long time.
> 
> ...



Gordon, I'm so very sorry for what your family has been through.

As you say, we offer our pets a peaceful end, and the irony is that we can in fact be prosecuted for not doing this if they are suffering.

You so understandably focus on her loss of dignity.   This is the aspect so ignored by those who refuse to consider euthanasia, saying that modern palliative care and drugs ease the pain of most people.   Pain is only one aspect, and many old people are not actually in pain so therefore don't even receive the benefit of a diminished awareness which is one of the effects of morphine et al.

Obviously your mother in law, despite dementia, was acutely distressed.
How utterly unnecessary and how futile.   

I understand, too, your own sense of helplessness at wanting to ease her distress, but completely realistically obviously being quite unable to do so.
I'm so sorry.


----------



## Knobby22 (2 July 2010)

There should be more room in the law for common sense.

There needs to be protection so Euthanasia is not abused but surely we can come up with a solution that involves a bit more choice and dignity.

It is funny we are talking on other threads about invasive government and the "left" want to control us but on this issue it is the "right" who want to control us.

Maybe the fact we can't get our act together as a country on this issue is due to people in power not wanting to think about their own death and so seek to ignore any issues to do with it as much as possible.


----------



## Julia (2 August 2010)

There will be a special live broadcast of "Australia Talks",  on "Dying with Dignity" tomorrow, August 3rd, at 6pm on Radio National.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/australiatalks/

The participants are:


Dr Philip Nitschke, Founder and Director of Exit International, 
Associate Professor Patrick McArdie, Australian Catholic University 
Dr Scott Blackwell, Palliative Care Australia's President Elect 
Dr Kaarin Anstey, Director of the Ageing Research Unit at the Centre for Mental Health Research, ANU.


----------



## Logique (4 August 2010)

Quite a good listen Julia.
Virtually all were in support, audience and panel, the ones that were heard anyway. Phillip Nitszche acquitted himself well. One of the few Greens policies I can live with, that and denticare.


----------



## Julia (4 August 2010)

Yes, for once the palliative care doctor and the other Catholic University person were reasonable and balanced in their comments.  As always, the moderator was good.

Philip Nitschke is very passionate about his cause and sometimes this does see him sounding a bit strident.

Agree about the Greens.   Pity most of the rest of their policies are so woeful.


----------



## Happy (4 August 2010)

gordon2007 said:


> ...
> 
> It’s a very sad state of affairs that we let a dog, cat, horse and many other animals be put down with dignity. But we can’t do this for a human.
> 
> ...




And the only reason is that SYSTEM could be abused.

Strange, but for that could be law and rules and regulations and honestly suffering individuals could be given the dignity in death that they deseve.


I am sure, one day we will be fighting economically motivated compulsory euthanasia.


----------



## Calliope (4 August 2010)

Euthanasia is legal now. It becomes illegal when there is another party involved. and therein lies the problem. Most people of a mature age are making arrangements for their final exit when life becomes not worth living.  

The big problem is when to activate it.  No one wants to go too early, but if left too late the management of your life may pass to a third party. One never knows when a stroke, dementia  or an accident may take all decisions out of your hands.

In this condition everyone has an obligation to keep you alive as long as they can, even if you are a vegetable. Your only escape is if you are lucky enough to have a rational doctor.


----------



## gordon2007 (4 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> In this condition everyone has an obligation to keep you alive as long as they can, even if you are a vegetable. Your only escape is if you are lucky enough to have a rational doctor.




Why though?. Why should there be an 'obligation' to keep you alive if you're not really living and enjoying life. Why, if you're suffering unimaginable pain, suffering and fear. Why, if it's ones wishes shall we carrying on a life they did not want? 

To hell with 'obligations.


----------



## DocK (4 August 2010)

This is why it's so important to have a medical directive (?) in place, at least if you have documented your wishes in the event of losing the capacity to voice them for yourself, there is a chance the right thing will be done.  My brother and I disagreed quite strongly about what measures should or shouldn't have been taken to prolong my father's life (or not) and if my mother and my father's doctors had not been able to persuade him that drastic measures were futile (not to mention cruel to Dad) his death may have been much harder than necessary.  For this reason I have ensured that Mum has documented her wishes (duly witnessed by JP) and that a copy is held with her GP, as well as with me. Although this won't by any means allow for euthanasia as such, at least it will prevent the artificial prolonging of life in certain circumstances.


----------



## Julia (4 August 2010)

Dock, if your mother already has a hospital file, you might also want to consider placing a copy of the Advance Health Directive on that file.
If she (or any of us) were to be acutely admitted to hospital, perhaps as a result of an accident where only the ambulance was involved, not her GP, and you weren't advised until after she'd been received at A & E, the treating doctors wouldn't necessarily know about her wishes.

And I think we have to remember that Advance Health Directives are not just appropriate for elderly people.  We are all at risk of an acute medical/accident event at any time.

I also carry a notice with me that makes clear an AHD is in place, and that it must be adhered to.  

For anyone who might be interested in the follow up online discussion after the broadcast of the "Dying with Dignity" Radio National program I referred to above, there is some informed and interesting ongoing discussion here:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/australiatalks/stories/2010/2964330.htm

For those unfamiliar with the "Australia Talks" program, it's a one hour discussion on a different subject every weekday, with usually two or three guests and questions from phone in and online audience.  Usually intelligent and thoughtful, completely different from commercial talk programs.


----------



## DocK (5 August 2010)

Yes, Julia, that would be a good idea, but as she lives in Brisvegas I think in the event of an ambulance ride she would not necessarily be taken to the hospital of her choice, but whichever was "on call"? I'm not sure of hospital procedure, but will mention to her that she may want to check this out with her GP and main specialists. If she has a file at any hospital I'm sure she would have given them a copy, but best to check.  The major bonus of her completing the Adv Health Directive is that my brother has been given quite clear instructions that she would not wish him to prolong her life for his benefit.  I believe it is quite common for families to disagree quite vehemently over this issue (based only on discussions with friends) and a clear directive should prevent this.  Unfortunately a lot of people are very reluctant to discuss this subject with their nearest and dearest.

As far as my husband and I go, as we own each other's life insurance we're ready to pull the plug on each other at the first opportunity


----------



## Calliope (5 August 2010)

gordon2007 said:


> Why though?. Why should there be an 'obligation' to keep you alive if you're not really living and enjoying life. Why, if you're suffering unimaginable pain, suffering and fear. Why, if it's ones wishes shall we carrying on a life they did not want?
> 
> To hell with 'obligations.




Don't ask me. Ask your politicians. It won't do any good, but ask anyway.


----------



## explod (10 August 2010)

Calliope said:


> Don't ask me. Ask your politicians. It won't do any good, but ask anyway.




It was a fair question, "dont' ask me" what sort of an answer is that?

"it wont do any good..." how do *you* know ?    

The more we question and ask the closer we go to change.


----------



## Ruby (20 September 2010)

It looks as though voluntary euthansia is going to be back on the agenda in federal parliament, and Julia Gillard is talking about allowing a conscience vote.   

I wonder how many politicians will be willing to face the truth about this highly emotive issue (that is, that most people want it), or whether they will take the pious line of least resistance and start mouthing the same old useless platitudes we constantly hear, such as "the sanctity of life..........", and "palliative care is so good these days........"

I expect the churches will weigh into the argument again and do the usual pontificating about it being "sinful", etc, etc!!

I can only hope that the way might be opening up for a positive move forward, and that there is some sensible and mature debate about it.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 September 2010)

Yes, it is good to see Ruby.

Gillard is on a hiding to nothing on the issue though.
She won't win votes from the Liberals through this issue and may see some votes drop off by religous elements. It will be interesting to see how Abbott scuttles this.


----------



## Logique (20 September 2010)

Ruby said:


> I can only hope that the way might be opening up for a positive move forward, and that there is some sensible and mature debate about it.



I second that Ruby. A conscience vote on this would be a good development.


----------



## Calliope (20 September 2010)

Logique said:


> I second that Ruby. A conscience vote on this would be a good development.




This Bill is not about legalising voluntary euthanasia. It is about giving the Territories the right to legislate on voluntary euthanasia. In effect it would prevent the Parliament from rescinding this legislation as they did with the NT some years ago.


----------



## Ruby (20 September 2010)

Calliope said:


> This Bill is not about legalising voluntary euthanasia. It is about giving the Territories the right to legislate on voluntary euthanasia. In effect it would prevent the Parliament from rescinding this legislation as they did with the NT some years ago.




Correct, Calliope, but anything that re-introduces some discussion on this subject is good, in my opinion.


----------



## Julia (20 September 2010)

Calliope said:


> This Bill is not about legalising voluntary euthanasia. It is about giving the Territories the right to legislate on voluntary euthanasia. In effect it would prevent the Parliament from rescinding this legislation as they did with the NT some years ago.



Sure, but it raises the issue again, and Bob Brown has made clear that the Greens intend to promote the consideration of voluntary euthanasia in this new parliament.

And even if all that happens in the short term is that the territories may make legislation which cannot be wiped out by the Feds, that opens the door for the same sort of legislation that allowed euthanasia briefly a bit more than a decade ago in the Northern Territory.

Julia Gillard's atheism is a plus on this issue, just as the devout religious objections spouted by the Opposition will never change.  A conscience vote makes sense:  I doubt every member of the Opposition shares the ultra conservative views of e.g. Tony Abbott and Kevin Andrews.


----------



## gordon2007 (20 September 2010)

Apparently in SA they're trying to bring this subject up again too. I'm a very firm believer in it.


----------



## Julia (20 September 2010)

In this article on the subject, there's a reference to Jim Wallace, who represents the Australian Christian Lobby.  This man is more conservative and closed to debate than all the Christians in the Liberal Party combined.

I can't understand how he gets so much media attention with such little challenge.

A stand-up fight between him and Bob Brown would be fascinating.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/pm-o...nl&emcmp=Punch&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member


----------



## gordon2007 (20 September 2010)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/20/3016641.htm?site=news

The above is the article about south australia.


----------



## Ruby (4 October 2010)

There was a very good article on this subject in the AFR on Saturday. Anyone who has any moral doubt about its "rightness" would do well to read it, as it was written from a very compassionate and humane viewpoint (not that I think there is any other viewpoint!) and gave some touching examples.

There is a global conference being held in Melbourne this week on the right to die.  It starts on Wednesday and it will be open to the public on Friday.  It will feature leaders from 46 organisations in 27 countries working internationally to legalise physician-assisted dying.

I am afraid I have no more information than that and cannot provide a link to a web site.   (The article is on the AFR site, but you need to be a subscriber.)  This was all gleaned from the newspaper.


----------



## Julia (4 October 2010)

Thanks Ruby.  The "Weekend Australian" also carried a similar (maybe the same?) article.  It's good to see discussion happening.


----------



## Julia (11 October 2010)

The following is not a reference to voluntary euthanasia, but rather to completing Advance Health Directive which I think in some States are known as Living Wills.

Please read this letter from an Emergency Department specialist.  It may not at this stage apply to you, but it may be something you need to discuss with another family member.

It's one of the most realistic, yet touching, pleas I've ever read.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/lifes...il_nl&emcmp=CM&emchn=Newsletter&emlist=Member


----------



## Ruby (12 October 2010)

Julia, I thought it was a wonderful letter.  I read only part of it yesterday and have just read it again.  It is a subject I have tried to raise with my old and frail mother, but sadly, she refuses to discuss it.  I know she reads the newspaper from front to back, so I might try and bring up the subject again.

Ruby


----------



## Julia (12 October 2010)

Ruby, could you perhaps print off a copy of the letter and give it to your mother to read, or would that be too 'in your face' for her?

Presumably she just refuses to discuss her mortality at all?
Very difficult for you.
What will you do eventually if medical staff ask you whether she wants life-sustaining treatment or not when she's approaching dying?


----------



## explod (12 October 2010)

Julia said:


> What will you do eventually if medical staff ask you whether she wants life-sustaining treatment or not when she's approaching dying?




Throw it back to the staff, family Doctor preferably,  and ask "What can we do?"  As long as pain is kept at bay you have to let nature take its course.  It is very unfortunate that that can string out a long time.  However if put like that to the Doctor (perhaps staff is the better word here) it usually wont.


----------



## Ruby (12 October 2010)

Julia said:


> Presumably she just refuses to discuss her mortality at all?
> Very difficult for you.
> What will you do eventually if medical staff ask you whether she wants life-sustaining treatment or not when she's approaching dying?



Yes - it's a no go area.  She refuses to discuss anything personal.  If I am ever given the choice I will say 'yes' to pain relief only and 'no' to life sustaining treatment



explod said:


> As long as pain is kept at bay you have to let nature take its course.  It is very unfortunate that that can string out a long time.




The situation has not arisen, but I would rather ask for increased pain relief at the possible expense of a longer life.  Nature is not taking its course if life is being prolonged by drugs or other technology.

Thank you both for your messages.

Ruby


----------



## Knobby22 (12 October 2010)

Ruby said:


> Yes - it's a no go area.  She refuses to discuss anything personal.  If I am ever given the choice I will say 'yes' to pain relief only and 'no' to life sustaining treatment
> 
> 
> Ruby




Maybe she knows that...and doesn't agree.
This is what I worry about with Euthanasia, it should be the person who is dyings choice.


----------



## explod (12 October 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Maybe she knows that...and doesn't agree.
> This is what I worry about with Euthanasia, it should be the person who is dyings choice.




It is to be hoped that the legislation if it comes will be clear on that point.  It must be the free will of the person seeking to die.



> The situation has not arisen, but I would rather ask for increased pain relief at the possible expense of a longer life. Nature is not taking its course if life is being prolonged by drugs or other technology.




Spot on.


----------



## Ruby (12 October 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Maybe she knows that...and doesn't agree.
> This is what I worry about with Euthanasia, it should be the person who is dyings choice.




I agree with voluntary euthanasia, and would like to be able to choose to die with dignity when the time comes.  This will be my choice for me, and does not mean I would seek to impose my views on any other person.  I agree with you totally Knobby, that it should be the choice of the person who is dying.  

However, voluntary euthanasia is not the same as witholding invasive treatment which would prolong a life which no longer has any quality.  If someone I loved was not able to make a choice, and was suffering, and I had the choice of making a decision (eg Power of Attorney), I would choose to give that person relief from pain rather than extend his or her life.


----------



## Julia (12 October 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Maybe she knows that...and doesn't agree.
> This is what I worry about with Euthanasia, it should be the person who is dyings choice.



Agreed absolutely, Knobby.  But what about the situation as with Ruby's mother where she refuses to make her wishes clear?
Did you read the letter from the emergency physician?  Unless a patient has *prior to losing the capacity to make his/her wishes clear* put in writing (Advance Health Directive) whether they want life sustaining treatment or not, doctors feel obliged to administer this extremely expensive and ultimately pointless treatment.   What is the point of this if the patient is absolutely not going to recover?  Isn't it way better to just offer pain relief and sedation until death?

The concern I have with voluntary euthanasia is the very real possibility of greedy children wanting mum or dad out of the way so they can acquire their inheritance.  Old people, losing confidence and physical capacity, easily become vulnerable to manipulation and suggestions that they should end their lives.  We'd have to hope such cases are few.

And legislation would have to cover this, ensuring the patient is interviewed by two or more doctors prior to any end of life decision.  Perhaps the family members should also be interviewed?




Ruby said:


> .
> 
> However, voluntary euthanasia is not the same as witholding invasive treatment which would prolong a life which no longer has any quality.



Exactly.  And that's the entire point of the letter from the emergency physician.  Can there be any possible reason for instituting life sustaining treatment in a person who is clearly dying anyway, when those resources could be better used in, say, a young person who will recover?


----------



## Knobby22 (13 October 2010)

Yes, good points.

Maybe Ruby's Mum just doesn't want to think about dying.


----------



## Ruby (13 October 2010)

You are probably right Knobby.   I think a lot of people don't want to think about dying, and therin lies the problem.  In life we all tend to put off doing things that are difficult and uncomfortable or which don't seem urgent.  Perhaps avoiding the whole dying thing is an extension of that.

I think too, that there are still some older people who are stuck in a time warp, when it was 'impolite' to discuss certain subjects, and it is hard for them to discard a lifetime of ingrained teaching and habits.   I was told as a child that "one *never *discusses sex, religion or politics".  That net also seemed to include anything deeply personal.

It is healthy to have the issue brought out in the open and to be having discussion about it.


----------



## Julia (13 October 2010)

Knobby22 said:


> Maybe Ruby's Mum just doesn't want to think about dying.




Knobby, I don't think any of us want to think about dying.  I certainly don't.  But unless we do consider it we can end up suffering in ways we'd want to avoid.  Do you, e.g. if there's no hope of your survival, want your life prolonged by artificial feeding, hydration, a machine to simulate breathing?
Is your family going to enjoy seeing you like that?  Isn't it just stretching out the whole miserable event of your dying?

And in a purely practical sense, is it reasonable that the incredibly expensive intensive care costs should be going to this illogical process when that money could be better spent on someone who will recover?

If you read the letter quoted above (and a year or so ago I read a great book by an intensive care physician very much along the same lines), the staff want you to make their decisions easier by simply thinking about death when you're in a position to do so with all your faculties, and taking the simple step of completing a form with your instructions.

Makes it easier for your family and easier for the medical staff.  The form leaves you plenty of room to write in special instructions in addition to the pre-printed Yes/No questions.

I found as soon as I'd done it (and you need to do it with your GP:  he completes one part of it), it was easier to stop worrying about what might happen.

And we shouldn't be thinking it's only when we're old that we need to give attention to this.  Anyone can have a serious accident any minute, and be faced with non-survival.


----------



## Logique (3 November 2010)

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Health/2010/11/03

Euthanasia_talks_in_Brisbane_534126.html

*Euthanasia talks in Brisbane * Wednesday, November 03, 2010

Two leading voluntary euthanasia advocates will be in Brisbane on Wednesday promoting overseas legislation that gives the right to choose to die.

Belgian oncologist Professor Jan Bernheim and Neil Francis, from the *newly formed Australian alliance YourLastRight.com*, will talk about voluntary euthanasia legislation in the USA and Belgium and how it could work in Australia at a public meeting at 2.30pm (AEST)at Lennons Hotel, in the Queen Street mall.


----------



## Calliope (3 November 2010)

Euthanasia is a DIY procedure and it is not an area for politicians and bureaucrats to be meddling in.

The drug of choice for euthanasia enthusiasts is Nembutal, but of course it can't be purchased in this country where its possession is illegal.

The recreational drug of choice for Australians is methamphetamine. It is illegal too, but enthusiasts set up DIY factories to manufacture it, and they can sell all they make for excellent returns, and apparently at very little risk.  

It seems to me that there is scope for some enterprising and understanding souls to follow the same course with Nembutal, and thus save consumers a trip to Mexico, and bringing it back illegally.


----------



## Calliope (16 February 2012)

*A TEACHER today became the first Queenslander to be jailed for aiding a suicide after he was convicted of helping his elderly friend to die by taking an animal anaesthetic.*



> Justice Jean Dalton ordered Merin Nielsen, 50, serve three years in prison, to be eligible for parole on August 15.
> 
> In a Queensland first, a Supreme Court jury in Brisbane took 2 1/2 days to find Nielsen, 50, of Mt Nebo, guilty of aiding Frank Ward , 76, to kill himself at Clayfield, on June 20, 2009.
> 
> ...




http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...f-elderly-friend/story-e6freoof-1226272620644


----------



## DB008 (16 February 2012)

Calliope said:


> Euthanasia is a DIY procedure and it is not an area for politicians and bureaucrats to be meddling in.




Yep. It' an individuals right.


*Wiki*


> Human euthanasia
> 
> Pentobarbital has also been used for physician-assisted suicide. In the US state of Oregon "oral doses of a barbiturate" have been used for this purpose.[6]
> 
> In Switzerland, the only country that allows foreigners to have assisted suicide, the Dignitas clinic uses the antiemetic drug metoclopramide followed by sodium pentobarbital for the procedure.[7] It is also used in the Netherlands, and was used n the Northern Territory of Australia during the brief period in which euthanasia was permitted.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentobarbital

Suppose if your desperate, you could always buy a 1 way ticket to Switzerland? 

But that's not so convenient in every situation?


----------



## pixel (16 February 2012)

DB008 said:


> Yep. It' an individuals right.
> 
> Suppose if your desperate, you could always buy a 1 way ticket to Switzerland?
> But that's not so convenient in every situation?



 Not only is it not convenient, but I find it disgusting that  supposedly civilised country like Australia should force its terminally ill (or simply world-weary) citizens to spend a fortune on (at least two) tickets half around the world, just so they can end their suffering in a dignified and "legal" manner.

*"Butt out, politicians and self-anointed apostles of morals for others!"*

When, why, and how I want to leave this world is nobody else's bluddy business but mine.

I concede that the process has to be formalised, by way of a kind of "Living Will" to be independently witnessed. By all means, have it notarised by a JP or the person's GP - mainly to prevent a friendly gold-digger helping grampaw or nan make up their mind...

But once that precaution has been satisfied, all it should take is for me to ask a GP or Pharmacist for a prescription.

Like Jubal Harshaw (alter ego of R.A.Heinlein) put it in "Stranger in a Strange Land" -



> *One For The Road*
> 
> There's amnesia in a hang knot,
> And comfort in the ax,
> ...


----------



## JTLP (16 February 2012)

TBH - I'm kind of torn on the issue.

Very recently my grandfather passed away from dementia - he had it for 7 odd years. He was an amazing person through and through - and a very dignified soul. Had he been of sound mind and body - he may have chosen euthanasia to pass with dignity and respect. My father believes that euthanasia would have been the best option also - to allow somebody to use the facilities that my grandfather was using.

But here is the catch - would you really want to bundle all your family (and we are a big family) into a room and say "hey everybody...I've decided on xyz date that I'm going to end it...say your goodbyes now". It would make for a very confronting and difficult situation. It sounds easy in principle - but I think the process of 'dying' - as awful as it is for terminal illnesses - allows for people to slowly grieve and accept what has happened - as well as those around them. It also gives people time to repent/love again/rectify any situation etc that they may see fit.

Plus there is the added moral conflict of a JP or GP or whoever signing the declaration to end life. Plus the Pharmacist or nurse mixing the lethal concoction and handing it over to whoever. You can just imagine the red tape "have you told your family?" "you do realize you only get 1 shot at this?" "have you organized for somebody to pick up your body?" etc etc

Conclusion - I probably lead more to natural time of death. As I said I understand the gravity of terminal illnesses but having time to say goodbye to someone very dear to me meant a lot...deterioration or not.


----------



## Julia (16 February 2012)

JTLP said:


> TBH - I'm kind of torn on the issue.
> 
> Very recently my grandfather passed away from dementia - he had it for 7 odd years. He was an amazing person through and through - and a very dignified soul. Had he been of sound mind and body - he may have chosen euthanasia to pass with dignity and respect. My father believes that euthanasia would have been the best option also - to allow somebody to use the facilities that my grandfather was using.



I'm very sorry to hear about your grandfather, JTLP.



> But here is the catch - would you really want to bundle all your family (and we are a big family) into a room and say "hey everybody...I've decided on xyz date that I'm going to end it...say your goodbyes now".



Yes, absolutely.  Why not?  It should be totally about the person who is dying, not about what makes those left behind feel more comfortable!



> It would make for a very confronting and difficult situation. It sounds easy in principle - but I think the process of 'dying' - as awful as it is for terminal illnesses - allows for people to slowly grieve and accept what has happened - as well as those around them. It also gives people time to repent/love again/rectify any situation etc that they may see fit.



You will likely develop a different view as you get older and can see the situation from the reality of someone who is old, sick and exhausted.




> Plus there is the added moral conflict of a JP or GP or whoever signing the declaration to end life. Plus the Pharmacist or nurse mixing the lethal concoction and handing it over to whoever.



