Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia

[Julia]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

"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]

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]

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]

"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]

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

 

[So_Cynical]

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

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

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

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