End of Life Assistance for Terminally Ill

[TwoPlAnKs]

In Switzerland, it's possible to go through a system of checks and balances with doctors and family members to get permission for somebody to assist you in committing suicide when your life is no longer worth living due to terminal illness.

An MSP is currently presenting a bill to the Scottish parliament to set up a similar system here, and I believe there is an active campaign for it in the rest of the UK as well.

The bill as proposed focuses very heavily on ensuring it is really what the patient wants when they are in a clear state of mind and needs various sign-offs from different doctors and is only possible when the patient has a terminal illness.

Do you agree with assisted suicide in this situation? A surprising number of MSPs are against the bill here in early polls so I thought I'd see how DF members feel.

There's a facebook group you can join if you support it in Scotland here. Like most facebook groups they won't achieve anything, but they post most of the news stories about it as they happen so it keeps you up to date in the issue.

[TwoPlAnKs]

Here is information from the BBC on what has been proposed to the Scottish parliament:

• A person must be terminally ill or "permanently physically incapacitated"
• A request must be made to, and approved by, a doctor and psychiatrist
• Both must be asked twice after 15-days cooling off period
• Assistance must be supervised by the approving doctor
• Close friends and relatives banned from administering drug
• Only over-16s qualify
• Applicants must be registered with Scottish GP for 18 months
• Bill does not apply to those with dementia or other degenerative mental condition

That's from this article about most MSPs opposing that bill.

You can read the bill here if you are into that sort of thing.

I think it's a good start to something that's safe - of course they need to avoid the nightmare situation of some old lady going a bit batty and having her greedy family rushing her through a suicide that she doesn't want to get their hands on her cash.

There are enough sob stories about people having to go to Switzerland or illegally help a family member die or whatever so I won't bother linking to those, you can see a few on the related articles on BBC and linked from the Facebook page in the OP.

[Teajunkie]

I completely agree and i'm not afraid to admit it!

But....
Why only over 16's ???
What if you have a 12 year old who is not going to make 6/12 months @ best, and is screaming in agony every minute of every single day and begging for the pain to stop!

What makes them any different from an over 16 ?

Bring on the Flames

[russbeer]

I agree.

If anyone I was close to, god forbid, contracted something terminal and they were in constant pain and wanted to end their suffering then why shouldn't they be allowed to?

[TwoPlAnKs]

I completely agree and i'm not afraid to admit it!

But....
Why only over 16's ???
What if you have a 12 year old who is not going to make 6/12 months @ best, and is screaming in agony every minute of every single day and begging for the pain to stop!

What makes them any different from an over 16 ?

Bring on the Flames

I agree, tbh I think she is maybe just going in easy to try to get approval for the bill and get it passed. Excluding children takes away a possible objection.

The MSP in question here does suffer from Parkinsons although I don't know if that's why she is doing it, or if she just feels for the stories from others.

I think I'll write to my MSP and find out his views and see if he's against it, because I do actually feel quite strongly about this. He's Lib-Dem so likely to be quite modern and open-minded about it.

This should bring it to the attention of the UK parliament and possibly result in a nationwide bill too, which would be good. Scotland is the most liberal and also most atheist part of the UK, so there is probably more chance of it getting passed here and our MSPs are still against it just now, so I wouldn't hold out too much hope of it actually getting passed but it's obvious that public opinion in swinging towards it from the 10-0 results to this poll alone.

[Little John]

As long as it is properly governed and people consulted in the process of making the decision then I would like this to be used in the UK. Forcing people to go through life in pain is unacceptable, I would like to think if I became screwed up in some way that I was a burden to people I could sort the problem out.

I think one thing that could be a problem is that the length of time taken to make desicions, the sick person will want it done asap, family would prefer it wasn't needed so will umm and ahhh slowing the process down and those stopping people getting bumped off for no reason will be so bogged down with reports and other paper work the process could take months to sort out.

[TwoPlAnKs]

Since this will be a boring thread if everyone keeps agreeing, I'll play devils advocate and paste a few disagreeing comments from the BBC debating system here.