Such a scenario is entirely unlikely and totally fanciful.  No way would a JP be ever given responsibility for such a situation, or just a GP either.  It's quite possible to draft legislation that puts in place very adequate safeguards and requires the agreement of three qualified people, e.g. a psychiatrist, and two other doctors.



> You can just imagine the red tape "have you told your family?" "you do realize you only get 1 shot at this?" "have you organized for somebody to pick up your body?" etc etc



It would never be so ridiculously casual.  You make it sound like buying a bottle of Coke.



> Conclusion - I probably lead more to natural time of death. As I said I understand the gravity of terminal illnesses but having time to say goodbye to someone very dear to me meant a lot...deterioration or not.



Again, you are rather selfishly looking at this from your own point of  view, rather than that of the person who is in pain and misery.


----------



## pixel (17 February 2012)

... but that's my point:
It shouldn't take "Red Tape" and endless questions. And quite frankly, Doctors ought to be able to handle the moral dilemma of "playing God"; there is only a small adjustment between their taking the responsibility to condemn an incurable patient to more weeks of suffering, vs allowing them to "be cured" of it.

Yes, I get your point about how can the family deal with it. But isn't there also an issue of compassion and allowing a loved-one the personal choice when to say their Good-Bye? It does require a paradigm shift - and restraint from the leaders of our established religions. As long as they keep mumbling about God's Will and Sanctity of Life, that change won't come easy. See the "Religion is Crazy" thread.
Since I have decided to assume responsibility for my own life decisions, I don't believe that I (or anyone else) can deny a family member the right to choose the time. In a close-knit family, it would hardly be a secret that someone had made a Living Will. In our family, we don't keep such important issues a secret. But that also means, when one or the other would decide it's time, it won't be a secret. The family members that matter would certainly know - and have time to get used to the facts that cause the decision.

A very dear friend of ours was diagnosed with brain tumor. She and her husband put the questions to the Doctor: How long? What treatment? What prognosis? What quality of life during the time of treatment?
Weighing up the options, Hubby sold the family business and took his beloved on a world cruise while she could still enjoy it. They came back when the symptoms put a stop to it. They visited family and friends around the country one last time and we said farewell. Not once did the thought arise that she should have spent the time instead in hospital, undergoing risky operations that might actually shorten her time of independence, and suffering through radio and chemo.
Did the family grieve? I'm sure they did. But the sadness was very much alleviated by the knowledge that their mother, aunt, sister, friend... could enjoy a great holiday before taking the last step on her terms. Dignity. Courage and Dignity. No Regrets.

PS: Julia, +1
ours crossed obviously. The terms "selfish" and "comfortable for others" had crossed my mind too.
... but I decided to give JTLP the benefit of the doubt, rather than judging him/her too harshly.


----------



## Glen48 (17 February 2012)

How much is going on in hospitals we can never  know.
Maybe some way the person can press a button on a injection machine when they feel ready (if capable ) as well as a  safety button if they suddenly change their mind, also why not have it on your licence like the donor program and you can decide when you are younger. 
 But like every thing   else it will never come to pass while we have do gooders around.


----------



## Logique (17 February 2012)

pixel said:


> ...A very dear friend of ours was diagnosed with brain tumor...Not once did the thought arise that she should have spent the time instead in hospital, undergoing risky operations that might actually shorten her time of independence, and suffering through radio and chemo....



Great post Pixel, highlighting an enlightened and contemporary approach, I admire the couple that went on a holiday instead.


----------



## Calliope (17 February 2012)

I think it should be obvious by now that we can't leave the arrangements for our final exit in the hands of a second ot third party, nor can we arrange the peaceful exit of loved ones. To do so is to risk incarceration. If the good Samaritan is a beneficiary of the deceased person (and why wouldn't they be?) it will also be labelled motive.

To devise a DOY kit that will deliver a painless, peaceful and tidy exit sittnig in you favourite armchair is not rocket science, nor is it expensive. All it requires is a lttlle research and dedication to the concept. 

My only sister died ten days ago after years of crippling arthritis and dementia. She died after a year in the best care facility that money could buy, but her quality of life was non-existant, and her trauma deeply affected the lives of her husband and children.

To avoid this trauma we should make preparations before we lose our cognitive abilities.


----------



## Julia (17 February 2012)

pixel said:


> PS: Julia, +1
> ours crossed obviously. The terms "selfish" and "comfortable for others" had crossed my mind too.
> ... but I decided to give JTLP the benefit of the doubt, rather than judging him/her too harshly.



You're right, pixel.  And JTLP, my apologies for the harsh response toward your post.
It's a subject I feel strongly about having witnessed two loved family members struggle with hideous suffering before eventually committing suicide.

My grandmother had a bone disease which caused her severe and unremitting pain over many years.  She could not walk, only crawl, had lost her sight so could no longer experience the pleasure of reading or even watching television.  She was unable to wash or feed herself.  A strongly independent woman, this was crushing and humiliating for her and she pleaded with us to help her die on many occasions.

I seriously considered giving the help she so wanted but the likelihood of being jailed for assisting a suicide overcame my desire to help end her misery.

One Sunday I went to visit her and found the house empty.  She had managed to crawl outside and drown herself in a tub of filthy water behind the garage.  We had all forgotten about the ancient laundry tub dumped there when it was replaced in the laundry.

By the time I found her the flies were crawling all over her.  I will never forget their buzzing frenzy.

My father also killed himself in a manner that I'm can't bring myself to discuss.
He would have suffered horribly in the process.  I learned about it from the police arriving at my door early one morning asking me to come and identify the body.




> It shouldn't take "Red Tape" and endless questions. And quite frankly, Doctors ought to be able to handle the moral dilemma of "playing God"; there is only a small adjustment between their taking the responsibility to condemn an incurable patient to more weeks of suffering, vs allowing them to "be cured" of it.



Pixel, I agree entirely for myself, you and others like us.  But I'm also conscious of the level of elder abuse in our society and how easily old, frail and vulnerable people could be persuaded by greedy relatives to get out of the way.

This is the basis for the cliched 'slippery slope' argument put forward by those who are opposed to euthanasia and it's not without validity imo.



> It does require a paradigm shift - and restraint from the leaders of our established religions. As long as they keep mumbling about God's Will and Sanctity of Life, that change won't come easy.



Hence the current stalemate.  Approximately 85% of the population in repeated surveys have agreed with voluntary euthanasia.  However, the minority against it are emphatically so for religious and other reasons.  As long as our politicians e.g. Rudd and Abbott, just as two examples, have any say, we will not see any change to the current laws.



> Since I have decided to assume responsibility for my own life decisions, I don't believe that I (or anyone else) can deny a family member the right to choose the time.



Ideally your wishes, properly expressed, should be all that is necessary.
But, given at present your clearly expressed written wishes can be overridden by your partner or offspring, even just on the issue of organ donation if you were to die naturally, the reality is that you cannot be sure that your wishes will be honoured.
Yes, this is absolutely wrong, but it's how the situation stands at present.



> In a close-knit family, it would hardly be a secret that someone had made a Living Will. In our family, we don't keep such important issues a secret. But that also means, when one or the other would decide it's time, it won't be a secret. The family members that matter would certainly know - and have time to get used to the facts that cause the decision.



Completely agree.  But I also think that family members with possibly an innate opposition to anything other than a 'natural' death could deny you what they have previously agreed, especially when faced with the reality of your death, rather than a distant hypothetical situation.



> A very dear friend of ours was diagnosed with brain tumor. She and her husband put the questions to the Doctor: How long? What treatment? What prognosis? What quality of life during the time of treatment?
> Weighing up the options, Hubby sold the family business and took his beloved on a world cruise while she could still enjoy it. They came back when the symptoms put a stop to it. They visited family and friends around the country one last time and we said farewell. Not once did the thought arise that she should have spent the time instead in hospital, undergoing risky operations that might actually shorten her time of independence, and suffering through radio and chemo.



Great story.  I've never been able to understand why people will endure the misery of the side effects of chemo and/or radiation to gain perhaps a few months more of life.
But then again, perhaps I would feel differently if I was ever in such a situation.  Then maybe death might be such an overwhelming thought, I might also clutch at some additional time.  



Calliope said:


> I think it should be obvious by now that we can't leave the arrangements for our final exit in the hands of a second ot third party, nor can we arrange the peaceful exit of loved ones. To do so is to risk incarceration. If the good Samaritan is a beneficiary of the deceased person (and why wouldn't they be?) it will also be labelled motive.



Yes.  



> My only sister died ten days ago after years of crippling arthritis and dementia. She died after a year in the best care facility that money could buy, but her quality of life was non-existant, and her trauma deeply affected the lives of her husband and children.



I'm very sorry about your sister, Calliope.  This is the sort of situation, especially the dementia, that is so utterly ignored by the anti-euthanasia brigade.  They rabbit on about how most pain can be dealt with etc, but fail to acknowledge the side effects, and give no credence to the degradation and loss of dignity experienced when a person can no longer even use a toilet.


----------



## JTLP (17 February 2012)

Without multi quoting - thanks for your sympathies Julia and I'm glad that Pixel asked that you don't be too harsh on myself (I fear I may have been a bit brash back - would not have been nice to do to someone whom I admire on these forums  ).

You could well be right - I am young and thankfully have not had to really deal with it. I'm not a big religious person (Buddhist actually  ) and whilst I respect that life is our decision - the complexity and enormity of the situation is perhaps too much for me to comprehend at the moment. I'm sure that once life goes on I may begin to formulate a different opinion - but for now I know my stance.

Pixel - Very interesting take on what your friends did. Do you mind me asking how old the lady was?
Calliope - Sorry for your loss.
Julia - That was a haunting story about your grandmother and I'm sorry it ended that way for her.


----------



## Glen48 (17 February 2012)

The only good thing I have seen so far is any one convicted gets a light sentence which shows the courts don't that it to seriously but still a long way to go so the invidual has choice to be or not to be.


----------



## pixel (18 February 2012)

JTLP said:


> Pixel - Very interesting take on what your friends did. Do you mind me asking how old the lady was?



 JTLP, does age really matter in such a situation?
If the verdict is "terminal", I believe there is no big difference between 26 and 62.
But fwiw, in this case we're talking a couple not yet of "pension age", but with adult children, who were living independently with children of their own; and the entire extended family supported their parents. As did their friends.

Had she "fought it" and allowed the doctors to extend her life, we would have supported her just the same. Think Jane McGrath and others like her. 

That's not the issue here. The point is, if someone is struck down by a condition that takes away their own sense of dignity and purpose, it is up to the person to decide how to handle it. If a friend were to ask my opinion, I would try and be as objective as possible; ask whether they want to consider the benefit to their children, as in Jane's case, of having their mother a few months or years longer. But also consider the impact a prolonged suffering would have on them. Does the person feel strong enough to stay level-headed? Is the partner strong and supportive enough? What part of their personality will be affected? To a ballet dancer, the loss of a leg could be catastrophic and make life unbearable. To a highly intelligent person, it might be the threat of Alzheimers or Dementia. 

Let's leave it there. The fundamental "wisdom" I have picked up in close to "three score and ten" years, is this: *Never tell another person how to live their life. Never judge anybody by your own standard. Find out theirs instead. Then be supportive, but respect their personal freedom.*


----------



## Julia (18 February 2012)

> Never tell another person how to live their life. Never judge anybody by your own standard. Find out theirs instead. Then be supportive, but respect their personal freedom.




Pixel, clearly your almost three score and ten has not been wasted if those years have given you the wisdom to offer the above advice.   Well said, thank you.


----------



## JTLP (18 February 2012)

pixel said:


> JTLP, does age really matter in such a situation?




Of course it does - no disrespect to your friend so I'll speak in the general sense - but if you were young and diagnosed as terminal I think you would feel robbed and try and fight it all you could - knowing there should theoretically be a lot of life left in you. Maybe you'd sit there hoping and wishing for a breakthrough or something (not that anyone of any age wouldn't)...

Being older probably means you've done a lot of what you've wanted to do so it's slightly easier to accept. Obviously not as black & white as I make it but I'm assuming the consensus from my forum peers is that the older you get the more you accept (in this sense) and not wanting to burden others.

Hopefully I've not offended and we can continue rationally...


----------



## Julia (18 February 2012)

I understand what you're saying here JT, but there comes a point where there can be no doubt that an illness is terminal and the person will die, despite every medical intervention and the strong will of the patient.

What advocates of voluntary euthanasia are saying is that *at that stage* we believe suffering should be minimised by allowing the person an assisted death so that he/she can go at a time of their own choosing and not be forced to endure extreme pain and loss of dignity.

If you have difficulty with this concept, do you think you could try to explain why you would find it more acceptable to allow a dying person extension and prolongation of their misery when they want an end to the pain and a peaceful death?

I'm not asking you this in any antagonistic way, but rather in an attempt to try to understand why people are opposed to voluntary euthanasia and why they feel they should have the right to say when another person should be able to die.


----------



## Glen48 (18 February 2012)

Mat be there is some difference between suicide and dying of natural causes , we will all die, just some want to go pain free and with dignity its their choice   and a  chance to say good bye to loved ones, much better option and guilt free for all.


----------



## Calliope (16 November 2012)

Apparently there is a new poll showing showing that two thirds of the population support voluntary euthanasia. I was just listening to a discussion of the subject on ABC radio...Same old Same o Same ole.

The government will never have bar of it. This is odd for a nanny state which want to control our lives from the cradle to the grave.

And i agree that politics, which never gets anything right, should keep its imperfect bureaucratic hands off this one.

I am firmly of the view that, whether to go or stay is a *personal* decision.

Anyone with a little nous can easily arrange for his/her own painless demise without causing undue stress to others.


----------



## Julia (16 November 2012)

Calliope said:


> Apparently there is a new poll showing showing that two thirds of the population support voluntary euthanasia. I was just listening to a discussion of the subject on ABC radio...Same old Same o Same ole.



Yes, I heard that discussion.  The doctor from Tasmania was particularly paternalistic and sanctimonious.  I wanted to punch him.



> The government will never have bar of it. This is odd for a nanny state which want to control our lives from the cradle to the grave.



The point was made by the Law Professor that much of the political Right is against voluntary euthanasia, and that this is in direct contradiction to their philosophy that individuals should take responsibility for their own lives.  I'd not thought of that connection before, but she's quite correct.



> And i agree that politics, which never gets anything right, should keep its imperfect bureaucratic hands off this one.



If there is to be any change in the law, then obviously politics has to be involved.  
Several decades ago abortion was illegal, women were required to leave many types of employment if they married, homosexuality was against the law etc etc.
Eventually, the will of the majority will prevail.



> I am firmly of the view that, whether to go or stay is a *personal* decision.
> 
> Anyone with a little nous can easily arrange for his/her own painless demise without causing undue stress to others.



Unfortunately many don't have your confidence about being able to successfully take their own lives.
Hence the call for medical assistance.


----------



## MrBurns (16 November 2012)

I dont think there's anything worng with deciding to take your own life if you're of sound mind BUT
the problem is in a society where the simplest things are completely stuffed up by bureaucrats and Govt agencies the implemetation of such a thing would be too risky.


----------



## Logique (17 November 2012)

Opponents will eventually be painted into a corner, when it's realized that their worst fears simply haven't materialized. I think so far there's Oregon, Holland, Switzerland, more to come in Europe.

As for the Australian medical profession, their opposition falls into the same category as the domestic shortage of doctors, especially in the bush.


----------



## MrBurns (20 November 2012)

This breaks my heart..............



> Mercy killer found dead at Perth beach
> 
> Police in Perth are investigating the death of a man who was waiting to be sentenced for the mercy killing of his severely-disabled partner.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-...o-partner27s-mercy-killing-found-dead/4381192


----------



## pixel (20 November 2012)

MrBurns said:


> This breaks my heart..............
> 
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-...o-partner27s-mercy-killing-found-dead/4381192




My wife and I heard it in this morning's news.
My first comment was "*The do-gooders and churchmen have another man's blood on their hands.* But they're so full of themselves and convinced they know best, that nothing will shake their resolve to stick their noses into other people's affairs."

I'm disgusted that none of our politicians have the guts and leadership to stop the meddling.


----------



## Julia (20 November 2012)

pixel said:


> My wife and I heard it in this morning's news.
> My first comment was "*The do-gooders and churchmen have another man's blood on their hands.* But they're so full of themselves and convinced they know best, that nothing will shake their resolve to stick their noses into other people's affairs."
> 
> I'm disgusted that none of our politicians have the guts and leadership to stop the meddling.



+1.  That poor sad old man.   

Calliope said a few posts back that it's easy enough for us to end our lives painlessly.  I suggested it wasn't, for many.  This awful case demonstrates that.  Just heartbreaking.
Bloody politicians.


----------



## Ruby (30 December 2012)

I thought I would re-enter this thread because I made comments a couple of years ago in connection with my old and frail mother, and matters have progressed since then.

My mother has deteriorated considerably in the last year; she has had several falls, a few trips to hospital, and is becoming quite confused.  She sometimes needs assistance showering - which must be very undignified for a proud and independent lady - her mobility is severely compromised and she is very weary.  The restrictions necessarily imposed on her make her angry and frustrated, and even though she is extremely well cared for, it makes no difference.  I can foresee the possibility of several more years of this gradually worsening decline, the inevitibility of which my siblings and I must also endure.  

My mother would never consider an assisted suicide, even if it were possible, so she is forced to face the slippery slope; but looking at her I find myself fast-forwarding 20 or 30 years to when I may be in the same situation, and I know with certainty that I don't want to be there.  It makes me more determined than ever to decide when I will make my own exit.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 December 2012)

This is a debate, which has been going since the time of Socrates.

Our diggers in WW2 had to make these decisions with severely injured mates who they could not evacuate and were about to fall in to Japanese hands.

There are thousands of scenarios, each a good argument for one side or the other.

There is no "right answer" on which legislation can be based.

It is a good debate and should continue, as by discussing it, we understand better.

gg


----------



## DB008 (30 December 2012)

Ruby said:


> It makes me more determined than ever to decide when I will make my own exit.




I have heard a few 'older' people say this.

They have lived their life, done all that is needed to be done, and should be able to choose their exit, with dignity, when the time comes.


----------



## Chris45 (30 December 2012)

Philip Nitschke has gone into the home brewing business.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-gas-import-scam/story-e6frg8y6-1226462002671

http://www.maxdogbrewing.com/

I hope he lasts.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 December 2012)

Chris45 said:


> Philip Nitschke has gone into the home brewing business.
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-gas-import-scam/story-e6frg8y6-1226462002671
> 
> ...




Nitschke is an extreme end of the debate.

Be careful.

I distrust extremists.

gg


----------



## Julia (30 December 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Nitschke is an extreme end of the debate.
> 
> Be careful.
> 
> ...



He is very genuinely motivated imo.  
Why else would he continually risk his licence to practise?
Have you ever met him?
(the question not just directed toward gg, but to anyone else).

Ruby, I'm so sorry about your mother.  I think most of us have formed our views about voluntary euthanasia as a result of being in a similar situation, watching someone we love rendered vulnerable and helpless due to the fragility of old age.


----------



## Ruby (31 December 2012)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Nitschke is an extreme end of the debate.
> 
> Be careful.
> 
> ...




GG - I can't agree with you.  As long as we have politicians, religious leaders, and some members of the medical profession with their heads firmly planted you-know-where on this issue, and pontificating about the "sanctity of life', we need people like Philip Nitschke to keep forcing it into our consciousness.   If he makes people feel uncomfortable and forces discussion....... well that is a good thing in my view.  I agree with Julia that his motivation is genuine.



Julia said:


> Ruby, I'm so sorry about your mother.  I think most of us have formed our views about voluntary euthanasia as a result of being in a similar situation, watching someone we love rendered vulnerable and helpless due to the fragility of old age.




Julia - thank you.  I only mention her because I think it is when we are confronted with a situation like this that we become fully aware of all the ramifications of this issue.  I know you have been in a similar situation.


----------



## gordon2007 (31 December 2012)

Ruby,
I went through this a couple of years ago. It can be devastating to watch a person go though this. It sounds like alzheimers is just kicking in. 

As for me, I definitely plan on having a plan on how to end it. My biggest concern though is getting dementia and not realising i'm stuffed already.


----------



## Julia (31 December 2012)

gordon2007 said:


> As for me, I definitely plan on having a plan on how to end it. My biggest concern though is getting dementia and not realising i'm stuffed already.



I think that's what we all fear.  And what leads some people to end their lives before they really wish to in order to preclude that.  It's one of Phillip Nitschke's main points:  that when people have the simple means to end their lives, they tend not to actually do it.  It's the reassurance that escape from senility or pain of whatever origin is possible that then lets people stop worrying about it.


----------



## Calliope (31 December 2012)

gordon2007 said:


> As for me, I definitely plan on having a plan on how to end it. .




That's the problem. It is no use *having a plan on having a plan*.

Your final exit plan needs to be fine tuned and readily accessible *now*.


----------



## Bill M (31 December 2012)

This year I sat down with my elderly Mother, my wife, a lawyer and a lawyers assistant to sign some documents at the family dining table.

My Mother is a forward thinking realistic person. She has seen death in her lifetime many times, through war, sickness, natural causes and accidents. She mingles with other elderly people and they are part of a support group. Sometimes I wonder why she called me up from Sydney to do this.

Anyhow she told me this is what she wants: I want "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" if there is no hope and If I am brain dead "PULL THE PLUG", there is no point in prolonging life. She said, note: "Under no circumstances sell the family home until I am gone."

My job is to carry out her wishes. The Lawyer said, "I am your witness and your Mother is of full mental capacity". "When the time comes Bill it will be your duty to carry out her wishes", "you have Power of Attorney." I was a bit overwhelmed at the time.

I have every intention of carrying out my Mothers wishes, why? because she told me to, it is my duty. No rat arsed politician or relgious nut is going to tell me what is right or wrong, it is written in law by my Mother. I really hope when the time comes that I won't be called, it would be far better if she passes away in her sleep but I would love to her go on for many years more.

I personally would rather die happy and in control and knowing what I am doing rather than suffering and wetting myself as a demented old man being feed through a tube in my stomach. How dare anyone tell me how to die.


----------



## bellenuit (31 December 2012)

Bill M said:


> Anyhow she told me this is what she wants: I want "DO NOT RESUSCITATE" if there is no hope and If I am brain dead "PULL THE PLUG", there is no point in prolonging life. She said, note: "Under no circumstances sell the family home until I am gone."
> 
> My job is to carry out her wishes. The Lawyer said, "I am your witness and your Mother is of full mental capacity". "When the time comes Bill it will be your duty to carry out her wishes", "you have Power of Attorney." I was a bit overwhelmed at the time.
> 
> I have every intention of carrying out my Mothers wishes, why? because she told me to, it is my duty. No rat arsed politician or relgious nut is going to tell me what is right or wrong, it is written in law by my Mother.




I am fairly sure that allowing your mother to die when she is only supported by artificial means is perfectly legal. There was a high profile death recently where the news said that life support was removed from the person, which then allowed the person to die, because that was the wishes of the person in his will. I can't recall who it was, but I am pretty sure it was in Australia.

Where the law intervenes is when a doctor/nurse/relative/carer actively does something to cause death, even if that is the wish of the person. I believe that too should be legal if the person gave consent to euthanasia when in sound mind, just as your mother did in regards to not being resuscitated.

That being said, I know quite a few nurses who tell me it is not uncommon for them to "encourage" death when the know that is the wish of the patient and the patient is in severe pain.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (31 December 2012)

Bill M said:


> This year I sat down with my elderly Mother, my wife, a lawyer and a lawyers assistant to sign some documents at the family dining table.
> 
> My Mother is a forward thinking realistic person. She has seen death in her lifetime many times, through war, sickness, natural causes and accidents. She mingles with other elderly people and they are part of a support group. Sometimes I wonder why she called me up from Sydney to do this.
> 
> ...




I believe it is called a Health Advanced Directive, I had one done when I was in the ADF and going overseas. It is still in place.

Most muggles don't have the balls to do it though.

They want the guvment or doctors, or the hospital to make the decision for them.

gg


----------



## Julia (31 December 2012)

Bill M said:


> This year I sat down with my elderly Mother, my wife, a lawyer and a lawyers assistant to sign some documents at the family dining table.



Good to know your mother is being realistic, Bill.  However, you need not have incurred legal fees to ensure her wishes will be adhered to.  You will have a document in NSW which is equivalent to the Queensland Advance Health Directive.  This is a legal document, completed by your mother (or you when you consider you should also think about the inevitable, even if it were to occur via a car accident eg), in conjunction with her GP.
It has multiple scenarios which you tick indicating whether you want, e.g. antibiotics, assisted breathing, in other words medical intervention of any kind.
For the document to be 100% effective, a copy probably needs to be lodged at her local hospital, plus a copy with you and her GP.

Having a legal document in place makes an unfortunate event easier for everyone.  The medical staff have something clear to go by, and are not obliged to consult you when you may be in a distressed state.


> My job is to carry out her wishes. The Lawyer said, "I am your witness and your Mother is of full mental capacity". "When the time comes Bill it will be your duty to carry out her wishes", "you have Power of Attorney." I was a bit overwhelmed at the time.



Presumably, then, you have also had her execute an Enduring Power of Attorney in order that you can operate her bank accounts, carry out real estate transactions etc?



> I personally would rather die happy and in control and knowing what I am doing rather than suffering and wetting myself as a demented old man being feed through a tube in my stomach. How dare anyone tell me how to die.



Repeated surveys have shown that around 80% of the population thinks likewise.  But without clear instructions to the contrary, the ethos of the medical profession is to preserve life.  No matter that it's a complete nonsense when the patient is going to die anyway.



bellenuit said:


> I am fairly sure that allowing your mother to die when she is only supported by artificial means is perfectly legal.



Yes, that's right.  But to have the patient's wishes clearly set out in writing makes it easier for everyone.
You will always get some young doctor full of his own reluctance to not sustain life, an abhorrent situation where it's about that young doctor rather than what is best for the patient.

Ridiculous levels of expensive care are employed when people are going to die anyway, often because staff have no instructions to the contrary and the family are too distressed to be clear about what the dying person would have wanted.



> Where the law intervenes is when a doctor/nurse/relative/carer actively does something to cause death, even if that is the wish of the person. I believe that too should be legal if the person gave consent to euthanasia when in sound mind, just as your mother did in regards to not being resuscitated.



I agree, but as the law stands at present, any medical personnel acting in such a way can be charged.
The way around it if the patient is able to communicate and is in pain is to have them respond "Yes" to the question "are you in any pain"?  If the answer is yes, the nurse/doctor is entirely justified in increasing the morphine et al dosage.  As far as the law is concerned, if the dosage required to control pain happens to result in the patient's death, that's acceptable.



> That being said, I know quite a few nurses who tell me it is not uncommon for them to "encourage" death when the know that is the wish of the patient and the patient is in severe pain.



Yes, as above.  



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Most muggles don't have the balls to do it though.
> 
> They want the guvment or doctors, or the hospital to make the decision for them.
> 
> gg



That is sadly true.  People are reluctant to talk about death.  So they remain in denial of its inevitability until ultimately their families are faced with the reality of not actually knowing whether their mother/father would want heroic medical measures taken or not.

We are all going to die.  Best, therefore, surely, to ensure we are not vulnerable to being kept alive through artificial means (something I can't imagine anyone would want) simply because we have failed to make provision for a more comfortable alternative.


----------



## DocK (1 January 2013)

From personal experience I can add that another important reason to have an Advanced Health Directive in place is to avoid dissent and stress between siblings or the surviving relatives of the dying patient.  I begged my mother to put her desired course of treatment/non-treatment in writing, and to very clearly stipulate exactly what action she did or did not want taken in various scenarios.  My brother and I disagreed very strongly upon what measures should or shouldn't have been taken to prolong my father's life, and I'm just grateful that Mum was quite clear on what his preferences were.  Unfortunately the disagreement between her children did nothing to make a difficult time any easier for her, and is something best avoided if at all possible imo.


----------



## gordon2007 (2 January 2013)

The wife and I both have advanced health directives. What I mean by 'plan' is that if we're in such health as we know we're not going to get better, we've got plans to end it on our terms. However we don't have the exact method down yet. The only thing that will stop either of us is if the last surviving person gets full on dementia so fast that they would not be able to act on our 'plan'.

Neither one of us are ready to call stumps nor do we want die any time soon. We thoroughly enjoy life and living. Hopefully we've both got  a fair few innings to play yet. But when the time comes, we will self euthanise. 



Calliope said:


> That's the problem. It is no use *having a plan on having a plan*.
> 
> Your final exit plan needs to be fine tuned and readily accessible *now*.


----------



## explod (2 January 2013)

gordon2007 said:


> The wife and I both have advanced health directives. What I mean by 'plan' is that if we're in such health as we know we're not going to get better, we've got plans to end it on our terms. However we don't have the exact method down yet. The only thing that will stop either of us is if the last surviving person gets full on dementia so fast that they would not be able to act on our 'plan'.
> 
> Neither one of us are ready to call stumps nor do we want die any time soon. We thoroughly enjoy life and living. Hopefully we've both got  a fair few innings to play yet. But when the time comes, we will self euthanise.




Agree, me too.


----------



## DB008 (15 January 2013)

Belgian twins killed by doctors in unique euthanasia case

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/he...se/story-fneuzlbd-1226553945755#ixzz2HzgNFjAD


----------



## MrBurns (15 January 2013)

DB008 said:


> Belgian twins killed by doctors in unique euthanasia case
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/he...se/story-fneuzlbd-1226553945755#ixzz2HzgNFjAD




How simple easy and right that is............


----------



## sydboy007 (15 January 2013)

reminds me of my Gran when I was heading to Mexico last year.  She asked me if i could procure her some of that stuff she's heard about (nembutal).  Told her I wasn't willing to risk transporting that kind of stuff across multiple international borders.

After seeing her father die of lung cancer, well I have no faith in a society that forces the terminally ill to sip on their morphine and count the breathless minutes.

Length of "life" is no substitute to quality of life.  I would say most of the numbats against euthanasia have NEVER had the trauma of watching a loved one face incredible pain day in day out with no hope of things getting better.

Within our family it's very clear that when it's ya time to go, don't let the doctors cheat you from it.

I remember my Grandpa telling the extended family he would haunt them if they pushed him into hospital to extend his life, but he needn't have worried.  We were just lucky to have an understanding doctor who helped to move things along, but still, it really shouldn't have to be like that.

I can't help but think if you had a pet in such agony but kept it alive that the same numbats against euthanasia would have no problem criticising you for it.


----------



## DB008 (12 February 2013)

Healthy Vancouver senior commits suicide in bid to change right-to-die law



> “I am a 91-year-old woman who has decided to end my life in the very near future. I do not have a terminal illness; I am simply old, tired and becoming dependent, after a wonderful life of independence,” she wrote. “By the time people read this, I will have died. I am writing this letter to advocate for a change in the law so that all will be able to make this choice.”




http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/11/healthy-vancouver-senior-commits-suicide-in-bid-to-change-right-to-die-law/


----------



## dutchie (27 March 2013)

Just watched this movie. Well worth watching.

http://www.sbs.com.au/films/video/21303875659/A-Short-Stay-In-Switzerland


----------



## Calliope (19 December 2013)

Essential reading *before *you have a stroke.



> INTENSIVE-CARE nurses know things you don't and wouldn't want to know.
> 
> Kristen McConnell, an ICU nurse, writes for The New York Post explaining why they would never want to be admitted to hospital:
> Last year I graduated from nursing school and began working in an intensive care unit in a large hospital. During an orientation class, a nurse who has worked on the unit for six years gave a presentation on the various kinds of strokes.
> ...




Read more;
http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/diary-of-an-intensive-care-nurse/story-fnkgbb6w-1226786372897


----------



## Chris45 (19 December 2013)

Calliope said:


> Essential reading *before *you have a stroke.



A GP recently told me that they would ignore a DNR tattoo because of the chance it may have been done while drunk or something.

He said that a wrist bracelet with instructions engraved on it might be more successful. It would be a major nuisance, but a wrist bracelet that could only be removed by cutting might work.


----------



## Calliope (13 April 2014)

An email today from the VEP              



> VEP Party WA Senate Campaign
> 
> 
> We Almost Did It!
> ...


----------



## DB008 (13 April 2014)

*THE GREENS

DYING WITH DIGNITY*​


> Terminally ill people should have the right to end their lives on their own terms. The Greens would legislate to give people that right.
> 
> WHAT DO YOU NEED TO KNOW?
> 
> ...





http://greens.org.au/dying-with-dignity


----------



## DB008 (21 May 2014)

*Euthanasia drug raids are 'traumatising'*



> ELDERLY people are being traumatised by constant police raids as officers search for banned euthanasia drugs, a right-to-die advocate says.
> 
> A 64-year-old woman, from Dayboro near Brisbane, was charged earlier this month for importing a bottle of pentobarbital, also known as Nembutal, from Mexico.
> 
> ...




http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/two-charged-with-importing-euthanasia-drug/story-e6frfku9-1226925609982


----------



## Julia (21 May 2014)

Whilst in total sympathy for anyone wishing to have control of the timing and manner of their death, it is absolutely widely known that to import Nembutal is illegal.

So anyone doing so would have to be aware that police raids and subsequent charges for the importation of an illegal substance is entirely possible.


----------



## SirRumpole (24 July 2014)

Phillip Nitschke has been deregistered from the AMA

About time, the man is a ghoul and a disgrace to the medical profession.

I support voluntary euthanasia but we don't need people like him as spokermen.


----------



## awg (24 July 2014)

I support euthanasia with reservations.

Hearing Nitschke interviewed at the time, I though surely he has lost his mind speaking as he did on the case that led to his deregistration...he did pull himself together towards the end, but not before displaying a shocking disregard and callous attitude. 

His excuse was utterly flimsy and legalistic, and did not adhere to the standards I would expect
(and are legally required, afaic, for a medical doctor)

This mornings defence that the man "was a serial-killer" is Mengele-like in its monstrosity

seems he was in extensive correspondence with this fellow, I have a feeling where there is smoke, there is fire..the cops and others want to bring him down, if he isnt careful he may find himself in jail for a long time....he appears to have made a character judgement in this matter?


----------



## Julia (24 July 2014)

SirRumpole said:


> Phillip Nitschke has been deregistered from the AMA



He has not been deregistered.
He has been suspended, presumably pending further enquiry.  Nowhere has it been stated that he has been deregistered, so it would be good if you do not misrepresent the facts.



awg said:


> I support euthanasia with reservations.
> 
> Hearing Nitschke interviewed at the time, I though surely he has lost his mind speaking as he did on the case that led to his deregistration...he did pull himself together towards the end, but not before displaying a shocking disregard and callous attitude.
> 
> ...



awg, I agree it was a bizarre interview.  My interpretation, however, is that he simply has a different attitude toward suicide than many.  In that interview, his main point was that he believes suicide can be a completely rational act.  In principle, I agree with that.  There are many situations where the predicament of a person is so utterly dreadful that to be dead would be preferable.  Therefore, in the absence of any assistance toward a peaceful end by the medical profession, that person will choose suicide, usually absolutely reluctantly and as a measure of desperation to escape the pain they are in, whatever the origin of that pain.

In the case of the person who was the subject of the interview, the 40 something year old, it seemed wrong to me for Dr Nitschke to accept (in the absence of physical disease and with respect to his age) that, before making the irrevocable decision to kill himself, he needed no psychological/psychiatric referral.  This, it seems to me, and I might be wrong, is where the concern about his behaviour has arisen.

People are so quick to jump on the bandwagon of criticism toward Dr Nitschke.  I'd just like to remind people that it's largely his single minded efforts that, over the last two decades or so, have brought the cause of voluntary euthanasia to public attention.  The only other individual who has made a real contribution is Dr Rodney Syme.

I met Dr Nitschke many years ago and found him an extraordinarily compassionate and committed person.
I expect when one has to every day fight for what one believes in, often in the face of vicious opposition (viz the dismantling by Kevin Andrews et al of the Liberal government of a perfectly workable voluntary euthanasia law in the Northern Territory), it's easy for commitment to turn into zealotry.

The 'establishment' has been gunning for Dr Nitschke for some time and the interview finally gave them what they were looking for.
I feel sad and disappointed about it all.   The anti-voluntary euthanasia lobby now has a tailor made case for why voluntary euthanasia should not be made legal.  To that end, Dr Nitschke has badly let down his own cause.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 July 2014)

Julia said:


> He has not been deregistered.
> He has been suspended, presumably pending further enquiry.  Nowhere has it been stated that he has been deregistered, so it would be good if you do not misrepresent the facts.




Dr Nitschke apparently believes he's been de registered



> Dr Nitschke will appeal against the decision, which he said is purely political and a "dirty little midnight assassination".
> 
> "It's clear to me that the Medical Board has conducted a trial by media which goes against the rule of law and Australian democracy as we know it," Dr Nitschke said.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...-not-surprised-by-nitschke-suspension/5621856

And if you watch the video on that link you will hear the word come from his own lips.


----------



## Julia (25 July 2014)

Dr Nitschke is understandably emotional and his language presumably reflects that.  He is not apologetic and is taking an aggressive stance in response.   He probably feels the need to do so, given how little support he seems to be receiving.


----------



## SirRumpole (25 July 2014)

Julia said:


> Dr Nitschke is understandably emotional and his language presumably reflects that.  He is not apologetic and is taking an aggressive stance in response.   He probably feels the need to do so, given how little support he seems to be receiving.




I once held Dr Nitschke in high esteem as a compassionate man fighting for terminally ill people to choose the time and means of their death, but after his increasingly extreme approach to the subject I began to doubt his motives. 

Following the case for which he was suspended I began to wonder if he just gets turned on by death and gets some sort of thrill in knowing he has helped to kill people. I just hope that if he is ever  to practice again,  it's not before he is given a thorough and rigorous psychiatric examination to determine if his motives are really altruistic or are driven by some darker desires.


----------



## Knobby22 (25 July 2014)

I hope he doesn't take it too hard. I wouldn't want him to become suicidal.  :bricks1:


----------



## Craton (28 July 2014)

A subject close to home.

Being with and witnessing my dearly departed wife's death (from lung cancer) and dealing with callous reactions from some doctors in the ER as she approached her final days, well to say they were cold hearted and matter-of-fact would be putting it mildly.
I struggled to understand how these docs acted in the manner they did but over time, I've come to understand that there are many factors to consider (they no doubt are confronted with death almost on a daily basis) and have come to accept that their "bedside" manner wasn't as cold-hearted and couldn't care less as I first thought.

On the opposite end, I must say that all the palliative care staff at RAH were brilliant and very compassionate in helping us to cope with what they knew and helped us to understand, would be the inevitable outcome. My wife knew her time was up and just wanted "...to go to sleep." long before it happened.

From my point of view we do have euthanasia but it's disguised, not openly discussed unless one seeks information regarding the "end stages", and I for one, approve it.

We keep death at arms length and don't want to be confronted with it let alone discuss it until we need to but death is part of life. I know from my experience that my wife hated not only the emotional and financial burden her illness placed on our family, but she despised the fact that she didn't have a "right to die" on her own terms. She knew she was dying, we knew it because we could see it but we were forced to cling to a vain hope. My wife felt forced to go through the motions and to her credit, she put on a very brave face. All the while she became a drug filled shell being kept alive via numerous hospital visits to address pain and dehydration, she felt she was only living waiting for death to arrive. 

It has become a taboo subject this voluntary euthanasia but it has many merits and let me be callous, if approved would surely lessen the burden on taxpayers coffers and hospital resources plus making the life of all involved richer, more fulfilling and certainly dignified. Perhaps it would make us all embrace life and value it a little more too. I'm all for getting the heads out of the sand and allowing those that choose to, the right to leave their mortal coil at a time of their choosing.

So from this very personal experience and that of other deaths close to me as well, I understand Nitschke's attitude and fully support his cause.


----------



## Julia (28 July 2014)

Craton, an honest and insightful post.  I'm so sorry about what your wife endured.

A close friend of mine died just over a year ago.  She was diagnosed with an aggressive form of leukaemia, had secondaries in various organs and bones. 

She and her husband had enjoyed a very good marriage, worked in jobs they liked until retirement, then spent that retirement travelling the world.  They had three children, no problems with them, plus loved grandchildren.

She said "I've had the most satisfying and wonderful life, couldn't have asked for better.   I'm in no pain and am assured that as the end approaches I can be made comfortable.  I'm happy to die here at home with the person who has loved and supported me all my life".  She was calm and rational.

However, her two sons protested.  "No, mum, there's always hope", they said.   "You owe it to us to try the chemo".
She has been informed that it was highly unlikely the very aggressive chemo would save her life but the medical advisers were prepared to make it available if that was what she wanted.  They warned her it would make her very sick.   

She reluctantly agreed to go into hospital, in a capital city, away from everything that was familiar to her, and have the treatment.   

She quickly became really ill, non-stop vomiting, diarrhoea, hair all fell out, infections everywhere, constant transfusions, until finally two weeks later she had a massive haemorrhage, vomiting blood all over her husband who was at her bedside.  He continues to relive her death in this horrible way.

So, I think one discussion that should be held just as much as euthanasia is whether or not to be treated.
To say "there's always hope", is just another platitude, and - given the sophistication of medical diagnostics these days - surely it's better not to push someone into a painful, dreadful death just to satisfy the reluctance of some family members to let go.

Another example is the many people, often in their 90s, in nursing homes, who are demented or otherwise rendered unable to function, whose families insist on their admission to hospital for acute treatment if, e,g.
pneumonia occurs.


----------



## Knobby22 (28 July 2014)

Terrible story, Julia.

I have come around due to this thread to be for euthanasia though I still believe that there should be checks to ensure that the person is doing it for the right reasons and not being coerced. 

Craton, just wondering, would your wife have undertaken euthanasia?...and if so, how far down the track of the illness and did you explore options?  I understand if you don't want to respond.


----------



## Craton (28 July 2014)

@Julia, thank you and so sorry for what you've been through with your Dad and your own experiences.

@Knobby22. Cheers, hard to discuss but welcome the chance to share with and perhaps inform others.

Disclaimer.

Sorry for the long post, I feel it's necessary for the context of this discussion.
There are some graphic descriptions contained in it and I make no apology for that.
Note that my wife of nearly 30 years had small cell lung cancer, discovered in her right lung. It was caused by the environment and not her smoking cigarettes (she quit as soon as she was diagnosed), anyhow the oncologists/specialists were all very adamant about this fact.

When she was first diagnosed in late '07 the lung cancer was already the size of a tennis ball, long story but essentially her doc was chasing Reflux or a gastric cause for her periodic vomiting. Once the cancer was found she was told to "...get your affairs in order." Man, that was a real shock let me tell you. We researched and became informed and was distressed to find the the low percentage of survival and the stats are not very good for this type of cancer, even less so for surviving past five years.

On the way back from Adelaide out on the open highway, she discussed how easy it would be to "...just head for the front of a truck." Very depressing to hear her talk like this but as she said, the chance of survival and the 2~3yrs death sentence coupled with the end stages wasn't something to look forward to. This was the first time we discussed "euthanasia" openly and in depth. Even so, she did her best to stay positive and go through the prescribed treatments of radiation then chemo.

As RAH said surgery was not an option because the tumour was near/in the trachea, the first treatment was to be radiation, this didn't do much. She didn't want or liked the thought of chemo and the side affects. Then we heard of the Peter Mac clinic in Melbourne with the mission statement of being the clinic par excellence for cancer patient treatment, so we sort a second opinion. Angels from heaven is how I'd describe them.

After a look see the surgeon there said pity we didn't come to them first but they could remove the right lung and then follow up with chemo. The chemo was supposed to knock out any remaining cancer cells. So in late April '08 the operation was done. The follow up chemo treatment was done in our home town so that helped but the chemo just knocked her about so much it was worse than the disease. Lots and lots of vomiting to the point of dehydration on several occasions and making her virtually bed ridden so a renewed but less effective cocktail was formulated. Finally that finished around Oct '08 and she went back to work by Feb of '09.

Follow ups throughout '09 and '10 showed no signs of cancer so she was officially in remission. Then, around Sept 2010 a spot showed up in her remaining lung and by late July 2011 it was down to Royal Melb. to perform a "wedge resection" to remove the spot. Unfortunately it was too late, the cancer had spread and was into her organs, liver, kidneys, spleen, the other lung, she was literally riddled with it.

She was given "...six months to (a long pause) many years." That was another shock. "How in the hell couldn't they find it or do something earlier?" my wife asked. An even more depressing drive home that one. She was already too weak, on O2 regularly by then, endless pain killers and I finally put my foot down and bought her the wheelchair she never wanted. 

There was one last hope in that if she had a receptor to a new drug that was successful in over 30% of patients but the tests in Sept '11. down in Melbourne again for that receptor proved negative. The oncologist still prescribed the medication but to no avail. This treatment caused huge reactions so that treatment was stopped after six weeks. From then on it was to continue the palliative care via Adelaide and our local hospital with O2 and pain killers, anti vomiting medications etc., basically we were just trying to make the most of whatever time we had together and sharing her with her family and our kids down in Adelaide. Travelling was very stressful and tiring for her so Adelaide become her home for the last couple of months.

Seeing her always in pain, not being able to have a decent sleep, not eating, not drinking, being barely able to wash and toilet herself was demeaning not only for her but to all of us to say the least. A go-getter woman who loved her family above all else, to see her forced to prolong the inevitable truly frustrated her. She just wanted "...to go to sleep." Christmas '11 she tried her best to again go on as normal but sadly we could see she was a spent force. Two days later she was in the palliative care unit of RAH.

After another three days of limbo but finally on that fateful evening, those long drawn out hours of seeing her trashing in her hospital bed, hearing her speaking of coins, grabbing at sheets, doubled up in pain, trying to get comfortable, oxygen going flat out, bleeding frothy blood from her mouth and nose, terrible images that will haunt me to my dying day I wondered why is this allowed to happen. No amount of medication was helping to lessen her suffering. One even thinks of placing a pillow...

Thankfully due to the late hour no-one else in our family saw the pain and the agony she was going through nor hear her last lucid words to me, "Tell them I just want to go to sleep!" Finally, not long after the main doc started his shift, at around 8 am the automated little box loaded with morphine, the legal euthanasia went in. She past away with all of us present just after midday on the 30th Dec 2011.  R.I.P my love. See you on the flipside babe.

As she and I had discussed "euthanasia" on many, many occasions and with family members too, I know that if she had the option she would have liked to have died at a place and time of her choosing in an orderly and dignified fashion. She contemplated a few places that would've appealed like a favourite and private lookout or down on her sister's farm, of which her sister was more than happy with, anywhere in nature appealed to her greatly. She hated the fact that she was a burden financially and that she could see the anguish her illness created, she wanted to lessen not only her pain but our pain too but how could she?

For our part, we gave/made no demands. How can you of a dying person?
We did all we could to make her time as comfortable and loving as possible and tons of it (so lucky to have that within our family) and making her understand that we are there for her wants and needs, not ours. We weren't the ones with the terminal cancer.
I can tell you though, it is very distressing seeing your wife eating, only to throw it all up within an hour or so. Day after day, night after night not being able to sleep, not being able to keep even water down, day in, day out, week after week, month after month as we all know the outcome of this scenario. What quality of life is that I ask.

Her last months, weeks, especially her last days and hours were terrible to say the least and no one should die this way. I know this is often used but we really do have far more sympathy towards our pets than to our own kind. Shame on us for doing so.