Some people think it's immoral or illegal:

It is immoral to kill. That includes assisting in death. The next step will see the disappearance of grandads and grandmas from our streets because they feel a burden to the rest of us. Family values include the thick as well as the thin. The greatest thing about the human spirit is our capacity to show compassion and our ability to stay the course through difficulties. It is a sham argument to say killing is better. It is the easy way out - and just think who benefits from a kill - the killers.

Doesn't your nation have a law that makes it a crime to murder someone ? Case closed.

Others think the media is biased in favour of it:

Re: “A short Stay in Switzerland”. I saw an article (in the Guardian?) quoting the BBC personality who had played himself in the story of this highly publicised suicide, in which he admitted that the drama was powerful, moving – and entirely one-sided . I had the impression he was a little embarrassed. He even expressed the hope that the BBC would put on a similarly powerful drama which presents the other side of the issue. Will this ever happen, I wonder?

And some thing paliative care is best, where life-prolonging medicine is stopped and pain relief increased to the maximum safe level until the person dies naturally:

There is an alternative. When a person is so far detriorated that he or she has ceased to be themselves and there is hope of recovery whatsoever, then Pallative Care is the answer. Doctors and nurses are trained to minimize the pain as nature takes its course. They cease to give therapies which prolong death and only administer pain relief. This is the most humane approach and there is no moral ambiguity about it.

I do not believe that assisted suicide should be legalised. It would be far too easy to 'help' someone die in order to get the inheritance or because someone was being difficult or even hard to live with. With all the propoganda in favour of legalisation (by the BBC amongst others) I am not surprised a poll shows a majority in favour. I know from personal experience that love and palliative care works.

Of course, there are lots of views on there that support the idea too.

My argument against those is that there is no moral or legal issue if it was the person's own choice, people will not be bullied into it if there is a good system to ensure it is their own clear-minded choice, and palliative care is just the same thing but more expensive, slower and more upsetting to those who have to see it. And immoral in cases where the patient would rather die but are being kept alive and the pain medication isn't working completely.

[Teajunkie]

Also if someone is kept alive but drugged up to the eyeballs so they feel no pain is that not the same thing?

[TwoPlAnKs]

Also if someone is kept alive but drugged up to the eyeballs so they feel no pain is that not the same thing?

I think it is. Good luck getting the religious right or anybody of traditional "morals" to agree to move the line of where death occurs though. Like most moral lines, it's based on the way it's always been done and since time of death can be declared years after somebody's personality has left this planet, that's the way it remains.

[CzarJunkie]

I once worked at a train station and on one Saturday morning a bloke threw himself in front of a train. Believe it or not he missed. He mistimed his jump and rolled beyond the tracks just before the train arrived.

When the station staff got him back on the platform they asked him what the fuck he was up to. As it transpired the poor cunt had cancer and rather than put his family through the heartache of seeing him suffer he just wanted to end it all.

He was duly arrested by the Transport police and taken away. We found out a few weeks later that rather than suffering from cancer, he had some kind of delusional disorder. Only 2 days before he performed the train stunt he had tried to throw himself off the top tier of the local shopping centre. On that occasion, instead of plummeting 100ft to his certain death, he fell on top of the lift and descended leisurely to the food court below.

All I'm saying is, if your numbers up, your numbers up. You shouldn't force these things.

[scullion]

he fell on top of the lift and descended leisurely to the food court below.

sad... but brilliant lol. sounds like a stunt from a Jackie Chan film

[willp2003]

i agree with it in principle, however I'm not sure i could go through with it.

after watching my dad waste away with stomach cancer, i can't see any reason why other people should go through similar situations, if there is an "easier" way out.
I'm not sure any of us could have gone through with some sort of assisted suicide though, even it was legal. It wouldn't feel right somehow knowing when the day would be and organising it.

[russbeer]

after watching my dad waste away with stomach cancer, i can't see any reason why other people should go through similar situations

it would be the hardest decision anyone should have to make... see a dearly loved family member suffer or lose them forever, sooner.

Its a horrible situation that I hope none of us ever find ourselves in.

My heart goes out to people like you Will.

[liveseytowers]

Its a tough one. I saw my GF's dad waste away after his liver failed and it took him two weeks to finally die after the doctors said they couldn't do any more for him. They drugged him up so he was unconscious most of the time and he just had sips of water. In the end it was like he just dried up and faded away. Weird to see.

The doctors could have done more to keep him alive but decided against it, probably because it would have just prolonged his misery. Isn't deciding to stop treating someone and not feeding them similar to helping them die? I suppose you are not helping them stay alive rather than doing something to help end their life.

I don't agree with giving someone drugs that you know will kill them however just letting the body do its thing and letting them die naturally is OK.

[BBK]

I believe I have the right to do what I want to do with my body. If this includes dying, then I should be allowed to do that if I wish, and if I am for some reason unable to do it myself then I can think of no better way than for someone to help me. People putting up moral obligations aren't even beginning to consider the fact that its our fucking right to do what we want with our bodies. What gives these arrogant shits the right to decide if I have to live in agony or not?

People should be allowed to do what they want to do with their own bodies, as it really doesn't affect anyone else other than the loved ones. Now if this was one of my loved ones I'd much rather see them die by drifiting off into a peaceful drug-induced death than dying knowing that they died in absolute agony.

EDIT: I thought this thread was about life insurance when I saw the title!

[AD]

We do the same for animals why not Humans? If I was on my way to knackers yard and was in so much pain I would want to go out with my dignity intact.
I know its a hard thing to concider for your family, but at least you could go out on the day you planned for instead of not knowing if your gonna be here in two weeks and prolonging the misery for everyone else.

-=AD=-

[willp2003]

lots of votes on this, but not many comments, i'd of thought people would be quite vocal on this, but maybe not.
tricky subject though.
if i was terminally ill and could "hit the button" so to speak; then i'd go for it every time - it's doing it for someone else who can't physically or mentally make that final action that is tricky, no matter if they have made the decision earlier on.

[casio]

I can see why people are worried that rather than putting someone in a retirement home they'd be "helped to die" and the truth is knowing the kinds of people out there it does give you something to think about.

But anyone who thinks this isnt already happening is deluded, it happens everyday in hospitals with do not resuscitate orders, when pain killers are administered that get rid of the pain but in the doses theyre administered that have a nasty side effect of killing the patient

If someone wants to kill themselves they should be able to as long as theyve considered what theyre wanting to do seriously and have spoken to dr's and a shrink about it then its their choice, and as long as there isnt anyone pressuring them I dont see the problem.

[GTI]

This is a hard one, with modern palliative care there is no need for anyone to suffer in pain and also from a quasi religious/moral point of view I don't believe in the act of suicide.

However even accepting that terminally ill people should be allowed to die with dignity, there have been countless examples where the system here in Switzerland has been abused e.g. the young lad who ended his life at dignitas following a rugby accident which left him quadriplegic. He claimed that life was not worth living in a wheelchair, and yet the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking who is in the same state has achieved more than most men. Then there was the British composer Edward Downes who chose to die alongside his terminally ill wife because he couldn't face life without her. He was 85 and slowly going blind and deaf, but he was merely suffering the ravages of old age and not a disease. It is very touching, but again it exposes the fact that people who feel they have nothing to live for can request a clinical end. This for me represents a very slippery slope.

Flame away

[BBK]

the young lad who ended his life at dignitas following a rugby accident which left him quadriplegic. He claimed that life was not worth living in a wheelchair, and yet the theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking who is in the same state has achieved more than most men

2 things. FIrst, not everyone has the same brain potential as Hawking. Second, the guy in this case was a young rugby player whose raison d'etre is his physicality. This has been taken away from him in sudden circumstances, so I'm reasonably confident in suggesting that his view was somewhat different. I'm neither physical or mental, but I'm pretty confident that were I to lose the use of all my limbs and have to spend the rest of my life sitting in a chair not being able to do anything I would rather die, or at least have a choice.

For me, the key here is having a choice. The only reason historically people feel its wrong its for religious reasons, that suicide is a crime according to the bible. Yes, of course there are legal implications, but they can reasonably easily be overcome. It should be my choice if I want to die, and I should be able to die with dignity in a manner I want.