----------



## Julia (28 July 2014)

Craton, it's just a terrible indictment on the medical profession that your wife was allowed to suffer like that.
There is no need for it.

This is where an Advance Health Directive can be so useful.  At least in Qld it's a legally binding document and allows you to set out - in conjunction with your GP who has to attest to your competence when making the document - what treatment you do want and what you wish to reject.  You can also put in writing that, if a return to health is impossible, you want all available medication to be made available to you to ensure you do not suffer.

In your wife's case it sounds as though such ultimate palliative care was far too late in being instituted.

My mother had an AHD, and was also absolutely lucid when her death was inevitable, so as to be able to make her wishes completely clear.  She had a gangrenous ulcer and only an amputation of lower leg would have saved her life.  This was not acceptable to her and she chose instead to die.  From the time of making that decision clear to the medical staff she was well managed with morphine, then when the level of that drug induced hallucinations, the addition of sedatives to ease her into a semi comatose state until she died.  
If there is such a thing as a good death, that is what she experienced.

It's immensely sad that similar management wasn't offered to your wife.  The suffering she and your whole family endured should simply never happen.  I'm so sorry.


----------



## Knobby22 (29 July 2014)

Thanks Craton. You must be a strong person as was your wife.


----------



## Craton (30 July 2014)

Julia said:


> Craton, it's just a terrible indictment on the medical profession that your wife was allowed to suffer like that.
> There is no need for it.




I/we don't hold any grudges. To be fair the palliative services all round were brilliant and they, of course, can only work within the framework of our laws and clearly, these laws need changing and upgrading.

Further, I would say its an indictment on our society that allows this type of suffering to occur but the more evidence of the cruel way people are allowed to die, like my wife, the more pressure is placed on the moral consciousness. Premier Baird in NSW is now advocating medical use marijuana after experiencing first hand the trauma people go through.

Speaking strictly within the topic of this thread; we need to stop taking this extreme religious stance that life is so sacred (and this spills into the abortion debate) that we exclude sensible, rational, moral even financial grounds to a persons right or wish to die.


----------



## Craton (30 July 2014)

Knobby22 said:


> Thanks Craton. You must be a strong person as was your wife.




Thanks mate and yes she was but I've not mentioned that at and around the time my wife was diagnosed, I was also ferrying my Dad down to Adelaide for treatment of his "normal pressure hydrocephalus". Couple with his dementia ("...my brain went bang."), juggling my wife's illness, trying to keep my business afloat (doors still open), being the eldest son, being a dad, grandad myself and having to put down my dog, yeah. 

All leading to eventually burying my wife then in Aug, 12, doing the same with Dad and his in another story of playing the waiting game. He knew he was a spent shell and wanted to end his suffering long before he ended up in the severe dementia ward of a nursing home. It was the last place he wanted to go to, to die. 

What can one do? Be strong? Maybe.

Simply one has to put one foot in front of the other and take whatever comes on-the-chin and deal with it as it happens all for the other person and all within the constraints of our medical and legal systems. Oh, and don't get me started on the travel, accommodation, parking costs that were incurred, coupled with the stress of not being in ones hometown. Us remote/regional dwellers are chronically disadvantaged. IPTAAS? ITCRAP!

Funny how typing these posts has made me realise just how much my life has been in limbo since '07 because no doubt, I'm still dealing and coming to terms with all these tragic events.

In the short term I really do wish we get our shyte together and respect the wishes of those that know they can no longer contribute in a meaning full way, like Dad (he used to watch a blank TV screen), or have no chance of having any quality of life as per my wife. Its the most humane thing we can do giving people the option of saying, yep, I want to go now.


----------



## DB008 (22 August 2014)

Hmm, I wouldn't place too much truthfulness on a newspaper, but this is interesting...


*Nearly quarter of suicide cases at Dignitas are Brits*



> One Briton a fortnight is choosing suicide at Dignitas, as campaigners say it is unethical to force terminally ill people abroad to die






> Terminally ill Britons now make up a nearly one quarter of users of suicide clinics like Dignitas in Switzerland, new figures have shown.
> Only Germany has a higher numbers of ‘suicide tourists’ visiting institutions to end their own lives.




http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11046232/Nearly-quarter-of-suicide-cases-at-Dignitas-are-Brits.html


----------



## DB008 (20 October 2014)

*Right-to-die: Grandmother starves herself to death after UK's assisted suicide laws left her with 'no alternative'*



> An elderly woman has starved herself to death to get around the UK’s tight and restrictive laws on assisted suicide.
> 
> Octogenarian Jean Davies, who is also a right-to-die campaigner, spent five weeks attempting to end her life and succeeded in doing so on 1 October.
> 
> ...




http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/grandmother-starves-herself-to-death-after-uks-assisted-suicide-laws-left-her-with-no-alternative-9804411.html


----------



## DB008 (28 October 2014)

*A little girl allowed to die*



> A mother in the U.K. has made legal history after winning a High Court case, that allowed her to make the heart-wrenching decision to end the life of her severely disabled 12-year-old daughter Nancy.
> 
> When Nancy Fitzmaurice was born blind and suffering from hydrocphalus, meningitis and septicaemia the outcome for her was a life in which she would be unable to talk, walk, eat or even drink.
> 
> ...





http://www.kidspot.com.au/a-little-girl-allowed-to-die/


----------



## Craton (29 October 2014)

With all the focus of late on terrorism, Ebola, tax, GST, the Medibank Private float, our economy, Subs, rogue fighters and Islam et al, no wonder with so many distractions there's been little discussion in the public arena on the OP title.

I guess our rights mean little in todays maelstrom of existence. *sigh*


----------



## DB008 (3 November 2014)

*Brittany Maynard ends her own life*



> Brittany Maynard, the terminally ill American woman who planned to end her life voluntarily, has died.
> 
> The 29-year-old brain cancer sufferer, who was diagnosed with a stage 4 malignant brain tumour in April and given six months to live, passed away over the weekend at her home in Oregon using drugs made legal to her by the state's Death with Dignity Act.
> 
> "Goodbye to all my dear friends and family that I love. Today is the day I have chosen to pass away with dignity in the face of my terminal illness, this terrible brain cancer that has taken so much from me ... but would have taken so much more," she published on Facebook.




http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/brittany-maynard-ends-her-own-life-20141103-11g21q.html


----------



## DB008 (10 November 2014)

*Assisted dying will be made legal in UK ‘within two years’*



> A change in the law that will allow terminally ill people to be helped to end their lives is inevitable and will happen within as little as a couple of years, according to the deputy chair of the British Medical Association (BMA).
> 
> Speaking in a personal capacity, Dr Kailash Chand has thrown his weight behind Lord Falconer’s private member’s bill, which would offer assisted dying to terminally ill patients who are deemed mentally capable and are likely to have less than six months to live.
> 
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/08/assisted-dying-will-be-legal-within-two-years-bma-deputy


----------



## DB008 (26 February 2015)

*Canada's Supreme Court overturns ban on euthanasia*



> The Supreme Court of Canada has overturned a ban on physician-assisted suicide, unanimously reversing a decision it made in 1993.
> 
> The decision puts Canada in the company of a handful of Western countries where the practice will be legal.
> 
> ...




http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0206/678369-canada-euthanasia/


----------



## Logique (27 February 2015)

Quite a nice article I thought. I have a feeling it might already be on this thread somewhere, sorry for the double up.



> *Have you got 'hurry sickness*'? - February 27, 2015
> http://www.smh.com.au/small-busines...e-you-got-hurry-sickness-20150226-13q7vv.html
> 
> James Adonis is one of Australia's best-known people-management thinkers
> ...


----------



## DB008 (21 June 2015)

*Dutch paediatricians back right to die for under 12s​*


> The Hague (AFP) - Terminally ill children in unbearable suffering should be given the right to die, the Dutch Paediatricians Association said on Friday, urging the suppression of the current 12-year age limit.
> 
> "We feel that an arbitrary age limit such as 12 should be changed and that each child's ability to ask to die should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis," said Eduard Verhagen, paediatrics professor at Groningen University who is on the association's ethics commission.
> 
> ...





http://news.yahoo.com/dutch-paediatricians-back-die-under-12s-150713269.html


----------



## DB008 (7 August 2015)

I was listening to this on the drive home today.

Late Night Live - (Monday - Thursday 10pm. Repeated: 4pm the following day)

Brilliant!

Well done ABC.

*Dying with dignity​*


> Stephen Hawking, a sufferer of motor neuron disease, admitted in 2015 that he would consider assisted suicide if he had nothing more to contribute and was a burden to those around him.
> 
> He described keeping somebody alive against their wishes as 'the ultimate' form of 'indignity'.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/helen-joyce/6677822​
Podcast
http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programitem/pg4OVnn94V?play=true​


----------



## explod (7 August 2015)

Julia said:


> Dr Nitschke is understandably emotional and his language presumably reflects that.  He is not apologetic and is taking an aggressive stance in response.   He probably feels the need to do so, given how little support he seems to be receiving.




This is a very interesting post.   I had been talking to Julia back in January by email and she was feeling frustrated with the forum and discussed moving on. Yet ASF was everything to her.  Perhaps her death was a natural cause but cannot help feeling she had given up.  

Was working on going up to visit as I had been in her space myself.  Eight years back loaded up with every tablet in the house,  but woke 15 hours later to the screams of my Daughter on the phone.  Had sent her a last message.   So glad I came through.  But apart from her beloved dog Julia did not have that family.  So priveledged and lucky. 

We need support.   Remember well a young Constable hung himself in a local park,  he had been stood down pending an enquiry over a wrongful arrest.  His Seargeant it turns out was more responsible but the young fellow was isolated from his peers and his girlfriend had left.  The pastor very correctly identified that we need anchours or we drift away. 


Find it hard getting Julia's spirit out of my mind on this, could be wrong,  what do others think. ?


----------



## DB008 (8 October 2015)

*California Governor Signs Hard-Won Right-to-Die Legislation​*


> California will become the fifth state to allow terminally ill patients to legally end their lives using doctor-prescribed drugs after Gov. Jerry Brown announced Monday he signed one of the most emotionally charged bills of the year.
> 
> Brown, a lifelong Catholic and former Jesuit seminarian, announced he signed the legislation after thoroughly considering all opinions and discussing the issue with many people, including a Catholic bishop and two of Brown's doctors.
> 
> ...




http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/California-Governor-Signs-Right-To-Die-Legislation--330745292.html​


----------



## pixel (8 October 2015)

DB008 said:


> *California Governor Signs Hard-Won Right-to-Die Legislation​*
> http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/California-Governor-Signs-Right-To-Die-Legislation--330745292.html​




One brave, humanitarian politician, whose thinking is not limited to himself, but the rights of others.
We can only hope that more politicians follow his example.


----------



## DB008 (2 March 2016)

*Medically assisted death weeks away in Canada​*


> A couple of centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin wrote that death and taxes were the only certain things in this world ”” perfectly capturing the dual pressures now bearing down on Canada's new government.Not only must Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his ministers come up with their first budget by the end of this month, but the Liberal Government is also being forced to produce a law in the next few weeks to permit medically assisted death.
> 
> The deadline for an assisted-death law comes from Canada's Supreme Court, which ruled in January that the country's parliament had to have legislation passed and in force by June.
> 
> ...




More on link below...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-02/medically-assisted-death-weeks-away-in-canada/7212122​


----------



## DB008 (8 March 2016)

*Euthanasia advocate and Melbourne doctor may risk jail in fight to assist terminal cancer patient​*


> Melbourne doctor Rodney Syme could lose his medical licence and face criminal charges if he defies regulatory authorities and proceeds to help a 70-year-old man end his life.
> 
> *Dr Syme promised to give Bernard Erica, who has terminal cancer, the lethal and illegal drug Nembutal for him to take at a time of his own choosing.*
> 
> ...





http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/doctor-risks-jail-in-fight-for-euthanasia-laws/7221212​


----------



## DB008 (12 March 2016)

Where are we at in Australia?


*California To Permit Medically Assisted Suicide As Of June 9​*



> California Gov. Jerry Brown signed landmark legislation last October that would allow terminally ill people to request life-ending medication from their physicians.
> 
> But no one knew when the law would take effect, because of the unusual way in which the law was passed ”” in a legislative "extraordinary session" called by Brown. The bill could not go into effect until 90 days after that session adjourned.
> 
> ...




http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/03/10/469970753/californias-law-on-medically-assisted-suicide-to-take-effect-june-9​


----------



## Logique (13 March 2016)

Dr Rodney Syme receiving counselling from the board


----------



## Logique (14 April 2016)

Good on you Bob.



> *'Absurd': Bob Hawke blasts lack of political will to legalise euthanasia* - April 14, 2016
> http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...l-to-legalise-euthanasia-20160413-go5w9u.html
> 
> ..."It's just an unarguable case," Mr Hawke told ABC Radio National on Thursday.
> ...


----------



## DB008 (28 May 2016)

Election around the corner and the politicians are too scared to touch on this issue. Cowards


*Vote Compass: Aussies want it, but euthanasia still a 'great untouched issue'​*


> The major parties are not touching it, but Vote Compass results show Australians are overwhelmingly in favour of allowing voluntary euthanasia for the terminally ill.
> 
> "Euthanasia is still the great untouched issue," ABC election analyst Antony Green told Lateline.
> 
> ...





http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-25/vote-compass-euthanasia/7441176​


----------



## DB008 (10 June 2016)

*Assisted Suicide Is Now Legal in Canada 

And One Province Is Providing Free Drugs to Do It​*


> It's now legal for doctors and other healthcare providers in Canada to help patients die.
> 
> The federal government missed its June 6 deadline to implement its assisted death legislation, Bill C-14, so provinces across Canada are taking things into their own hands when it comes to regulating how and when people can end their own lives.
> 
> ...




https://news.vice.com/article/assisted-suicide-is-now-legal-in-canada-and-one-province-is-providing-free-drugs-to-do-it​


----------



## DB008 (20 June 2016)

*Canada Legalizes Physician-Assisted Dying​*



> After weeks of debate, Canadian lawmakers have passed legislation to legalize physician-assisted death.
> 
> That makes Canada "one of the few nations where doctors can legally help sick people die," as Reuters reports.
> 
> ...






http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/06/18/482599089/canada-legalizes-physician-assisted-dying?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20160618​


----------



## Logique (24 June 2016)

There's a Voluntary Euthanasia Party in the Senate on 2 July- www.vep.org.au

A vote would be a good way to send a message to the pollies


----------



## Bill M (7 December 2016)

This is a very interesting point of view and a good story from somebody who has gone through a lot.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-07/euthanasia-debate-terminally-ill-victorian-woman-sue-jensen/8057960

---
This narrowing, this excruciating drawn-out shutting down is precisely what Sue doesn't want for her last days ”” if it comes to that.

She has no problem with palliative care. This is not palliative care versus euthanasia, she says.

She just wants the right to choose from a full range of options ”” not for anyone else, for herself.

The "euthanasia debate" is ass-about, if you ask Sue.

"We've got these positions put out and we have all these facts and figures trotted out about what countries have it and how many people and that sort of stuff but, you know what? Nobody bothers to ask me. This discussion, which we need to have, it's about me, it goes on around me but doesn't include me," she says.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-07/euthanasia-debate-terminally-ill-victorian-woman-sue-jensen/8057960
---


----------



## Knobby22 (7 December 2016)

Palliative care has advanced a lot over the last 20 years but can be expensive.

My concern is that if this bill results in a reduction on the quality of palliative care and the encouragement of people to "get out of the way" then it will be a bad thing. Doctors now do practice a form of euthanasia but having government protocols and forms and bureaucracy all over it is not how I want to spend my last days.

I think the first draft of the bill will be a mess. I note the AMA are not for it.
Also I know there will be horse trading in the senate. This could go pretty badly.


----------



## Logique (25 June 2017)

Some movement in NSW







> JUNE 24, 2017
> *Euthanasia survey hints at support from doctors, nurses and division*
> James Robertson -SMH,  http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/euthanasi...among-doctors-and-nurses-20170624-gwxspn.html
> Most NSW doctors and nurses support a controversial medical euthanasia bill headed for Parliament, according to research that could prompt new debate about the medical fraternity's willingness to accept changes to assisted suicide laws.
> ...


----------



## Tink (26 June 2017)

Dink said:


> The only benefit to legalisation (or decriminalisation) is that it promotes greater consultation between treatment teams (and possibly families) without the risk of legal action. From memory I believe studies have shown that the rate of euthanasia in the Netherlands decreased following decriminalisation and may in fact be less than in countries in which euthanasia is not decriminalised. However I reiterate that doctors in Australia have enough legal protection to act humanely and in the best interests of their patients.
> 
> In response to Nioka's post I am sorry to hear that her grandmother sufferred as she did. Every case must be treated on an individual basis. I will not comment on your grandmothers situation as I simply do not know enough.
> 
> ...




_You must remember that while some doctors are more altruistic than others, all (well I hope all) entered medicine with the aim to help people. The hippocratic oath itself states "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect". I for one did not get into this profession to perform such acts or have it expected of me to do so._

A ten year old post.


----------



## Logique (19 October 2017)

Bolt is sound on so many issues. But he is wrong on voluntary euthanasia. He needs to get out of the way on this one.

Our dogs and cats may die with dignity.  But not our human seniors, and the terminally ill of all ages. Well-done by those States working toward changing these out-dated laws.







> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/a...g/news-story/b8c43157086aaa2c415e1e25f8ad57b0
> VICTORIANS SLEEPWALK TO EUTHANASIA: KILLING PEOPLE TO STOP THEM DYING
> Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun
> October 19


----------



## PZ99 (19 October 2017)

Yep. I'm on board with it. Palliative care has its limits unfortunately.


----------



## DB008 (19 October 2017)

Wait, didn't l saw the Government should ask 3 questions on the upcoming gay vote?

Gay marriage
Euthanasia
Medical Marijuana

That's right, we are talking about politicians. All talk, no action and waste money...


----------



## notting (19 October 2017)

I dunno, like if I get diagnosed with oldtimers or what ever it's called, Think Ill just become frickin fast food junky, be slamen down Mars bars, you know, take up parachuting, cliff climbing, try balancing along the hand rail of some bridge over a freeway, That kind of stuff.  There are no fatty's in nursing homes.
If you think it should be legal then blow your own brains out before you can't.  Seems pretty simple to me.
Question you gotta ask yourself is, WHAT'S STOPPING YOU?


----------



## Junior (20 October 2017)

notting said:


> I dunno, like if I get diagnosed with oldtimers or what ever it's called, Think Ill just become frickin fast food junky, be slamen down Mars bars, you know, take up parachuting, cliff climbing, try balancing along the hand rail of some bridge over a freeway, That kind of stuff.  There are no fatty's in nursing homes.
> If you think it should be legal then blow your own brains out before you can't.  Seems pretty simple to me.
> Question you gotta ask yourself is, WHAT'S STOPPING YOU?




Many people nearing end of life are stuck in a hospital bed, immobile, incapable of ending it.


----------



## qldfrog (20 October 2017)

Junior said:


> Many people nearing end of life are stuck in a hospital bed, immobile, incapable of ending it.



Indeed so the problem; I was 100% for euthanasia law: it should be the right of people to end their life, when they want;IAnd I do not buldge on that
But then seeing the world as it is with '1984' already there, what are my chances not to be euthanised by a future government: above 50, male, white, not gay and not voting the "right way", potentially even spreading 'rumours' on our islamic friends-> so obviously not of a sound mind to make judgment...I do not have much chances.


----------



## notting (20 October 2017)

Junior said:


> Many people nearing end of life are stuck in a hospital bed, immobile, incapable of ending it.




Yeah I know, but the point I'm trying to make is that if we are preemptive and personally act, on our own behalf, before it gets to that stage, then whats the problem?  Why are we always looking for others to do it for us or make stupid rules for such!  Why don't you just do it?!


----------



## Tisme (20 October 2017)

notting said:


> Yeah I know, but the point I'm trying to make is that if we are preemptive and personally act, on our own behalf, before it gets to that stage, then whats the problem?  Why are we always looking for others to do it for us or make stupid rules for such!  Why don't you just do it?!




I'm guessing it's not the destination that is the fear, but the amount of hurt the journey takes.


----------



## notting (20 October 2017)

I'm guessing we have a strong instinct that says 'there's something wrong with it.'


----------



## Logique (20 October 2017)

notting said:


> Yeah I know, but the point I'm trying to make is that *if we are preemptive and personally act, on our own behalf*, before it gets to that stage, then whats the problem?  Why are we always looking for others to do it for us or make stupid rules for such!  Why don't you just do it?!



Metal detector at the nursing home may detect the 12 gauge .

Good in theory Notting, but we are not all so comfortable with, nor have available, such methods, e.g. drugs or firearms (there are laws). Nor so comfortable with the the after-affects on our loved ones of the more violent methods.

Would you say '..just do it yourself..' to the 90 year old, in pain on a hospital bed? That might be any of us some day.


----------



## Logique (20 October 2017)

DB008 said:


> Wait, didn't l saw the Government should ask 3 questions on the upcoming gay vote?
> *Gay marriage
> Euthanasia
> Medical Marijuana*
> That's right, we are talking about politicians. All talk, no action and waste money...



Completely support this notion, let's have a separate ballot paper, in conjunction with the next Federal election.  But as you say ..politicians.  It would involve too much common sense, and would save too much money.


----------



## sptrawler (20 October 2017)

Junior said:


> Many people nearing end of life are stuck in a hospital bed, immobile, incapable of ending it.




Sadly the only problem I see is, there are many who will be hovering around the bed, willing to assist you whether you want it or not.
Safeguards will be in place I assume.


----------



## notting (20 October 2017)

Tip - Do not under any circumstances get a pace maker.


----------



## Tink (21 October 2017)

We are all entitled to our view.

Freedom of speech and freedom of thought is a must in this country.
------------------------------

Dictator Dan and his Green Stalinists would have to be the most extreme, radical, left wing.

As I have said, I call them communists.

Good on the MPs that stood up for LIFE, family and faith.

This is my view.
------------------------------

_Two former prime ministers from opposing sides of politics have urged Victorian politicians to abandon a euthanasia bill, amid warnings the legislation would fundamentally alter the way society valued human life.

Paul Keating and Tony Abbott have come out strongly in opposition to Victoria’s voluntary euthanasia push, which yesterday passed its first hurdle in the state’s lower house. The former prime ministers joined the nation’s peak medical body and Australia’s most powerful churches in seeking to have the bill scrapped.

Malcolm Turnbull also signalled his personal opposition to euthanasia, but said the federal government did not have the power to intervene

“It is a big development there is no doubt about that,’’ the Prime Minister conceded.

But he rejected Mr Keating’s assertion that such laws would fundamentally change the nation.

Victoria’s Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill made history after the legislative assembly voted 47 to 37 in favour — making it the first time a government-backed euthanasia bill has passed a state house of parliament. It will now proceed to the upper house where the vote is expected to be closer.

Mr Abbott called on politicians to block the bill and give more consideration to its possible impact on society.

“I want them to block it and, at the very least, I would like them to delay it until after the next election so the public has more time to think about it,” Mr Abbott told The Weekend Australian.

He described the legislation as a “turning point” in the way society viewed doctors, patients and the terminally ill.

“I think we’ll regard this is a sad milestone in our decline as a decent society. It marks our descent into a country which regards human beings as disposable, and we don’t want anyone ever to be regarded as useless, worthless or disposable. But that’s what this legislation says.”

Mr Keating, who this week urged parliamentarians to reject the bill, yesterday accused Victorian politicians of effectively voting to remove one the most basic human rights.

“What it means is that the civic guidance provided by the state ... is voided when it comes to the protection of our most valuable asset; the essential human rights of the citizenry, especially and particularly those in either a fragile state or state of mind or fragile period,” Mr Keating said. “To do or to cause to abrogate the core human instinct to survive and live for the spirit to hang on against physical deprivation, is to turn one’s back on the compulsion built into the hundreds of thousands of years of our evolution.”_

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...a/news-story/7fe6e4aca94be4d9cd36f8413441fec8

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...human-right-paul-keating-20171020-gz4y1h.html

--------------------------------------

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/i-dislike-daniel-andrews-intensely.32824/page-4


----------



## lindsayf (21 October 2017)

Tink said:


> We are all entitled to our view.
> 
> Freedom of speech and freedom of thought is a must in this country.
> ------------------------------
> ...




Cant quite believe the verbose waffle Keating has vomited up here. Can only assume that he has never been witness to horiffic chronic untreatable pain. Of course we expect churchy Abbot to pop up on the no side.  It easy and completely expected for pious folk to lean on their doctrine and words of their church leaders especially when they also have not had real exposure to the kind of torment and indignity we are talking about.  I presume all on the no side provide cutting edge palliative care to thier aging and suffering dogs and cats and budgies who shake, have siezures, have no joy, cant eat, are in constant pain and long ago lost any hope of improvement in condition....if not then why not?


----------



## Tink (4 November 2017)

Vic euthanasia bill

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/poli...uthanasia-debate-could-take-several-days.html

http://www.news.com.au/national/vic...t/news-story/8300311eb2781e3283d20919a962696f

-------------------

imv, a sad day for Victoria.


----------



## Logique (17 November 2017)

NSW LC (upper house): 19 for, to 20 against = voted down.

Sometimes you just despair of the political class. Gay marriage, good as gold. But if you're in pain on your deathbed, with under a year to live - you're on your own mate.

Inhumane and out of step with the community, as a postal survey would soon demonstrate.

With due respect to Tink and others of the opposing view.


----------



## Junior (17 November 2017)

lindsayf said:


> Cant quite believe the verbose waffle Keating has vomited up here. Can only assume that he has never been witness to horiffic chronic untreatable pain. Of course we expect churchy Abbot to pop up on the no side.  It easy and completely expected for pious folk to lean on their doctrine and words of their church leaders especially when they also have not had real exposure to the kind of torment and indignity we are talking about.  I presume all on the no side provide cutting edge palliative care to thier aging and suffering dogs and cats and budgies who shake, have siezures, have no joy, cant eat, are in constant pain and long ago lost any hope of improvement in condition....if not then why not?




I have witnessed an immediate family member in this situation.

The fact is, hospitals doctors & nurses discreetly put people out of their misery every day when their time remaining is measured in hours or days.  Time to attend to those who may have months of unbearable misery ahead of them (and their friends & family).


----------



## DB008 (17 November 2017)

Logique said:


> Sometimes you just despair of the political class. Gay marriage, good as gold. But if you're in pain on your deathbed, with under a year to live - you're on your own mate.
> 
> Inhumane and out of step with the community, as a postal survey would soon demonstrate.
> 
> With due respect to Tink and others of the opposing view.




Couldn't have put it better Logique.


----------



## SuperGlue (17 November 2017)

Logique said:


> NSW LC (upper house): 19 for, to 20 against = voted down.




On a lighter side of things.

*Wise Man Up There:* Wheww..... what a relief.
                           A flood of fragile and feeble elderly immigrants from Down Under.
                             How are we going to handle them?
                             Don't you mere mortals know we already have a big problem up here.


----------



## SuperGlue (17 November 2017)

SuperGlue said:


> Don't you mere mortals know we already have a big problem up here.




Problem UP There?

*Wise Man Up There:* Trying to find 21 virgins for every ... followers.

*Wise Man Up There:* Pssst, Don't tell them that everyone, yes everyone good or bad is a virgin Up Here.  They don't get the virgins, they are the virgins.


----------



## Tink (23 November 2017)

And so Victoria move on to the Killing State.

_Of course we are all entitled to our view -- freedom of speech and freedom of thought._

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-...-assisted-dying-bill-passes-major-hurdle.html

--------------------------------------------


----------



## lindsayf (23 November 2017)

Junior said:


> I have witnessed an immediate family member in this situation.
> 
> The fact is, hospitals doctors & nurses discreetly put people out of their misery every day when their time remaining is measured in hours or days.  Time to attend to those who may have months of unbearable misery ahead of them (and their friends & family).




Not sure if your statement is attempting a case for or against this?


----------



## lindsayf (23 November 2017)

Tink said:


> And so Victoria move on to the Killing State.
> 
> _Of course we are all entitled to our view -- freedom of speech and freedom of thought._
> 
> ...




'Killing state' - ridiculous hyperbole.


----------



## DB008 (23 November 2017)

Tink said:


> And so Victoria move on to the Killing State.




So let me get this straight - if my dog gets cancer and is stuffed, l can put her out of her misery.
If l get terminal cancer and am in immense pain, l can't choose an exit.

Why not?


----------



## Tink (23 November 2017)

DB, as I said, you are entitled to your view.

I don't agree with any of the killing -- be it babies, elderly, disabled.

BTW, dogs cannot talk so there is no way he could tell you anything.

imv, there is no such thing as a conservative bill.

141 clauses.

That is my view.


----------



## Junior (24 November 2017)

Tink said:


> DB, as I said, you are entitled to your view.
> 
> I don't agree with any of the killing -- be it babies, elderly, disabled.
> 
> ...




In most cases these people are only kept alive due to medical intervention in the first place.  I'm not sure that this is the way 'god intended', or is it OK to keep someone alive past their use-by date using modern medicine, but not OK to end the suffering?


----------



## tech/a (24 November 2017)

You know
Upon reflection I think Julia bought this topic up with her own situation in mind


----------



## Tisme (24 November 2017)

SuperGlue said:


> Problem UP There?
> 
> *Wise Man Up There:* Trying to find 21 virgins for every ... followers.
> 
> *Wise Man Up There:* Pssst, Don't tell them that everyone, yes everyone good or bad is a virgin Up Here.  They don't get the virgins, they are the virgins.





Chances are the majority adult virgins are lesbians and gays. That would be a shock for a believer; getting to Islam heaven and finding out his virgins are men!!!!


----------



## lindsayf (27 November 2017)

Tink said:


> DB, as I said, you are entitled to your view.
> 
> I don't agree with any of the killing -- be it babies, elderly, disabled.
> 
> ...




So you would do nothing if your dog was 15 years old, having siezures, shitting itself, yelping in pain, was blind and so on. You would just wait for it to die. Might take months.
"Because it cant talk."
You are avoiding the obvious thrust of the question.
I think it is called ducking and weaving or creating a strawman.


----------



## tech/a (27 November 2017)

Just had to do just that with my 15 yr old Labbie and 19 yr old cat
Both lost quality of life and it was more for us than for them that we stalled.

Having to power of execution of your long term mates is very painful

With a 94 yr old Dad in a nursing home 
I’d hate to be in that sort of position even under their instruction.


----------



## Tink (27 November 2017)

Lindsay, as I have said, you and anyone else are entitled to their view.

Ducking and weaving?
that humans and animals are different?
I don't see dogs walking around being doctors.
They need us.

I care about animals, but I am not a vegetarian, as the Greens would want.
The Greens are the death cult, imv.

Doctors are for healing, not for killing.
I don't see you mentioning any babies that are killed for no reason.
Are you advocating for the death penalty for criminals as well?
-------------------------------

Yes, tech, Julia brought this up regarding suicides.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/suicide-and-voluntary-euthanasia.3588/page-7#post-93788

Philip Nitschke has also been mentioned as an extremist.

Junior, what hospital would that be -- St Vincents.
Another reason for freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion.
----------------------------------
We had a dog and a cat, both loved and part of the family.
_Our cat passed away at 18 years old, and our dog passed away 6 months later, at 10 years old._
-------------------------
I put up this song by Eric Clapton.
It was written when he lost his son.


----------



## Junior (27 November 2017)

Tink said:


> Doctors are for healing, not for killing.




Some people reach a stage where there are no remaining avenues for healing, or pain relief, or any acceptable quality of life.  They face the prospect of many weeks or months of unbearable pain/suffering with certain death to follow.  This is the situation where, for some people, ending life under their own terms a little sooner is preferable.  It is kinder not only to the individual, but to friends and family who have to witness ongoing suffering as an alternative.


----------



## lindsayf (30 November 2017)

Tink said:


> Lindsay, as I have said, you and anyone else are entitled to their view.
> 
> Ducking and weaving?
> that humans and animals are different?
> ...




More straw men and avoiding the actual questions being discussed.

This podcast has very insightful, informative and authentic discussions of these issues.

https://soundcloud.com/wheelercentre/sets/better-off-dead


----------



## lindsayf (7 December 2017)

Here is a podcast episode that specifically addresses the hyperbolic, strategic and ideologically motivated reference to the 'killing of babies'.


----------



## Boggo (15 January 2018)

Junior said:


> Some people reach a stage where there are no remaining avenues for healing, or pain relief, or any acceptable quality of life.  They face the prospect of many weeks or months of unbearable pain/suffering with certain death to follow.  This is the situation where, for some people, ending life under their own terms a little sooner is preferable.  It is kinder not only to the individual, but to friends and family who have to witness ongoing suffering as an alternative.




A very difficult area and until you are involved you really don't understand the mental tug of war that goes with watching a loved one in pain.

I have just spent almost three weeks at my wife's bedside as she was losing her battle with a brain tumour.
On one hand you just don't want to watch them writhe in pain, confusion and become bed bound but on the other hand maybe a selfish approach where you want them to just hang on for longer.

My beautiful wife lost her battle yesterday morning. I am sad, upset and also angry that I couldn't do anything for her but I am glad for the time we had.


----------



## Joe Blow (15 January 2018)

Boggo said:


> My beautiful wife lost her battle yesterday morning. I am sad, upset and also angry that I couldn't do anything for her but I am glad for the time we had.




I am sorry for your loss Boggo. You did all you could and that's the only thing that matters. My best wishes to you and your family during this difficult time.


----------



## ghotib (16 January 2018)

Boggo, so sorry for the three weeks just gone and their achingly sad outcome. I hope your good memories will soon outweigh the sad ones.


----------



## sptrawler (16 January 2018)

Boggo, mate, there is nothing sadder than losing one so close. Words just don't fill the void, hang in there and don't forget, there are a lot of friends here.
It certainly puts a lot of things in perspective, what really is important, those you love.


----------



## Tisme (16 January 2018)

Boggo said:


> A very difficult area and until you are involved you really don't understand the mental tug of war that goes with watching a loved one in pain.
> 
> I have just spent almost three weeks at my wife's bedside as she was losing her battle with a brain tumour.
> On one hand you just don't want to watch them writhe in pain, confusion and become bed bound but on the other hand maybe a selfish approach where you want them to just hang on for longer.
> ...




I have to rate the loss of mine as the worst thing I've ever had to endure and I still weep now and again when I think of her. 

My heartfelt sympathy for you cobber.


----------



## DB008 (16 January 2018)

Boggo said:


> My beautiful wife lost her battle yesterday morning. I am sad, upset and also angry that I couldn't do anything for her but I am glad for the time we had.




My condolences Boggo


----------



## lindsayf (18 January 2018)

Best wishes to you Boggo.


----------



## Boggo (18 January 2018)

Thanks everyone.

Over 13 years since she was first diagnosed and treated but then the tumour came back with a vengeance this year.

I thought that I was prepared for this but not so.

Reading posts etc on here is keeping me occupied and distracted until the funeral tomorrow.


----------



## sptrawler (18 January 2018)

All the best for tomorrow, just remember the great times you had together, at the end all we have is memories.
I feel so humble, that you find time to talk to us, we all feel for you and hope you keep posting when you feel up to it.


----------



## Value Collector (18 January 2018)

Tink said:


> DB, as I said, you are entitled to your view.
> 
> I don't agree with any of the killing -- be it babies, elderly, disabled.
> 
> ...




Are you a vegan Tink?

Or are you willing to put down an animal for your meal time enjoyment, but not willing to put it down to end its suffering?


----------



## Tisme (6 February 2018)

I know this won't be as important as gays trying the same or paid actors pretending to be honestly shocked at men making a pass at them, but if you feel there's nothing left, think again ... there's always resets, workarounds and people who care. The kids will get old enough to come see you on their own and there's a lot of value time after that occurs:


----------



## PZ99 (6 February 2018)

Work with plenty of dads in the above position. They're on ice. All of them


----------



## DB008 (6 April 2018)

*Medically assisted suicide becomes legal in Hawaii*
​HONOLULU (AP) — Hawaii became the latest liberal-leaning state to legalize medically assisted suicide Thursday as the governor signed a measure into law allowing doctors to fulfill requests from terminally ill patients to prescribe life-ending medication.

“It is time for terminally ill, mentally competent Hawaii residents who are suffering to make their own end-of-life choices with dignity, grace and peace,” Gov. David Ige said.

Ige said the law was written to ensure the patient is in full control and it provides just one option available for end-of-life care, knowing assisted suicide is not for everyone.

“But we know that we have gotten to a point in our community that it does make sense to give the patient a choice to request the medication, obtain it and take it, or ultimately change their mind,” the governor said.

Hawaii’s heavily Democratic lawmakers approved the legislation late last month. The state joins California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, Washington state and the District of Columbia in allowing the practice.

Critics say they are concerned that the option will lead to hasty decisions, misdiagnoses and waning support for palliative care, in which dying people can be sedated to relieve suffering.

The law has safeguards to prevent abuse. Two health care providers are required to confirm a patient’s diagnosis, prognosis, ability to make decisions and that the request is voluntary.

A counselor also must determine that the patient isn’t suffering from conditions that may interfere with decision-making, such as a lack of treatment of depression.

The patient must make two oral requests for the life-ending medication, with a 20-day waiting period in between, and sign a written request witnessed by two people, one of whom can’t be a relative.

Criminal penalties will apply to anyone who tampers with a request or coerces a prescription for life-ending medication.

“The time was right for Hawaii to adopt this law,” said Peg Sandeen, executive director of the Death with Dignity National Center, a nonprofit advocacy group. “The safeguards Hawaii state legislators have enacted into this law will ensure that patients are in control of this process and make their own decisions at every step of the way — as is their right.”

Allowing medically assisted death has been a divisive issue in Hawaii. Last year, a similar measure passed the state Senate but was later tabled in the House.

https://www.apnews.com/91a066e44af6...ally-assisted-suicide-becomes-legal-in-Hawaii​


----------



## Tink (21 April 2018)

Sad to see these men taking their own lives..

_Avicii found dead in Oman at 28
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-21/avicii-found-dead-in-oman-at-28/9683252

Shane Yarran found dead in Perth
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-...rs-afl-player-shane-yarran-found-dead/9682202_

------------------------

_Family Stress and Teenage Self Harm and Suicide
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/family-stress-and-teenage-self-harm-and-suicide.33425/_


----------



## DB008 (21 April 2018)

Tink said:


> Sad to see these men taking their own lives..
> 
> _Avicii found dead in Oman at 28
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-21/avicii-found-dead-in-oman-at-28/9683252_




Avicii's death wasn't suicide. 

He had suffered from health problems for several years, including acute pancreatitis, in part due to excessive drinking. He had his gallbladder and appendix removed in 2014.


----------



## noirua (21 April 2018)

Suicide thoughts can be because of long term depression or because everything suddenly goes negative and there is no way out. That happened to me after the 1987 stock market crash when I thought gold shares would rise as in 1973 - 1976. To cut a long story short, one can be consumed by financial demands way above assets and other matters pile on up. Maybe give everything still left away to charity and end it all. At least that is a smack in the teeth to creditors and others.


----------



## DB008 (22 April 2018)

It is with great sadness and incredibly heavy hearts to write that Verne passed away today.


----------



## DB008 (2 May 2018)

*104-year-old academic David Goodall to travel to Switzerland for voluntary euthanasia*​104-year-old academic David Goodall has confirmed he plans to fly to Europe this week to end his life, but he resents the fact that he has been left with no other choice.

After repeated failed attempts at suicide over the past 12 months, the 104-year-old has made the decision to travel to Switzerland, where voluntary assisted dying is legal.

Dr Goodall will fly to Bordeaux on Wednesday to visit family before making his final journey to the Swiss city of Basel, where an end of life clinic has approved his application to die through voluntary euthanasia.

"I don't want to go to Switzerland, though it's a nice country," Dr Goodall said.

"But I have to do that in order to get the opportunity of suicide which the Australian system does not permit.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-switzerland-for-voluntary-euthanasia/9714292​


----------



## Tink (2 May 2018)

It was stated by the family that Avicii's death was suicide, DB.

_Following the tragic passing of the beloved Swedish DJ Avicii, his family have now confirmed that the 28-year-old's death as suicide._


----------



## SirRumpole (2 May 2018)

DB008 said:


> *104-year-old academic David Goodall to travel to Switzerland for voluntary euthanasia*​104-year-old academic David Goodall has confirmed he plans to fly to Europe this week to end his life, but he resents the fact that he has been left with no other choice.
> 
> After repeated failed attempts at suicide over the past 12 months, the 104-year-old has made the decision to travel to Switzerland, where voluntary assisted dying is legal.
> 
> ...




A very sad end to a good life well lived.

Sad that he has to do it elsewhere.


----------



## noirua (2 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> A very sad end to a good life well lived.
> 
> Sad that he has to do it elsewhere.




This is all very tricky.  Only a Highest Court should be allowed to make a decision.
Belgium and Netherlands are alternatives though it needs a court to decide after an application is made.

Warning * Do not click on this link if you are of a nervous disposition.
*First child dies by euthanasia in Belgium*
* https://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/17/health/belgium-minor-euthanasia/index.html

*Legality of euthanasia*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_euthanasia

*Belgium Euthanasia Law in Effect - 2002*
http://euthanasia.com/belgiumlaw.html

*Belgium's parliament votes through child euthanasia*
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26181615


----------



## DB008 (4 May 2018)

Tink said:


> It was stated by the family that Avicii's death was suicide, DB.




My apologies if l was incorrect


----------



## Tink (5 May 2018)

Thanks, noirua and DB.

As I said, I agreed with Trump

*The sanctity of life and the family, as the foundation of our society.*

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/president-trump-addresses-45th-march-life/


----------



## DB008 (5 May 2018)

Big write up on the ABC about David Goodall and his farewell

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...-switzerland-for-voluntary-euthanasia/9716354


----------



## lindsayf (5 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> A very sad end to a good life well lived.
> 
> Sad that he has to do it elsewhere.




I guess each end is sad.  But this one was on his terms, more or less.  I am happy for him.  A good life and in it's own way a good ending.


----------



## noirua (8 May 2018)

*'Brain-dead' US boy regains consciousness one day before doctors set to pull plug*
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...iousness-one-day-before-doctors-set-pull-plug
Slowly but surely, Trenton is making strides beyond what anyone expected, but it’s not without a struggle.


----------



## cynic (9 May 2018)

noirua said:


> *'Brain-dead' US boy regains consciousness one day before doctors set to pull plug*
> https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...iousness-one-day-before-doctors-set-pull-plug
> Slowly but surely, Trenton is making strides beyond what anyone expected, but it’s not without a struggle.



This leads one to wonder, how many "miracles" may have been prematurely "nipped in the bud".

Those faced with such an uncomfortable decision (withdrawal of life support from a, tragedy beset, beloved) followed by the prospect of a life, haunted by doubts as to whether or not the best choice was made, have my sympathy.


----------



## Tisme (9 May 2018)

noirua said:


> *'Brain-dead' US boy regains consciousness one day before doctors set to pull plug*
> https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...iousness-one-day-before-doctors-set-pull-plug
> Slowly but surely, Trenton is making strides beyond what anyone expected, but it’s not without a struggle.




He was probably faking, Lloyd Christmas style; that or once the decision was made to pull the plug, crash test dummy inject him with experimental drugs.


----------



## DB008 (10 May 2018)

*David Goodall ends his life at 104 with a final powerful statement on euthanasia*​David Goodall has fulfilled his final wish and taken his life through assisted suicide in a Swiss clinic, in a powerful statement in favour of voluntary euthanasia.

The story of the 104-year-old Perth academic, who is one of the first Australians to undertake the procedure due to old age rather than a terminal illness, has attracted international headlines and further inflamed a highly divisive debate.

His supporters applauded his decision to take charge of his fate after declaring his life was no longer worth living.

But critics warned his decision to end his life solely on the grounds of old age set a dangerous precedent

Ahead of his death, Dr Goodall said he resented having to travel so far to carry out his plan, but was relieved the end was near.

"My recent life has not been enjoyable," he said.

The Perth great-grandfather departed Australia on Wednesday last week and spent time with family in Bordeaux, France, over the weekend, before travelling to the town of Basel in Switzerland, where assisted dying is legal.

He was greeted at the Swiss airport on Monday by euthanasia advocate Philip Nitschke, who helped the science professor and Order of Australia recipient fast-track his application to Swiss association Life Circle.

"I am glad to arrive [in Basel]. I'll be even more pleased when further steps of my journey are completed.

"I have been able to say goodbye. I was a bit sorry to say goodbye to my family in Bordeaux but that's the way it was."

When asked by a journalist whether he was certain he wanted to go through with his plan, Dr Goodall laughed and replied: "Oh yes, that's what I'm here for."

"I don't feel that anyone else's choice is involved. It's my own choice to end my life … and I look forward to that," Dr Goodall said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-...in-a-powerful-statement-on-euthanasia/9742528​


----------



## grah33 (12 May 2018)

DB008 said:


> *David Goodall ends his life at 104 with a final powerful statement on euthanasia*​David Goodall has fulfilled his final wish and taken his life through assisted suicide in a Swiss clinic, in a powerful statement in favour of voluntary euthanasia.
> 
> The story of the 104-year-old Perth academic, who is one of the first Australians to undertake the procedure due to old age rather than a terminal illness, has attracted international headlines and further inflamed a highly divisive debate.
> 
> ...




okay, but what was the reason he needed to take his life???


----------



## greggles (12 May 2018)

grah33 said:


> okay, but what was the reason he needed to take his life???



From another article:


> Dr Goodall had become determined to die after his quality of life worsened with age as he lost the ability to walk.
> 
> 'My recent life has not been enjoyable,' he told reporters after arriving in Switzerland.
> 
> ...




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...iss-suicide-clinic-morning.html#ixzz5FHezUmJB

He was ready to go. His quality of life had diminished to the point where he no longer wanted to continue living.


----------



## grah33 (12 May 2018)

greggles said:


> From another article:
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...iss-suicide-clinic-morning.html#ixzz5FHezUmJB
> ...




Sad story, very sad. I got a relative that's a paraplegic, stuck home all the time. He suffers but he's sticking it out. I also know of a blind youth.

His top says “aging disgracefully”. Using that logic we may as well kill disabled mental etc since they're disgraceful too. That kind of thinking is a load of rubbish.  I think Marx or someone similar did the same thing because of age.

I wonder if he had what I encounter in some people, what I call a character problem? You know some people out there would kill themselves over minor things. They are very selfish when you get to know them.

Another problem here is he believes God doesn't exist so if you got a problem I guess you're free to kill yourself. I think he'd be better off being theist or agnostic than atheist and a little ray of hope might have shone upon him.

The story is fascinating though.


----------



## lindsayf (13 May 2018)

grah33 said:


> Sad story, very sad. I got a relative that's a paraplegic, stuck home all the time. He suffers but he's sticking it out. I also know of a blind youth.
> 
> His top says “aging disgracefully”. Using that logic we may as well kill disabled mental etc since they're disgraceful too. That kind of thinking is a load of rubbish.  I think Marx or someone similar did the same thing because of age.
> 
> ...




Right, so in your wisdom you have concluded he has a character problem.  Why doesn't it surprise me when the pious folk do that?  Such a judgemental and arrogant outlook on this man, his situation, his beliefs and his decision.  Perhaps come back to this thread when you are 103?


----------



## grah33 (13 May 2018)

lindsayf said:


> Right, so in your wisdom you have concluded he has a character problem.  Why doesn't it surprise me when the pious folk do that?  Such a judgemental and arrogant outlook on this man, his situation, his beliefs and his decision.  Perhaps come back to this thread when you are 103?





I haven't come to such a conclusion. We don't know his full story, but I also don't believe that old age coupled with partial blindness was a good reason for what he did.


His motto “aging disgracefully” is negative. I'm all for positive. Everyone can believe in being positive.


----------



## Bill M (14 May 2018)

grah33 said:


> Everyone can believe in being positive



And everyone should have the right to choose. I am as appalled as he was that he had to travel all the way to Switzerland to do this. Seeing an older person and in particular a family member suffer in a hospital for days on end until the end of life by natural causes in not a pretty sight. It was awful and I witnessed this twice. Like my sibling said at the time, "when it is my turn I just hope there is a switch beside my bed that I can flick to put an end to all the suffering." Australia is still in the dark ages with this.


----------



## Tink (14 May 2018)

Death on demand is what these people are encouraging...imv


----------



## Tink (14 May 2018)

*Media Feeding Frenzy as Goodall Commits Assisted Suicide *
_
Australian scientist David Goodall has committed assisted suicide at a Swiss death clinic, and the media are swooning.

It is worth noting that there were apparently no suicide-prevention attempts and that he was accompanied to Switzerland by Australian suicide guru, Philip Nitschke — who once told NRO’s Kathryn Jean Lopez that he thought “troubled teens” should have access to suicide pills “available in grocery stores.”

Goodall held a last press conference, complete with a media photography feeding frenzy of popping flashes. From the New York Times story:

    Mr. Goodall spoke on Wednesday before a phalanx journalists and photographers in Basel, Switzerland. That the inquisitors had come from around the globe to hear what would be most likely the last public words of the man once called Australia’s oldest working scientist was evidence that his campaign to end his life had captivated audiences worldwide…

    Keenly aware that the news conference on Wednesday was one last opportunity to help promote euthanasia and assisted dying in his own country, Mr. Goodall withstood the barrage of questions, squinting because of the flashing cameras and sometimes struggling to understand because of his hearing loss.

No, media types were enthralled, most of whom are wholly in the tank for assisted suicide. So transgressive, don’t you know!

This is all very destructive because it boosts elder-suicide specifically — and suicide generally — as a positive. As does the (constantly repeated in the media) headline phrase, “die on his [own] terms.” Heck, everyone who commits suicide dies on their own terms!

It also totally violates World Health Association media guidelines for reporting on suicide state quite clearly (my emphasis):

    Sensational coverage of suicides should be assiduously avoided, particularly when a celebrity is involved. The coverage should be minimized to the extent possible… Photographs of the deceased, of the method used and of the scene of the suicide are to be avoided. Front page headlines are never the ideal location for suicide reports.

    Detailed descriptions of the method used and how the method was procured should be avoided. Research has shown that media coverage of suicide has a greater impact on the method of suicide adopted than the frequency of suicides.

Oh pshaw. There’s a cause to boost!

Goodall was not terminally ill, but wanted to die because he couldn’t do most of the things he enjoyed. And that is being celebrated – -meaning, assisted suicide isn’t about terminal illness and never was.

The point of all this is to push Australia into legalizing euthanasia:

    He said he hoped his life story would “increase the pressure” on Australia to change its laws. “One wants to be free to choose his death when death is at the appropriate time,” Mr. Goodall said.

That’s death-on-demand — and it is the ultimate destination of the euthanasia movement.

The proper societal response to this tragedy shouldn’t be to make it easier for the ill, elderly, disabled, and mentally ill to obtain death, but for government to state clearly that it will seek to prevent all suicides for whatever reason they are desired._


----------



## ghotib (14 May 2018)

"Aging disgracefully" is a common joke among older people. Not negative at all.


----------



## Junior (14 May 2018)

It was his choice to end his life, and he had very good reason to do so.  104 years old and quality of life rapidly diminishing.  He has watched most of his friends and family die around him.  Total loss of independence and ability to do any kind of constructive work.

I find it disappointing that some people want to block someone like him from signing off on his own terms.  So the preference is to keep propping the guy up until he's a prisoner in a hospital bed waiting for his heart to stop?  Why?  To satisfy your personal religious beliefs?  When your time comes you will want to make your own decision too.


----------



## Tink (14 May 2018)

You are entitled to your view, Junior.

I gave mine in the other thread,
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...hings-metaphysical.27938/page-151#post-981872


and cheering suicide, no matter how old, is not something I would do.


----------



## grah33 (14 May 2018)

U don't have to live life fully to have a life worth living. Many people don't and still want to keep on living.

U can have 2 people with the same terrible thing. One of them refuses to accept it and hates themselves and everything else and wants to die. The other accepts it and makes the most of it, and things aren't so bad.

I'm not speaking for all kinds of suicidal people, but some (I've had to stop them...) itch to kill themselves over very minor things.  Sometimes the problem is their outlook on life.


----------



## basilio (14 May 2018)

It all comes closer to home when one of our own ASF community dies after a long and painful illness.

Pixel passed away last weekend. His views as a person dealing with his terminal illness were quite strong.

https://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-west-australian/20180130/281870118873624
 (Thanks Tisme)


----------



## noirua (15 May 2018)

Always questionable to varying degrees as to whether a death by overdose was in fact suicide combined with depression...

*Lisa Vanderpump’s brother dead from suspected overdose*
https://pagesix.com/2018/05/14/lisa-vanderpumps-brother-dead-from-suspected-overdose/
The British tabloid reported that 59-year-old Mark Vanderpump, who worked as a DJ, died of a suspected drug overdose at his home in Gloucestershire, England, on April 30.
Mark Vanderpump faced legal troubles and the end of his 22-year marriage, according to the paper.


----------



## SirRumpole (15 May 2018)

basilio said:


> It all comes closer to home when one of our own ASF community dies after a long and painful illness.
> 
> Pixel passed away last weekend. His views as a person dealing with his terminal illness were quite strong.
> 
> ...




Publishing this may raise assumptions which may not necessarily be correct.

I also wonder whether people's real lives should be published on an anonymous forum.


----------



## basilio (15 May 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> Publishing this may raise assumptions which may not necessarily be correct.
> 
> I also wonder whether people's real lives should be published on an anonymous forum.




I take your point Rumpole but I certainly was not making any assumptions. And clearly no assumptions should be made.

With regard to publishing peoples real lives on an anonymous forum?  I think we do value our privacy .  Joe's recognition of Pixels passing was recognition of a very good person. I think that was well called for.

Hopefully that recognition  is all the loss of anonymonity leads to.


----------



## noirua (6 June 2018)

blob:https://www.aol.co.uk/dff3015f-ae6f-423a-b7a1-247ebbe4e34c

*Woman makes remarkable recovery from paralysis*
A mother has relived the tender Christmas Eve smile that marked the beginning of her daughter's remarkable recovery, after a medical blunder left her "like a vegetable".
https://www.aol.co.uk/video/view/wo...very-from-paralysis/5b163324cd472420f5a5551b/


----------



## noirua (6 June 2018)




----------



## noirua (7 June 2018)

*Actress Rachel Brosnahan, Kate Spade’s niece, breaks silence on designer’s death*
Spade — born Katherine Brosnahan — hanged herself with a red scarf from a doorknob from her Park Avenue residence, according to sources. She was 55 years old. 
Spade’s apparent suicide comes after her husband of 24 years, Andy Spade, sought a divorce. She leaves behind 13-year-old daughter Frances Beatrix.
https://pagesix.com/2018/06/06/actress-rachel-brosnahan-kate-spades-niece-breaks-silence-on-designers-death/


----------



## noirua (7 June 2018)

This song does show that the depth of depression and meaningless existence points to one reasonable way out...


----------



## noirua (8 June 2018)

*Sheryl Underwood reveals husband’s suicide while discussing Kate Spade*


----------



## grah33 (8 June 2018)

noirua said:


> This song does show that the depth of depression and meaningless existence points to one reasonable way out...



Suffering can also be a gift too. It changes people's lives.

Belief in the existence of God, or being open to it, leads to entrusting oneself to a Creator. The 'promise' that God supports his friends in illness and affliction is very true for many people.

The command “Do not worry, do not fear” can be helpful to a suffering person.

Also, I should report that when a person develops virtue, problems of the mind tend to diminish significantly (something I've seen).  Practicing virtue can bring great peace to a person. “For they (the holy teachings) are life to those who find them, and health to the whole body. ” (proverbs)


----------



## noirua (8 June 2018)

*Fu Da-ren* (Chinese: 傅達仁; 3 April 1933 – 7 June 2018) was a Taiwanese television presenter who received a Golden Bell Award in 1980.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu_Da-ren

In later life, Fu was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and actively supported euthanasia.[3] He traveled to Switzerland in November 2017 to join Dignitas, an organization that provides assisted suicide to its members.[4] Days later, Fu chose not to die by euthanasia,[5] and received a visit from Tsai Ing-wen upon his return to Taiwan.[6] In May 2018, Fu flew to Switzerland and underwent euthanasia on 7 June 2018, aged 85.[7]


----------



## noirua (8 June 2018)

*Anthony Michael Bourdain* (June 25, 1956 — June 8, 2018) was an American chef, author, and television personality. He was a 1978 graduate of the Culinary Institute of America and a veteran of numerous professional kitchens, including many years as executive chef at Brasserie Les Halles. He was noted by popular sources as one of the most influential chefs in the world.[1][2][3][4][5] He first became known for his 2000 book _Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly_. His first food and world-travel television show was _A Cook's Tour_, which ran for 35 episodes on the Food Network from 2002 through 2003. In 2005 he began hosting the Travel Channel's culinary and cultural adventure programs _Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations_ (2005–2012) and _The Layover_ (2011–2013). In 2013, he switched to CNN to host _Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown_.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Bourdain

Bourdain died June 8, 2018 in an apparent suicide.[87]


Bourdain had been in France working on an upcoming episode of his award-winning CNN series, "Parts Unknown," the network said.


----------



## CanOz (9 June 2018)

I've suffered through depression, I was lucky that i got help and took it up. Were there no attempts by him to reach out for help?


----------



## noirua (9 June 2018)

CanOz said:


> I've suffered through depression, I was lucky that i got help and took it up. Were there no attempts by him to reach out for help?



https://pagesix.com/2018/06/08/anthony-bourdain-dies-of-suicide-at-61/

No reason it seems. Hotels are quite lonely places, stiflingly confined at times. I used to go out for long walks with no aim for anywhere and then try to find my way back to the hotel. It's, maybe, all about living with your own head - some just want to get out of that place and there is only one way.


----------



## MrBurns (10 June 2018)

CanOz said:


> I've suffered through depression, I was lucky that i got help and took it up. Were there no attempts by him to reach out for help?




I’ve had anxiety and depression in short bursts from time to time. Took Zoloft it was horrible dropped it after 5 days 
It’s interesting that when you have no reason to feel down it happens anyway. I’m ok now but getting older makes you retrospective and thoughtful about past mistakes. 
It’s been said that man is the only creature that is born crying and dies disappointed.


----------



## noirua (10 June 2018)

*Suicide rates are rising across all genders, age groups and ethnicities in the U.S. Here’s what to do if you or someone you know is in crisis.*

https://moneyish.com/ish/suicide-ra...bfc251&utm_campaign=circular&utm_medium=MONEY


----------



## noirua (13 June 2018)

*Bhaiyyu Maharaj* (29 April 1968 – 12 June 2018), born as *Uday Singh Deshmukh*, was a spiritual guru from Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. He died of suicide by shooting himself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhaiyyu_Maharaj
	



As a Spiritual Leader, My Mission is to achieve the goal of happy, prosperous united, strong & youthful India.
https://twitter.com/bhaiyujimaharaj?lang=en


----------



## noirua (21 June 2018)

*Publicist Jeanine Pepler dies by suicide at 50*
Https://pagesix.com/2018/06/20/publicist-jeanine-pepler-dies-by-suicide-at-50/


----------



## noirua (27 June 2018)

*‘Operation Repo’ star Carlos Lopez Jr. dead of apparent suicide*
https://pagesix.com/2018/06/25/operation-repo-star-carlos-lopez-jr-dead-of-apparent-suicide/
Carlos' body was found by his roommate.  He had reportedly shot himself on the terrace of their downtown apartment.


----------



## sptrawler (27 June 2018)

Noirua, there seems to be a lot of suicide going on.
I wonder if the worry of some past indiscretion, causes the pressures of falling from grace, causes an implossion?
Or if they really are in a mental state, that thinks death is the only escape?
Or they are on some sort of drug, that causes manic depression, I can't see that one being right.


----------



## noirua (4 July 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Noirua, there seems to be a lot of suicide going on.
> I wonder if the worry of some past indiscretion, causes the pressures of falling from grace, causes an implossion?
> Or if they really are in a mental state, that thinks death is the only escape?
> Or they are on some sort of drug, that causes manic depression, I can't see that one being right.




No doubt it's a complex subject.  Obviously the increasingly changing society and technology mania, expectations, demands and so forth push people in a certain direction whether they want to go there or not.
I remember a person at a company many years ago. He looked out of the company's window, saw the sunshine, said, "Holidays". After lunch he had disappeared. That is it really, he was able to get out of life's determinable cycle.


----------



## noirua (4 July 2018)

Tina Turner's eldest son Craig Raymond Turner has died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, it has been reported.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/tina-turners-eldest-son-craig-12850012


----------



## noirua (8 July 2018)

*Tyler Deon Honeycutt* (July 15, 1990 – July 7, 2018) was an American professional basketball player. He played college basketball for the UCLA Bruins, where he earned first-team all-conferencehonors in the Pac-10 (known now as the Pac-12) as a sophomore in 2011. Honeycutt was selected by the Sacramento Kings in the second round of the 2011 NBA draft. He played with the Kings for two seasons and in 2013 moved to Europe, where he played for EuroLeague clubs Khimki and Anadolu Efes. He committed suicide after a shoot-out with police on July 6, 2018.

On the night of July 6, 2018, Honeycutt's mother called 911 and reported that he had been acting erratically. When police arrived they found that he had barricaded the entrance to his Sherman Oaks home before opening fire at them; he was later found dead inside the house from an apparently self-inflicted gunshot wound.[21][22]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_Honeycutt


----------



## noirua (17 July 2018)

*‘Ladies of London’ star’s friends hoped death was a hoax*
https://people.com/tv/ladies-of-london-annabelle-neilson-dies/

Neilson was an avid horse racer until she was thrown off the saddle in a horrifying accident in 2013. Although she told the _Daily Mail _that she was able to walk again after 12 weeks, she was told by doctors she could never ride again — and suffered chronic pain following the incident.

Annabelle Neilson was born to her parents Max Neilson and Elizabeth Neilson on 1969. She belongs to a wealthy aristocratic family and she was raised up in South London. She is an author by occupation and has written several books series and books including The Me Me Me's and The Curious Tale of Fi-Rex.


----------



## noirua (24 July 2018)

*Roh Hoe-chan* (Korean: 노회찬, 31 August 1956 – 23 July 2018) was a South Korean politician. He had a bachelor's degree in politics from Korea University. He was a member of the 17th, 19th, and 20th National Assembly. A progressive and a socialist,[1] Roh was involved with multiple progressive-leaning parties, lately with the Justice Party from 2012 until his death in 2018.

He served as a member of the National Assembly from 2004 to 2008.[5] He ran for Mayor of Seoul as a New Progressive Party candidate in 2010.[6] He again served as member of the National Assembly as member of the Unified Progressive Party and the Justice Party in 2012 to 2013.[7] Roh broke with Unified Progressive Party after allegations that the faction led by the party leader Lee Jung-hee manipulated party list to elect members of her own faction into the National Assembly.[8] He, with Sim Sang-jeong and Rhyu Si-min formed the Progressive Justice Party in October 2012, but in 2013 the party became the Justice Party.[9][2]

In 2005, he posted the name of the prosecutors implicated in corruption cases involving Samsung on internet.[10] He was charged with breaking communication secrecy act, and after long legal battle, he was sentenced to 4 months in prison and 1 year suspended prison sentence in 2013.[10]

He was elected to the National Assembly as a member of the Justice Party in 2016.[4]

In July 2018, Roh was under investigation into accusations that he accepted ₩50-million from an aide to an influential blogger while at the center of an opinion-rigging scandal.[11] The blogger was known by the nickname "Druking".[2]

During special prosecutor investigations on illegal political funds of Druking, the main perpetrator of the 2018 opinion rigging scandal in South Korea, Roh committed suicide by jumping from his apartment in Seoul on 23 July 2018, aged 61.[12][11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roh_Hoe-chan


----------



## grah33 (24 July 2018)

Was just telling a friend of mine to put with difficulties.  The good times and feelings come back...


----------



## noirua (28 July 2018)

*Oksana Shachko, a Founder of Feminist Protest Movement, Dies at 31*
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/obituaries/oksana-shachko-a-founder-of-feminist-protest-movement-dies-at-31.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/obituaries&action=click&contentCollection=obituaries&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=9&pgtype=sectionfront






*Oksana Shachko* (Ukrainian: Оксана Шачко; 31 January 1987 – 23 July 2018) was a Ukrainian artist and activist with FEMEN. She was one of the founders of the feminist activist group FEMEN in April 2008, along with Anna Hutsol and Alexandra Shevchenko, a group that publicly protested in various countries against sexual exploitation, income inequality, and policies of the Roman Catholic Church, among other causes.

France granted her political refugee status in 2013, after several attacks by security forces connected to Vladimir Putin, a target of FEMEN protests along with the French Front National.[8] She lived in Paris working as a painter.

Shachko was found dead in her apartment in Paris, France, on 23 July 2018. She was 31. Anna Hutsol told _Ukrayinska Pravda_ that friends were awaiting an official report.[10] It was reported that she hanged herself[11] and a suicide note was found next to her body.[12]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oksana_Shachko


----------



## noirua (28 July 2018)

grah33 said:


> Suffering can also be a gift too. It changes people's lives.
> 
> Belief in the existence of God, or being open to it, leads to entrusting oneself to a Creator. The 'promise' that God supports his friends in illness and affliction is very true for many people.
> 
> ...




I've known three people with neuralgia who suffered such violent pain that in one case it through him to the ground.  Thinking a person can suffer such pain or a raging toothache type of pain always and have any belief in the existence of god help them or think suffering is a gift. Then I say, god help them who believe that may...


----------



## grah33 (28 July 2018)

noirua said:


> I've known three people with neuralgia who suffered such violent pain that in one case it through him to the ground.  Thinking a person can suffer such pain or a raging toothache type of pain always and have any belief in the existence of god help them or think suffering is a gift. Then I say, god help them who believe that may...




I don't think such people are deluded, but on the contrary might have something good to offer. This verse below shows the Christian position on suffering, and gives its followers a wonderful sense of security in this life, no matter what comes their way:

“
..You will have the strength in you to bear all manner of suffering with joy, and to never give in…
“
(Paul, New T, paraphrased as couldn't find it)

So, for a practicing Christian, key point here is God's willingness to assist a person to bear all manner of suffering peacefully. The writer himself speaks from experience as he suffered the most, and suffered for his whole life after his conversion to Christianity. His life was regularly exercised in different types of suffering and hardship, including suffering beyond human ability to cope.  He is also known for his beautiful line "Perfect love casts out fear...".  Perhaps their persecutions and sufferings also made them tremble with fear...  What else could I add to this? The same writer also talks about God's purpose in suffering - includes perfecting human character. And on a practical level, a suffering Christian would entrust themselves completely to God (faith), ask for help, and some would even offer it up to God for some special intention.


----------



## noirua (28 July 2018)

grah33 said:


> I don't think such people are deluded, but on the contrary might have something good to offer. This verse below shows the Christian position on suffering, and gives its followers a wonderful sense of security in this life, no matter what comes their way:
> 
> “
> ..You will have the strength in you to bear all manner of suffering with joy, and to never give in…
> ...




We will have to agree to differ as I have my views and do not try to justify them by hunting on line through very many books, signified holy or otherwise, depending on how we want to justify belief or causation.


----------



## noirua (28 July 2018)

*Ellie Soutter* (25 July 2000 – 25 July 2018) was a British snowboarder.[1]
Soutter took her own life in woodlands near her French home on 25 July 2018, her 18th birthday.[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellie_Soutter

https://www.facebook.com/SamaritansAustralia/
https://twitter.com/SamaritansAus
https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/
https://www.samaritans.org.au/charity/


----------



## noirua (29 July 2018)

*Bongani Mawethu Mayosi* (28 January 1967 – 27 July 2018) was a South African cardiology professor who was awarded his county's highest honour, the Order of Mapungubwe (Silver) in 2009.[1] He was the Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Cape Town and an A-rated National Research Foundation researcher.[2] Prior to this, he was head of the Department of Medicine at the University of Cape Town and Groote Schuur Hospital.[3] His father was a medical doctor and so is his wife; his research interests included rheumatic fever, tuberculous pericarditis and cardiomyopathy.[4][5] He was a member of the Academy of Science of South Africa and a former President of the College of Physicians of South Africa.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bongani_Mayosi


----------



## MrBurns (29 July 2018)

The doctors who think it's become too hard to die

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-...to-death-and-having-a-plan-for-dying/10014582


----------



## noirua (29 July 2018)

Yes, this thread is no doubt the saddest place on ASF. So a few songs that can cheer the place up a bit lest we all become depressed ourselves:


ASF share competition: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...g-competition-entry-thread.34114/#post-989958


----------



## sptrawler (29 July 2018)

That's nice, I think there are a lot, who need cheering up.


----------



## MrBurns (29 July 2018)




----------



## grah33 (29 July 2018)

noirua said:


> Yes, this thread is no doubt the saddest place on ASF. So a few songs that can cheer the place up a bit lest we all become depressed ourselves:
> 
> 
> ASF share competition: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...g-competition-entry-thread.34114/#post-989958




nice music.  “You raise me up” is a bit of an uplifting personal anthem for those who believe, but inspires everyone really. Pretty much sums up my other post. The "raising up" is to a new place of strength.


----------



## cynic (30 July 2018)

For bouts of *mild* depression, I have sometimes found these ones useful: 


Unfortunately, for more severe bouts of *D*epression (note the capital "*D*") no amount of upliftingly positive music has ever alleviated the symptoms, nor brought colour back into the world. I suspect that many (perhaps even most) suicides are a consequence of those deeper levels of *D*epression (sometimes referred to as visitations of "the black dog").


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

My understanding is that medication does work. I know some people who are on anti anxiety or depression meds and you’d never know they had a problem. Some have been on them for many years.

I can see from their posts that other connections of mine are in a depressive state, you can tell from their posts.
It’s quite common now and the media doesn’t help, the news is absolutely full of every nasty story they can find.

Thank goodness for the ABC at least they don’t join in this nasty practice.


----------



## CanOz (30 July 2018)

Zoloft saved my life. Unfortunately some people don't believe in meds and yet they could be the only thing left in hope of leading a normal life....free from anxiety and anger.


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

CanOz said:


> Zoloft saved my life. Unfortunately some people don't believe in meds and yet they could be the only thing left in hope of leading a normal life....free from anxiety and anger.




Tried it hated it didn’t bother after that.
I’m not bad but as you get older you realise it doesn’t go on forever, your body starts to break down and so on.

Marriages are over one way or the other I hardly know anyone that’s happily married after 20 years.

You get more loyalty from a dog.

So you reflect on the past more and more you have regrets and plenty of them. 
Then you realise that’s the way life is.

Keeping your social contacts is important.
I look back and see my social life has retracted dramatically over the years.

If you understand all men die eventually rich or poor and to do as much good as you can while you still can is important 

I was hoping to leave this world a better place for my children but I think it may have gone the other way.


----------



## CanOz (30 July 2018)

Geez that's pretty dire burnsy....

I need some self medication now....but it's not even 8 am!


----------



## MrBurns (30 July 2018)

CanOz said:


> Geez that's pretty dire burnsy....
> 
> I need some self medication now....but it's not even 8 am!




Ha, it’s not all bad just adjusting to getting older.
The world probably isn’t a worse place it’s just different and older people tend to think their time was the golden years.
I am disappointed in how relationships break down but people change and that’s life.
Plenty of people adjust without any problems it’s just getting older seems to have snuck up while I wasn’t looking.

I do have concerns about the dying process I don’t want to linger on unable to have any control over matters.
I’d like advance notice so I can get things in order.  Ha, practical right to the end.

In the meantime travel and drink up and bore people silly with your wisdom [emoji106]


----------



## noirua (30 July 2018)

ASF share competition: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...g-competition-entry-thread.34114/#post-989958 

Something to look forward to.


----------



## grah33 (30 July 2018)

In the past I once tried medication to help deal with serious anxiety problems, which were quite powerful at the time. It didn't help me, but who knows, maybe if I kept trying different types of medication I might have found something that worked. I got really bad side effects too, and didn't want to keep trying stuff after that. Fortunately I have found other ways to deal with it and my symptoms are significantly smaller in strength now. Interestingly enough I feel better now than before when I was once healthy.

Even if I didn't get much from medication, it does seem to help many people out there.

Suffering is a part of life. Many healthy people are battling with something all the time.


----------



## noirua (31 July 2018)

*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*
https://twitter.com/SamaritansAus
https://www.facebook.com/SamaritansAustralia/

*A Rough Rehearsal, a Suicide and a Broadway Show in Turmoil*
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/28/theater/chicago-musical-actor-suicide-broadway.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/obituaries&action=click&contentCollection=obituaries&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

Mr. Loeffelholz was born and raised in Norman, Okla. His father, Ray Loeffelholz, died by suicide at the age of 23, about three months before Jeff Loeffelholz’s birth, according to a friend and a news report at the time. His mother died, apparently of a heart attack, at 45, when Mr. Loeffelholz was in college; he sang “You’ll Never Walk Alone” from “Carousel” at her funeral.





*
ASF share competition: https://www.aussiestockforums.com/t...g-competition-entry-thread.34114/#post-989958


----------



## noirua (1 August 2018)

*Brian Christopher Lawler*[1] (January 10, 1972 – July 29, 2018)[1] was an American professional wrestler. He was the son of professional wrestler Jerry Lawler[1] and brother of wrestling referee Kevin Christian.[3] He was best known for his career in the World Wrestling Federation (now known as WWE), where he performed as *Brian Christopher* and *Grand Master Sexay*. Lawler was a one-time WWF Tag Team Champion as part of Too Cool with Scotty 2 Hotty, and won 44 titles within the United States Wrestling Association.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Christopher

In early July 2018, Lawler was again arrested and jailed for driving under the influence and for evading police. On the early morning of July 29, 2018, Lawler was found hanging in a cell at the Hardeman County Jail and was observed to be brain dead.[7] His life support was disabled after his father Jerry Lawler had arrived to the hospital to bid his farewell.[8] Lawler was pronounced dead at around 4:40 PM EST at the age of 46.[9]


---

*Jerry O'Neil Lawler* (born November 29, 1949), better known as *Jerry "The King" Lawler*, is an American professional wrestler and color commentatorsigned to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) under the company's legends program.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lawler

---

*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/
https://twitter.com/SamaritansAus
https://www.facebook.com/SamaritansAustralia/

*


----------



## noirua (8 August 2018)

*‘My 600-lb Life’ star found dead at 30*
https://pagesix.com/2018/08/03/my-600-lb-life-star-found-dead-at-30/

*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (8 August 2018)

*Rick Genest (August 7, 1985 – August 1, 2018) was a Canadian artist, actor, and fashion model. He was also known as Zombie Boy.
On August 1, 2018, Genest was found dead after a fall from the balcony at his Plateau-Mont-Royal apartment.[21] A police source told CBC it was a suicide.[22] However, his family and friends believe his death to have been an accidental fall.[23]*

Planned to be unveiled in 2019, an 11.5-foot (3.5 m) sculpture of Genest called “Self-Conscious Gene” will be a new permanent fixture at the Science Museum, London, UK. The statue is to be created by British artist Marc Quinn.[20]
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Genest*

*Lady Gaga mourns suicide of ‘Zombie Boy’ from ‘Born This Way’ video*
https://pagesix.com/2018/08/03/lady-gaga-mourns-suicide-of-zombie-boy-from-born-this-way-video/



*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (8 August 2018)

*Amy Meselson, Lawyer Who Defended Young Immigrants, Dies at 46*
*Ms. Meselson, who had struggled with depression since she was a teenager, committed suicide on July 22 at her home in Manhattan, her mother, Sarah Meselson, said. She was 46.*

*Ms. Meselson had dedicated her career to defending hundreds of vulnerable immigrants from deportation and helping them navigate the gaps between the child welfare and national security bureaucracies. She recruited volunteers from corporate law firms to represent foster children in immigration cases, and she successfully lobbied for a special juvenile section in immigration court.

Chief Judge Robert Katzmann, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, who was instrumental in founding the Immigrant Justice Corps, described Ms. Meselson in an email as “a life saver and life giver.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/06/obituaries/amy-meselson-lawyer-who-defended-young-immigrants-dies-at-46.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/obituaries&action=click&contentCollection=obituaries&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=8&pgtype=sectionfront*

**


*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (15 August 2018)

*Tomasz Jędrzejak* (14 July 1979 – 14 August 2018) was a Polish motorcycle speedway rider, who was a member of the Poland national speedway team.[1]
The 2012 Polish champion and former Belle Vue, Eastbourne and Lakeside rider scored 11 points for his club Stal Rzeszow in the Polish Second Division alongside four-times world champion Greg Hancock.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/7016178/tomasz-jedrzejak-dead-at-39/






*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (16 August 2018)

*Man dies after intentionally flying plane into his own home – that had wife, son inside, police say*
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/d4156c...e66a7bae/ss_man-dies-after-intentionally.html



*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## Tink (16 August 2018)

I was glad to see euthanasia was voted down.


----------



## grah33 (16 August 2018)

noirua said:


> *Man dies after intentionally flying plane into his own home – that had wife, son inside, police say*
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/d4156c...e66a7bae/ss_man-dies-after-intentionally.html
> 
> 
> ...




What advice would you give my friend? He thinks he's entitled to kill himself if he loses what little money he has left in the bank. He feels that it is his right to do so.  (have already advised seeing a physiologist, helplines etc)


----------



## satanoperca (16 August 2018)

Tink said:


> I was glad to see euthanasia was voted down.



What gives you the right to tell me when I should have the option to live or die?


----------



## cynic (16 August 2018)

satanoperca said:


> What gives you the right to tell me when I should have the option to live or die?



Are you certain that Tink was actually claiming that right?


----------



## grah33 (16 August 2018)

I think I used poor words. I should probably clarify that my friend wasn't thinking at all about legal rights as in this kind of discussion, but rather something like

“ you gotta man [end your life] cause it's so bad [if I would lose this money from catastrophic causes]”  (such is his outlook)

Furthermore , he can't stop worrying about the money he lost, from previously squandering it over everything he wanted.  My perception is that this is hurting him deeply and continuously .


----------



## noirua (16 August 2018)

grah33 said:


> I think I used poor words. I should probably clarify that my friend wasn't thinking at all about legal rights as in this kind of discussion, but rather something like
> 
> “ you gotta man [end your life] cause it's so bad [if I would lose this money from catastrophic causes]”  (such is his outlook)
> 
> Furthermore , he can't stop worrying about the money he lost, from previously squandering it over everything he wanted.  My perception is that this is hurting him deeply and continuously .




I doubt his money problem was as deep as mine but unless a person can take a lofty point of view it is easy to be completely consumed by it. Some can go under being only a few thousand dollars in debt, before he does that, mine was seven figures and counting - if his debt or losses are over $3 million then that's difficult I know but not enough to jump off a certain popular rock as I once thought.

Basically I was busted by the 1987 stock market crash and debts and liabilities plus tax and everything else wiped me out.  Only way out was to jet out of Australia. As mentioned before I was lucky in 1994 as I bought heavily into Endeavour Resources Limited ( St Barbara Mines ) by walking into a bank and investing every few weeks - as it was done in those days with no checks as long as money was put into an account and few questions asked. The shares headed off from 2c to nearly $3.00 so from heavy debts to paying everything off.

After all that I'm not bothered much by all the things that appeared important and trying to consume me. Take that lofty point of view and matters seem smaller and that means move away how ever far and just for a period of time, about 7 years in my case, climb back and forget them all and everything.

A song followed by a better one and more:


----------



## grah33 (18 August 2018)

noirua said:


> I doubt his money problem was as deep as mine but unless a person can take a lofty point of view it is easy to be completely consumed by it. Some can go under being only a few thousand dollars in debt, before he does that, mine was seven figures and counting - if his debt or losses are over $3 million then that's difficult I know but not enough to jump off a certain popular rock as I once thought.
> 
> Basically I was busted by the 1987 stock market crash and debts and liabilities plus tax and everything else wiped me out.  Only way out was to jet out of Australia. As mentioned before I was lucky in 1994 as I bought heavily into Endeavour Resources Limited ( St Barbara Mines ) by walking into a bank and investing every few weeks - as it was done in those days with no checks as long as money was put into an account and few questions asked. The shares headed off from 2c to nearly $3.00 so from heavy debts to paying everything off.
> 
> ...




Looks like you've been through some stuff...

As you say a lofty point of view to have. I'm glad you think like that, as I wasn't sure. My friend Gavin doesn't have a debt but his past (squandering money , has very little) is bothering him excessively, endlessly.

Some considerations for Gav:
He still has food and water, and income coming in. Not all in the world have that.

He could aspire to work hard and save (and maintain life balance), and learn from his mistakes.

Many of us will experience some kind of setback/regret in the course of a lifetime, either through bad decision making, or being unlucky. Not just him.  We have to go on.

He should forget the past.

Since he is obsessed with becoming rich, some additional money reflections might be of use (he throws away lots of his money on lottery tickets):

A Ferrari is nice to have, but you get used to it after a while.

You don't need wealth to go on holidays once a year.



The thing is, he can't seem to adopt these positive belief systems, or want to adopt them. He is extremely unhappy, tortured endlessly by the past.


----------



## noirua (25 August 2018)

grah33 said:


> Looks like you've been through some stuff...
> 
> As you say a lofty point of view to have. I'm glad you think like that, as I wasn't sure. My friend Gavin doesn't have a debt but his past (squandering money , has very little) is bothering him excessively, endlessly.
> 
> ...





The cricketer Geoff Boycott's main philosophy in life is to only think and look forward and never once look back. Dispose of those wing mirrors and rear view mirrors. If a person cant do that then the last resort is pretend to do it - life may become part of an act. There are some quite famous actors who in real life are tormented and if a person can act all the time that can be a cure all.


----------



## noirua (25 August 2018)

*Jill Janus *(September 2, 1975 – August 14, 2018)[1] was the lead singer of American heavy metal bands Huntress, The Starbreakers and Chelsea Girls.[2]





Janus had long struggled with mental Illness, and killed herself outside Portland, Oregon, on Tuesday, her relatives and bandmates said in a statement released through publicist Alexandra Greenberg.
https://pagesix.com/2018/08/17/huntress-singer-jill-janus-commits-suicide/



**https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (26 August 2018)

*Teenage YouTube star McSkillet dies in 100mph crash going wrong way down California highway *
*https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...star-mcskillet-dies-100mph-crash-going-wrong/*

*Trevor J. Heitmann, known on YouTube as "McSkillet," was identified as the teen driver killed in a wrong-way car crash in San Diego on Thursday.* * Heitmann, 18, was driving a high-end 2014 McLaren sports car the wrong way on Interstate 805 when he hit a Hyundai SUV Thursday afternoon, reports KSWB. The crash sparked a series of other collisions involving eight cars, two of which ended up in flames. Two other people in the Hyundai — a 43-year-old mother and her 12-year-old daughter — were killed.*

*YouTube - McSkillet*
*https://www.youtube.com/user/OGMCSKILLET*

**


----------



## noirua (30 August 2018)

*A 9-Year-Old Colorado Boy's Death by Suicide Highlights the Challenges Facing LGBTQ Kids*
https://www.yahoo.com/news/9-old-colorado-boy-apos-210244642.html



https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## noirua (2 September 2018)

Female doctor’s suicide triggers nationwide reflection on verbal abuse

A female doctor has committed suicide in Deyang, southwest China’s #Sichuan province, after becoming a target of verbal abuse in a suspected sexual assault-related dispute at a swimming pool.

The doctor, surnamed An, reportedly felt two teenage boys inappropriately touching when she was swimming at a swimming pool on August 20. She demanded an apology but the boys refused and allegedly spat at her and made obscene gestures. Infuriated, An’s husband then pushed one of the boy’s head under the water.

The brawl did not quiet down after An’s husband apologized to the boy at the police station. The boy’s family allegedly came to An’s hospital, protesting and demanding that the doctor be removed from her post. The surveillance video of An’s husband attacking the boy was also released, which immediately caused one-sided criticism of the female doctor.

According to An’s family, the doctor has always been mild and wanted no trouble, but nobody expected she would commit suicide on August 25.

Many netizens began to reflect upon the public opinion on the internet, as well as the irrational behavior of the boy’s family. “You just type her name and there she is, lying dead at the hospital. I hope more people can think independently and not follow the crowd and rush to judgment,” wrote a netizen.

This is not the first time Chinese netizens’ aggressive criticism has put pressure on others. Some Chinese celebrities have already shut down their comment areas on China’s Twitter-like Weibo so as to avoid extremely insulting comments like “go to hell.”

https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## DB008 (2 September 2018)

*Voluntary euthanasia inquiry announced in Queensland, issue must be confronted Premier says*​Queensland's Premier has ordered an inquiry into end-of-life care, including the issue of voluntary euthanasia, with Queensland the last state in the country to debate the issue.

Annastacia Palaszczuk has told the Labor Party Conference in Brisbane the issue must be confronted.

She said the parliamentary health committee would lead the examination, which will also look at aged care and palliative care.

"Following the vote on the termination of pregnancy bill the parliamentary health committee will begin examining all issues to do with what's known as end-of-life care," she said.

"I have watched carefully as other jurisdictions have faced this issue head-on.

*The LNP's official policy is against euthanasia.*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-02/euthanasia-inquiry-in-queensland/10192716​

Labor want to have a look at Euthanasia
LNP are against it
Don't vote for LNP


----------



## Tink (3 September 2018)

On the same day, DB.

I agree with Matthew.


----------



## noirua (3 September 2018)

https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/
--

Peter Frame, a former New York City Ballet principal dancer who became a mentor to young dancers, died on Thursday outside his apartment building on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, the police said. He was 61. The cause was suicide, the medical examiner’s office said.  Authorities said he left behind a note. 









*Former NYC Ballet principal dancer Peter Frame commits suicide just a day after the death of his former colleague - renowned dancer and choreographer Paul Taylor*
*http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...me-commits-suicide-day-death-Paul-Taylor.html*


----------



## grah33 (4 September 2018)

Tink said:


> On the same day, DB.
> 
> I agree with Matthew.




a bit of karma going on.  killing babies first, then in turn killing ourselves


----------



## So_Cynical (5 September 2018)

Thanks for posting noirua - its so easy to just avoid the subject, its very real and not going away.


----------



## noirua (9 September 2018)

*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*

*Boy 'decapitates himself with chainsaw' after losing computer game as police probe 'incitement to suicide'*
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/boy-cut-head-chainsaw-after-13192883





He died in the village of Mogochino in Russia


----------



## dutchie (24 September 2018)

Brave doctor admits to euthanasia.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...doctor-reveals-woman-says-injected-drugs.html

She should not be charged or jailed for her humane act.

Legalise euthanasia.


----------



## noirua (5 October 2018)

*The Samaritans offer support and advice to people feeling suicidal or vulnerable 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. *
https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/

*'Perfectionist' textiles teacher, 27, hanged herself after she was 'changed completely' by occupational therapist who called her 'emotionally immature' *
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...er-emotionally-immature/ar-BBNUe8F?li=BBoPWjQ


----------



## noirua (21 October 2018)

*Former member of GNZ48, Du Yuwei killed herself due to bullying*
http://news24xx.com/read/news/11423/Former-member-of-GNZ48-Du-Yuwei-killed-herself-due-to-bullying


----------



## sptrawler (11 January 2019)

I guess this is a side effect of the society we live in.

https://thewest.com.au/news/regional/karratha-shattered-by-five-deaths-in-a-month-ng-b881070138z

On a per capita basis, that is a lot of deaths, maybe 24/7 bad news gets people down? Who knows, but is is a sad indictment of today's World.


----------



## sptrawler (13 February 2019)

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...n/news-story/08e329b5572c944dffcecb21ba814976
Not a very uplifting story, but the reality for many, don't forget to take the time to listen to a mate.
One I know finished it last week, just didn't see a light at the end of the tunnel, 65 still in debt. 
But no one thought he was thinking of ending it.


----------



## DB008 (23 February 2019)

*'We should be able to choose': Australian firefighter Troy Thornton dies in Swiss euthanasia clinic*​An Australian firefighter has died in a Swiss euthanasia clinic, leaving a message for politicians and voters.

Troy Thornton, 54, died by lethal injection late on Friday, Australian time.

His wife Christine was there to hold his hand, but he died without his two teenage children by his side.

The Victorian man said he wanted the nation to think deeply about the concept of dying well, and to challenge the notion that choosing death is somehow wrong.

He wanted to legally end his life at home in Australia, with all those he loved around him.

But despite Victoria becoming the first state to legalise voluntary assisted dying, he did not qualify.

His disease — multiple system atrophy — is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder. There are no treatments and there is no prospect of recovery, but death can take years.

That's where the Victorian laws fall down, Mr Thornton said.

He could not find two doctors willing to say with absolute certainty that he would die within 12 months, which in his case is a condition to access the legislation.

That left him with Switzerland as a solution to end his suffering, albeit without his children, his extended family and his circle of friends.

"Doctors have always told me that you don't die of it, you die with it. You can live for quite a few years, but… you end up being a vegetable," he said from the Swiss city of Basel.

"After a while it attacks different systems, breathing, swallowing. I'd end up drowning in my own mucous, that's what happens."

He called his disease a "beast": one that takes everything away slowly.

"First you can't swim, then you can't run, walk, kick the footy with your children, you can't surf, drive; eventually it takes your career. Then you end up being a vegetable.​

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02...hter-dies-in-swiss-euthanasia-clinic/10843092​


----------



## lindsayf (24 February 2019)

DB008 said:


> *'We should be able to choose': Australian firefighter Troy Thornton dies in Swiss euthanasia clinic*​An Australian firefighter has died in a Swiss euthanasia clinic, leaving a message for politicians and voters.
> 
> Troy Thornton, 54, died by lethal injection late on Friday, Australian time.
> 
> ...



Horrible disease..


----------



## noirua (24 March 2019)

*Pupil who escaped Parkland shooting takes own life due to 'survivor's guilt'*
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...to-survivors-guilt/ar-BBV8MoA?ocid=spartandhp
A student who survived the massacre at a high school in Parkland has taken her own life after struggling with 'survivor's guilt'.


----------



## noirua (25 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> You may be surprised that the 3 main religions regard suicide (not in all instances though) as a highly selfish act, likened to murder, and worthy of eternal perdition .  And this is what quite a few people -even on this forum – think , so should be pointed out.
> 
> There is definitely something selfish to ending your life imo, if it's not going how you want it to go.
> 
> Augustine (City of God from memory) provides a different perspective .




Augustine on Taking One’s Own Life
http://www.didymus.org/uploads/3/4/2/1/3421357/augustine_on_suicide.pdf





https://www.lifeline.org.au
https://www.lifeinmindaustralia.com.au/youcantalk


----------



## DB008 (25 March 2019)

noirua said:


> *Pupil who escaped Parkland shooting takes own life due to 'survivor's guilt'*
> ​
> A student who survived the massacre at a high school in Parkland has taken her own life after struggling with 'survivor's guilt'.​
> https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...to-survivors-guilt/ar-BBV8MoA?ocid=spartandhp​






*Second Parkland shooting survivor kills himself, police confirm*​Parkland is feeling more pain.

A week after the suicide of a former student, a Marjory Stoneman High School student has taken his life, Coral Springs police confirmed Sunday.

The double tragedy comes just as students are out of school this week for spring break.

Investigators told the Miami Herald that the male student died in “an apparent suicide” on Saturday night. He was a sophomore and attended MSD last year at the time of the Feb. 14 shooting that claimed 17 lives on campus. Police did not release his name.​
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/broward/article228350134.html​


----------



## qldfrog (25 March 2019)

On a less political subject, my grandmother passed away yesterday in france, 100y plus but what a shameful end.no thinking for more than 10y due to Alzheimer, a heart beating only after a pacemaker was installed in her 90 while already senile and last year or so bedridden and tube fed...but the hospital was getting paid a fortune every day for that...
Doing the same treatment to a dog would bring you to jail....
Never forget the money side of the aged care system when dealing with the latter years.
Unless the family is very strict and united..it was not ..you are treated as a dollar bag
Obviously fully favoring euthanasia.or at least the choice to stop treatment...
Wishing that end to no-one...


----------



## Bill M (25 March 2019)

qldfrog said:


> my grandmother passed away yesterday in france, 100y plus but what a shameful end.no thinking for more than 10y due to Alzheimer, a heart beating only after a pacemaker was installed in her 90 while already senile and last year or so bedridden and tube fed...but the hospital was getting paid a fortune every day for that



Please accept my condolences.

My Father was in a nursing home when he had dementia. He had stopped eating and was withering away in a hospital and the Doctors called a family meeting. They basically said that we can keep your Father alive by feeding him through a tube "but what kind if life would that be for him". Similar with my Mother, she had multiple organ failure and the Doctors did say they can keep Mum alive for quite some time "but is that what Mum would like, is that a way for Mum to live her life."?

As a family we said we were not medically qualified in anything and we didn't know what to do. We asked, what would be the right way to go and what should we do? They said, we can keep your Mum going for 3 or 4 weeks but eventually she will die or we could let her die naturally by disconnecting everything and let her have a peaceful and natural death. They said the family should decide but they said that in this situation they thought disconnecting everything would be the better option. The siblings all had the meeting and we thought we should follow the Doctors advice. Mum always said, if she was in that situation, please tell them to pull the plug.

So my question is don't French Doctors advise the same? Who was paying these hospital bills, they would have been astronomical?


----------



## Logique (25 March 2019)

qldfrog said:


> On a less political subject, my grandmother passed away yesterday in france, 100y plus but what a shameful end.no thinking for more than 10y due to Alzheimer, a heart beating only after a pacemaker was installed in her 90 while already senile and last year or so bedridden and tube fed...but the hospital was getting paid a fortune every day for that...
> *Doing the same treatment to a dog would bring you to jail*....
> Never forget the money side of the aged care system when dealing with the latter years.
> Unless the family is very strict and united..it was not ..you are treated as a dollar bag
> ...



Never a truer word spoken.


----------



## tech/a (25 March 2019)

In this situation now with my 95 year old Dad.

Not good to watch as he clearly is drifting from recognizing
people things and where he is to the terror of knowing you
you cant remember what you should be able to and there
is nothing you can do. He is bed ridden due to Knee and
hip issues.

He has made it as clear to us as I have to my kids.
Make it as comfortable as possible but dont prolong
the exit!

For me at least it certainly diminishes the importance of all
the rubbish we go through in life from relationships to building
careers and businesses---when what is left is basically nothing!
Our life affects very few.


----------



## lindsayf (25 March 2019)

Hard times.
Yes..puts thing well and truly into perspective.
My 90yo mother died recently after a few years in an aged care facility.
John Mellencamp wrote in one of his sings that life goes on long after the thrill of living is gone.
So true.
My mother was fortunate to die from a massive stroke when she did.
Her family likewise fortunate to not have to endure the witnessing of the cumulative indignities of the failing mind and body.


----------



## qldfrog (25 March 2019)

Bill M said:


> question is don't French Doctors advise the same? Who was paying these hospital bills, they would have been astronomical?



Pension from deceased husband plus assets(low as working class) plus welfare from a debt ridden socialist bankrupt nation
During that time 10pc permanent unemployment and millions illegal immigrants..you understand why most of gifted youths are running away


----------



## DB008 (26 March 2019)

*‘Heartbreaking’: Sandy Hook Father Dies in Apparent Suicide*​
Jeremy Richman was the father of first-grader Avielle Richman, who died in the 2012 school massacre.

The father of a first-grade girl who was killed in the Sandy Hook school shootings died in an apparent suicide Monday morning, Newtown Police confirmed.

Jeremy Richman, 49, was found dead at 7 a.m. inside Edmond Town Hall, where he had an office space, police told The Daily Beast. Authorities said the medical examiner’s office is still investigating the exact cause of death.

A neuropharmacologist, Richman co-founded the Avielle Foundation after his first-grade daughter, Avielle Richman, died in the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The 6-year-old was among the 20 first-grade students and six administrators killed.

“This is a heartbreaking event for the Richman Family and the Newtown community as a whole, the police department’s prayers are with the Richman family right now, and we ask that the family be given privacy in this most difficult time,” Lt. Aaron Bahamonde said in a statement. “The death appears to be a suicide but police will not disclose the method or any other details of  the death, only to state the death does not appear suspicious.”

In a later statement, Bahamonde said that some of the officers called to Monday’s scene also responded to the Sandy Hook shooting. The officers found a note next to Richman’s body, he added.​

https://www.thedailybeast.com/jerem...her-dies-in-apparent-suicide?via=twitter_page​


----------



## grah33 (27 March 2019)

request moderator to move posts
663 664 665 666 667  669
to  the usual "religion science skepticism " thread
(plz, if you don't mind,as those posts better fit there)


----------



## Logique (27 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> request moderator to move posts
> 663 664 665 666 667  669
> to  the usual "religion science skepticism " thread
> (plz, if you don't mind,as those posts better fit there)



I agree


----------



## grah33 (27 March 2019)

Logique said:


> I agree



yeah, it's a bit full on for this thread.


----------



## Joe Blow (27 March 2019)

grah33 said:


> request moderator to move posts
> 663 664 665 666 667  669
> to  the usual "religion science skepticism " thread
> (plz, if you don't mind,as those posts better fit there)




I've moved them across but I've had to include a few more posts so I could extract the whole conversation which started a little further back.


----------



## grah33 (27 March 2019)

Joe Blow said:


> I've moved them across but I've had to include a few more posts so I could extract the whole conversation which started a little further back.



thanks.


----------



## DB008 (28 March 2019)

*New Jersey is about to legalize medically assisted suicide for the terminally ill*​(CNN)Terminally ill adults in New Jersey will soon be able to ask for medical help to end their lives.

Gov. Phil Murphy said he plans to sign a bill legalizing assisted suicide which passed the state legislature on Monday. The bill allows adults with a prognosis of six months or less to live to get a prescription for life-ending medication.

Currently, California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, Hawaii, Montana and the District of Columbia allow physician-assisted suicide.

The bill requires a second opinion on the diagnosis, and either a psychiatrist or psychologist must determine that the patient has the mental capacity to make the decision. The prescription is a series of self-administered pills that can be taken at home.

"Allowing terminally ill and dying residents the dignity to make end-of-life decisions according to their own consciences is the right thing to do," said Murphy.​

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/26/health/nj-assisted-suicide-trnd/index.html​


----------



## noirua (1 April 2019)

An appropriate song or two I think if we find ourselves depressed:


----------



## noirua (18 April 2019)

Peru’s former president Alan García has died after deliberately shooting himself in the head when police tried to arrest him in connection with a multibillion-dollar Latin American corruption scandal.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...x-president-shoots-himself-critical-condition

Former Peruvian president Alan Garcia has died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. His death was confirmed by current President Martin Vizcarra, who expressed his condolences over Twitter. Garcia was president from 1985 to 1990 and again from 2006 to 2011.
Source: CNN

*135 247 – 24/7 Anonymous Crisis Support.*
*https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## noirua (16 May 2019)

*Isaac Kappy death: Thor and Breaking Bad actor dies, aged 42 *
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...42/ar-AABob4W?MSCC=1557957601&ocid=spartandhp

*135 247 – 24/7 Anonymous Crisis Support.
https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/*


----------



## DB008 (16 June 2019)

*Voluntary euthanasia to begin in Victoria as assisted dying laws take effect this week*​The Victorian Parliament passed the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act in November 2017.

After an 18-month implementation phase, the laws will become active on Wednesday.

Applicants must be Victorian residents, aged over 18 and be assessed by two doctors to have a terminal illness with intolerable pain that will likely cause death within six months or 12 months if the illness is a neurodegenerative condition like motor neurone disease.

The laws also have safeguards to prevent terminally ill people being pressured into a decision.

Anyone who is the beneficiary of the person's will cannot be among the two witnesses required to sign the application.

Authorities will not reveal the exact make-up of the drug prescribed under the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act.

But it is similar to the product Nembutal.

It will be dispensed by pharmacists at the Alfred Hospital, which was asked by the State Government to provide the service.​
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-16/voluntary-assisted-dying-starts-in-victoria/11207712​


----------



## noirua (19 August 2019)

The tomb of Pablo Escobar and family in the Monte Sacro Cemetery, Itagüí

It has never been proven who actually fired the final shot into his ear, or determined whether this shot was made during the gunfight or as part of a possible execution, with wide speculation remaining regarding the subject. Some of Escobar's relatives believe that he had committed suicide.[9][51] His two brothers, Roberto Escobar and Fernando Sánchez Arellano, believe that he shot himself through the ear. In a statement regarding the topic, the duo stated that Pablo "had committed suicide, he did not get killed. During all the years they went after him, he would say to me every day that if he was really cornered without a way out, he would 'shoot himself through the ear'."[52]


----------



## Knobby22 (9 September 2019)

Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows males are more vulnerable, with 2.8 per cent of male deaths attributable to suicide compared to 1.0 per cent of female deaths.

"It's an interesting picture in Australia — there is a major male-female discrepancy here," Dr Hafizi said.

"That gender difference [in suicide rates] is something we see everywhere.

"In the UK it might be twice as many — but in Australia it's around three times … the reasons behind that are obviously something to explore."


----------



## noirua (5 December 2019)

South Korean pop star and actor Cha In Ha has been found dead at the age of 27 , the third young Korean star to die in the space of two months.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...found-dead-aged-27/ar-BBXIpuI?ocid=spartandhp
The band – which is worth $3.5bn annually to South Korea’s economy, according to the Hyundai Research Institute – said they would have “extended period of rest and relaxation” to “recharge and refresh as musicians and creators”.

---




135 247
https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## DB008 (6 December 2019)

*Voluntary euthanasia bill passes WA Upper House with*
*laws set to take hold within days*​
Western Australia is set to become the second state to legalise voluntary euthanasia after proposed laws allowing terminally ill people to end their own lives passed the Upper House of Parliament.

The controversial voluntary assisted dying bill is now destined to become law within days after being passed 24 votes to 11.

Legislative Council MPs voted in favour of the Government's legislation after weeks of prolonged debate, amid accusations of filibustering and bullying.

The bill will now return to the Legislative Assembly next week for a final vote on amendments introduced in the Upper House.

Premier Mark McGowan was unrepentant for the pressure he applied to the Opposition, and in particular Liberal MP and strident critic of the bill Nick Goiran, to push the bogged-down legislation along in the Upper House.

"Sometimes to make an omelette you have to break a few eggs," Mr McGowan said.

"I wanted to see this get to a vote, because if it just went on for endless debate, we'd never achieve it.

"And I think that was the aim of perhaps one member of the Upper House."​


More on link below....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-05/wa-voluntary-euthanasia-law-passes-upper-house-vote/11771302​


----------



## noirua (30 December 2019)

Bill and Joe Smith, who appeared on Channel 4’s “My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding” in the U.K., have been found dead in Sevenoaks, Kent, according to numerous reports. They were 32.
https://variety.com/2019/tv/news/my-big-fat-gypsy-wedding-twins-dead-suicide-1203453192/


Samaritans: https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## noirua (3 February 2020)

*Blood on the tracks: Russian mystery of drummer's death in Siberia*




He was 25 and an aspiring drummer with an eye on a career with the band he formed with his college friends. Dmitry Fyodorov was also planning to marry his girlfriend in the Siberian city of Omsk.

But last month, police broke the news to his family that he had been decapitated by an oncoming train because he had ignored a driver's warning signal to get off the tracks.

His friends do not believe a word of it and say he would never have taken his own life.

Before he died, Fyodorov posted a video saying he had been framed by police and his fiancée says while there was some blood on the tracks, it was not enough to suggest such an appalling accident.

"One of the officers put his hand into my left pocket and then a little bundle fell on to my feet which wasn't mine and couldn't possibly be mine," he told his lawyer. "Then he shoved his hand again into my empty left pocket and pulled out four more little bundles just like the first one."

She says the officers made him admit on camera to being a dealer; they took away his phone and wanted him to sign statements that he was in that part of town to deliver drugs. This way, they told him, he'd get a suspended sentence but otherwise he'd go to jail.

But on 16 December 2019, the day after his arrest, criminal proceedings began. A lawyer assigned to his case urged him to co-operate fully and sign a statement that a search had been carried out in his flat. That had not happened, but he signed nevertheless and found another lawyer, Igor Suslin.

His new lawyer filed complaints alleging Fyodorov had been stitched up. They took the case to the local headquarters of the federal security service (FSB) to complain that drugs had been planted on the young musician and went to the local court too.




Fyodorov was eventually released from the police department in Omsk but legal proceedings soon began


----------



## basilio (9 March 2020)

How do we want to go ?
This story opens up the conversation.

* When assisted dying means you have to go before you're ready *
 Assisted dying 

Grappling with Alzheimer’s, Leila Bell decided to end her life. She used her final days to call on Canada to change its rules

Christina Frangou

Wed 4 Mar 2020 21.15 AEDT

Shares
958




Leila Bell, who passed last year, fought for end-of-life directives to be established well in advance of needing them. Photograph: leila bell
Leila Bell, an 85-year-old great grandmother in Vancouver, decided the circumstances of her death warranted one last act of advocacy.

She told a handful of close friends, her psychologist and her doctor about her plan. Her long-time confidante Sarah Townsend made the arrangements.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/04/assisted-dying-maid-canada-leila-bell

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-47047579


----------



## noirua (22 March 2020)

*What have you seen that made you think, "Wait they can actual do that?!!*
https://www.quora.com/What-have-you-seen-that-made-you-think-Wait-they-can-actually-do-that


----------



## DB008 (25 December 2020)

*60 Minutes Archives: An interview with Dr. Jack Kevorkian*






​
*Jack Kevorkian* was an American pathologist and euthanasia proponent. He publicly championed a terminal patient's right to die by physician-assisted suicide, embodied in his quote "Dying is not a crime".[2] Kevorkian said that he assisted at least 130 patients, to that end. He was convicted of murder in 1999 and was often portrayed in the media with the name of "*Dr. Death*". There was support for his cause,[3] and he helped set the platform for reform.[4]

In 1998, Kevorkian was arrested and tried for his direct role in a case of voluntary euthanasia on a man named Thomas Youk who suffered from Lou Gehrig’s disease or ALS. He was convicted of second-degree murder and served 8 years of a 10-to-25-year prison sentence. He was released on parole on June 1, 2007, on condition he would not offer advice, participate, nor be present in the act of any type of suicide involving euthanasia to any other person; as well as neither promote nor talk about the procedure of assisted suicide.[5]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian



.​


----------



## noirua (10 January 2021)

Stella Tennant death: Supermodel took her own life, family confirms as they pay tribute to ‘beautiful soul’ (msn.com)
She was among models representing the British fashion industry during the closing ceremony at the Olympic Stadium, on the final day of the London 2012 Olympics.

Samaritans: https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## noirua (12 February 2021)

Bayern Munich star's ex-girlfriend found dead a week after breakup
		

The Polish model was reportedly found dead of a suspected suicide in her apartment on Tuesday, February 9. It had been just a week since she and the famous footballer called it quits. The couple was together for approximately 15 months before they ended their relationship earlier this month, as stated in a report from Marca.


Samaritans: https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## noirua (13 February 2021)

Japan's suicides jump 16% in COVID-19 2nd wave after fall in 1st wave - study
					

(This Jan 16 story corrects researcher's affiliation in para 2 to Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, not Hong Kong University)




					www.reuters.com
				



According to health ministry information from November 2016 to October 2020, the child suicide rate rose 49% in the second wave compared to the period after the nationwide closure of schools.


----------



## DB008 (16 September 2021)

Queensland legalises voluntary assisted dying​

*Voluntary assisted dying is now law in Queensland*

This afternoon the parliament voted to legalise the right of the terminally ill to choose when to end their life.

The legislation demands the patient be -

Suffering intolerably from a terminal illness
Have fewer than 12 months to live
Have obtained more than one medical opinion
Be over the age of 18
Have the capacity to make the decision.
Medical staff and faith-run organisations will retain the right to conscientiously object.

Members of parliament were today given a conscience vote, meaning they were free to vote based on the opinions of their constituents as well as their own personal, religious and moral convictions, rather than be bound by their political party.

The legislation doesn't take effect until January 2023.

Victoria, Western Australia, Tasmania and South Australia have all passed voluntary assisted dying laws.



https://www.9news.com.au/national/q...omes-law/71c5871e-3f44-482b-86a8-d9ef39e273f0


.​


----------



## Knobby22 (30 September 2021)

Suicide rates officially down 6.2%. The lowest rate since 2013 for woman.
Deaths also fell across the 5 leading causes of death including heart disease, respiratory disease, dementia.
(This isn't going to suit the extreme left and right wing agendas.)
We are drinking alcohol a bit more though.










						Fewer suicides, but alcohol-related deaths rose in first pandemic year
					

New data shows the suicide rate fell in 2020 despite the coronavirus pandemic, but alcohol-related deaths rose. There were just 55 deaths from the flu.




					www.theage.com.au


----------



## noirua (20 May 2022)

https://www.quora.com/Which-screenshot-deserves-6678k-views/answers/299678617
					

https://www.quora.com/Which-screenshot-deserves-6678k-views/answers/299678617




					qr.ae
				



Pakistani heroes also deserve limelight like others







Samaritans: https://thesamaritans.org.au/contact-us/


----------



## PZ99 (20 May 2022)

NSW passes voluntary assisted dying laws... https://www.theguardian.com/austral...nal-illness-after-marathon-upper-house-debate


----------



## noirua (23 May 2022)

Albert Edwin Trott (6 February 1873 – 30 July 1914) was a Test cricketer for both Australia and England. He was named as one of the Wisden Cricketers of the Year in 1899. He is believed to be the only batsman to have struck a ball over the top of the Lord's Pavilion. He is also one of only two players to take two hat-tricks in the same first-class innings, the other being Joginder Rao. Despite his notability, having played in 375 first-class matches including 5 Tests, he was almost penniless when he committed suicide at the age of 41.








						Albert Trott - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				









Full name at birthAlbert Edwin TrottClaim to fameDate of birth6 February 1873Place of birthAbbotsford, VictoriaDate of death30 July 1914Place of deathHarlesden, Middlesex, EnglandOccupationOccupation categoryCricketNationalityBritish








						Harry Trott - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## noirua (24 May 2022)

Andrew Stoddart - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Andrew Ernest Stoddart, one of the greatest of batsmen, died by his own hand on Saturday, the 3rd of April, shooting himself through the head. 
A brilliant career thus came to the saddest of ends. Mr. Stoddart was born at South Shields on March 11th, 1863, and had thus completed his 52nd year. 
Curiously enough, considering the great fame he won, he did not take to cricket seriously until 22 years of age, when he became associated with the Hampstead Club, and showed such form, scoring no fewer than five separate hundreds for that team, that before the end of the season of 1885 he had been tried for Middlesex. 
From 1886 to 1898, except for the summer of 1888, when he was engaged playing Rugby football in Australia and New Zealand, Mr. Stoddart proved a tower of strength to Middlesex in batting, keeping up his skill so well that in 1898 -- his last full season in county cricket -- he averaged 52. 
He soon became a popular idol at Lord's, his batting, in conjunction with that of T. C. O'Brien, making the Middlesex matches far more attractive than they had ever been before his day.


----------



## noirua (24 May 2022)

Arthur Shrewsbury - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



On 12 April 1903 Shrewsbury bought a revolver from a local gunsmith. He returned a week later after having difficulty in loading the gun. The clerk found that Shrewsbury had the wrong bullets and supplied the correct ones.[48] Shrewsbury went to his bedroom that evening and shot himself first in the chest and then, when that did not prove fatal, in the head.[48] 
His girlfriend, Gertrude Scott, found him bleeding from a head wound and by the time a doctor arrived Shrewsbury was dead. At the inquest, held the following day, the coroner decided that Shrewsbury had committed suicide, his mind having been unhinged by the belief that he had an incurable disease.[48] 
The coroner added that there was, however, no evidence to show Shrewsbury was suffering from a major illness.


----------



## noirua (7 June 2022)




----------



## noirua (1 October 2022)

News anchor takes own life 'after finding woman's underwear'
					

WAOW news anchor Neena Pacholke died last week




					www.leicestermercury.co.uk


----------



## noirua (5 October 2022)

King George V - euthanasia - 
*Bertrand Edward Dawson, 1st Viscount Dawson of Penn*, GCVO KCB KCMG PC FRCP (9 March 1864 – 7 March 1945) was a physician to the British Royal Family and President of the Royal College of Physicians from 1931 to 1937. He is known for his responsibility in the death of George V, who under his care was injected with a fatal dose of cocaine and morphine to hasten his passing.








						Bertrand Dawson, 1st Viscount Dawson of Penn - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The First World War took a toll on George's health: he was seriously injured on 28 October 1915 when thrown by his horse at a troop review in France,[105] and his heavy smoking exacerbated recurring breathing problems. He suffered from chronic bronchitis. In 1925, on the instruction of his doctors, he was reluctantly sent on a recuperative private cruise in the Mediterranean; it was his third trip abroad since the war, and his last.[106] In November 1928, he fell seriously ill with septicaemia, and for the next two years his son Edward took over many of his duties.[107] In 1929, the suggestion of a further rest abroad was rejected by the King "in rather strong language".[108] Instead, he retired for three months to Craigweil House, Aldwick, in the seaside resort of Bognor, Sussex.[109] As a result of his stay, the town acquired the suffix _Regis_ – Latin for "of the King". A myth later grew that his last words, upon being told that he would soon be well enough to revisit the town, were "Bugger Bognor!"[110][111][112]

George never fully recovered. In his final year, he was occasionally administered oxygen.[113] The death of his favourite sister, Victoria, in December 1935 depressed him deeply. On the evening of 15 January 1936, the King took to his bedroom at Sandringham House complaining of a cold; he remained in the room until his death.[114] He became gradually weaker, drifting in and out of consciousness. Prime Minister Baldwin later said:



> ... each time he became conscious it was some kind inquiry or kind observation of someone, some words of gratitude for kindness shown. But he did say to his secretary when he sent for him: "How is the Empire?" An unusual phrase in that form, and the secretary said: "All is well, sir, with the Empire", and the King gave him a smile and relapsed once more into unconsciousness.[115]



By 20 January, he was close to death. His physicians, led by Lord Dawson of Penn, issued a bulletin with the words "The King's life is moving peacefully towards its close."[116][117] Dawson's private diary, unearthed after his death and made public in 1986, reveals that the King's last words, a mumbled "God damn you!",[118] were addressed to his nurse, Catherine Black, when she gave him a sedative that night. Dawson, who supported the "gentle growth of euthanasia",[119] admitted in the diary that he ended the King's life:[118][120][121]



> At about 11 o'clock it was evident that the last stage might endure for many hours, unknown to the Patient but little comporting with that dignity and serenity which he so richly merited and which demanded a brief final scene. Hours of waiting just for the mechanical end when all that is really life has departed only exhausts the onlookers & keeps them so strained that they cannot avail themselves of the solace of thought, communion or prayer. I therefore decided to determine the end and injected (myself) morphia gr.3/4 [grains] and shortly afterwards cocaine gr.1 [grains] into the distended jugular vein ... In about 1/4 an hour – breathing quieter – appearance more placid – physical struggle gone.[121]



Dawson wrote that he acted to preserve the King's dignity, to prevent further strain on the family, and so that the King's death at 11:55 pm could be announced in the morning edition of _The Times_ newspaper rather than "less appropriate ... evening journals".[118][120] Neither Queen Mary, who was intensely religious and might not have sanctioned euthanasia, nor the Prince of Wales was consulted. The royal family did not want the King to endure pain and suffering and did not want his life prolonged artificially but neither did they approve Dawson's actions.[122] _British Pathé_ announced the King's death the following day, in which he was described as "for each one of us, more than a King, a father of a great family".[123]

The German composer Paul Hindemith went to a BBC studio on the morning after the King's death and in six hours wrote _Trauermusik_ ("Mourning Music"), for viola and orchestra. It was performed that same evening in a live broadcast by the BBC, with Adrian Boult conducting the BBC Symphony Orchestra and the composer as soloist.[124]

At the procession to George's lying in state in Westminster Hall, the cross surmounting the Imperial State Crown atop George's coffin fell off and landed in the gutter as the cortège turned into New Palace Yard. The new king, George's eldest son Edward, saw it fall and wondered whether it was a bad omen for his new reign.[125] As a mark of respect to their father, George's four surviving sons – Edward, Albert, Henry, and George – mounted the guard, known as the Vigil of the Princes, at the catafalque on the night before the funeral.[126] The vigil was not repeated until the death of George's daughter-in-law, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, in 2002. George V was interred at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, on 28 January 1936.[127] Edward abdicated before the year was out, leaving Albert to ascend the throne as George VI.[128]


----------



## noirua (22 October 2022)

1.Officer talks man out of committing suicide. Eight years later, the Now-Father-Of-Two gives the Officer an award at The American Foundation For Suicide Prevention


----------



## basilio (16 November 2022)

Disturbing story on theABC.

Seems there is website that supports almost encourages people to commit suicide. Moer significantly they offer a mechanism for suicide that, until the website began was quite infrequent.  However as result of the world wide  promotion many more poeple are killing themselves using this process.









						There is a pro-suicide website linked to deaths in Australia. Getting it shut down is not so simple
					

There's been a spike in deaths in Australia linked to a lethal substance frequently discussed on the off-shore forum. Some of those who've died spent time on the site, which experts say has guided suicidal people toward death instead of away from it.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## farmerge (18 November 2022)

Julia said:


> It's been a while since we had a debate on a difficult topic so I thought I'd bring up what is probably an emotional question about suicide and euthanasia.
> 
> Some of you may think it odd to group these two together, but I think they are definitely two aspects of the same question, i.e. should we as individuals have the right to determine our time and method of dying?
> 
> ...



Good afternoon Julia. I don't know if you were part of the Com community, but nearly 3 years I suffered very serious injuries from a double attack from a bull in my cattle yards. The prognosis I was given by the specialist surgeons in RPH were not good for me at my age at that time. At best a wheelchair and at most paraplegia. At 70 odd neither of these were a happy position for me to be in. I thought if I only have limited movement then it would be time to visit the bloke with the big wings in the Heavens. All I would need is to have my rifle at close range. Fortunately with a lot of help and family support I have regained my health and am now back doing what I love. Farming and farm contracting. The point I am trying make is, I am the one who should be able to say enough is enough, not some do-gooder who has no idea of what is good or bad for me.


----------

