The right to die with dignity

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Guinness

Yup, guilty as charged, I have derogatory views on anyone who could possibly align themselves with the Spanish inquisition, the destruction of numerous cultures, nazi sympathising popes, covering up child molesting clergy, holy wars etc..etc.. and then claim that someone who wants the right to die with dignity is an affront to scripture.



This isn’t even an argument….there is a LAW to safeguard the rules, break the law suffer the consequences..and believe me the Mental Capacity law is enforced far more stringently than the breaking and entering or burglary law.



This is a separate argument but I’ll bite..would you rather that unwanted pregnancies were left to a back street auntie with a knitting needle and a pint of gin? And there are still safeguards (under LAW) in place regarding terminations



As have I, the legislation in question is about options not enforcement, nobody is suggesting that anyone should be forced to end their life, it should be a option



Yes, but again it’s about options, those who choose ‘no’ should have the very best that a civilised society can give



Already enshrined in law under the mental capacity act



Named and shamed in their local newspaper, questioned at the local police station, treated like a criminal, fingerprints, photographs and forensics at a time of deep personal grief


That’s a really silly question and so beneath you, the debate in question had very clear parameters i.e. terminally ill, six months to live and a high court ruling….Shipman was an aberration



100% agree, even though we disagree on the actual argument




And once again…’choice’……not yours…but your mum and dads

Now then.....where to start with this one.
The beginning I suppose is a good place......but I'll give the derogatory remark point the 'flick' as you have accepted my point....but with yor own reservations and explanations.....even though I feel some of them are irrelevant at worst, and tenuous at best.


Point number two - The Law.....is this the same law that says it is illegal to use drugs, sell drugs, peddle drugs.....yet a blind eye is turned to all of these offences?
There are laws which govern abortion, but they are not policed.....and today it is abortion on demand.....?how long has it taken to get to this point?
Well, if you don't know, I will tell you. It took approximately two decades.
That should worry us all....because if this law came into being I really think that a similar thing would happen.

Point three - when I qualified in 1977 I was allocated to work on a Gynae ward until I found a post.
Even though the abortion act had been passed. It was very difficult for woment to access termination of pregnancy. Many Doctors would not refer women for it.
I had the job one Sunday morning of dealing with a desperately ill woman who had sought the services of a local abortionist.....she already had eight children and could not face another pregnancy (no matter what her priest said).those children came within an inch of losing their mother that morning......it was only the skills of the late Hamish Kirkpatrick who saved her life.
I decided that I would work permanently in that area of medicine.....and it was that event that determined that.
I stayed on that unit for 25 years. I like to think that over the years I helped many women.
The fact that I still hear the call 'Sister P' across the street when I am out and about confirms this for me.

Point four - sometimes what starts out as an option can become an obligation.....or can be manipulated by the unscrupulous to become so.

Point five - See point four....Maybe our civilised society would be less keen to offer the care and attention needed by people who have life limiting conditions...or maybe they would put a time limit on how long someone would be supported as this kind of care is expensive and the NHS is not a bottomless pit.
As I said previously it is a slippery slope to be setting foot on.

Point six - yes well laws are broken every day.....and are subject to the vagaries of interpretation by judges(for example look at how Human rights law is administered in this country....contrast this with how it is administered in France, same laws....not the same outcome). Hard cases make for bad laws.

Point seven - named and shamed in newspapers? I think that the majority of us who read such stories think 'there but for the grace of God'.
I think there are few people who would castigate someone for such action.....unless of course it had been done with the aim of profiting by such action.
I think most communities would recognise the situation, it is just that the authorities don't..which is precisely why the law is unequal.

Point eight - although you think this is irrelevant and not part of the argument, I have to disagree. This man thought he was doing good by dispatching,peacefully members of the community whose lives were no longer valid.
He thought he was doing them a favour.
Up unti recently Doctors in hospitals were doing something vaguely similar. It was called the Liverpool Care Pathway....and it had nothing at all to do with care.

Point nine - yes we are in agreement...We agree to disagree, although I reserve the right to change my mind should circumstances change.

Point ten....my father wanted to live right up to the very end.
My mother too.....but had they not wanted to, then that would have been my dilemma rather than theirs.

For those of you who have waded through all this...you deserve a medal.
I am sorry but felt a response was required.

[Accyexplorer]

The debating for free choice when folk are suffering and have no quality of life due to illness are well and good. But, what if your in good health and simply want to end it all?

Should pedophiles,thieves and rapists be allowed assisted suicides if they deem their life unfit to live or should they be forced to serve their sentences?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer

The debating for free choice when folk are suffering and have no quality of life due to illness are well and good. But, what if your in good health and simply want to end it all?

Should pedophiles,thieves and rapists be allowed assisted suicides if they deem their life unfit to live or should they be forced to serve their sentences?

No Pedos @ rapists should be executed in the first place.

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Now then.....where to start with this one.
The beginning I suppose is a good place......but I'll give the derogatory remark point the 'flick' as you have accepted my point....but with yor own reservations and explanations.....even though I feel some of them are irrelevant at worst, and tenuous at best.


Point number two - The Law.....is this the same law that says it is illegal to use drugs, sell drugs, peddle drugs.....yet a blind eye is turned to all of these offences?
There are laws which govern abortion, but they are not policed.....and today it is abortion on demand.....?how long has it taken to get to this point?
Well, if you don't know, I will tell you. It took approximately two decades.
That should worry us all....because if this law came into being I really think that a similar thing would happen.

Point three - when I qualified in 1977 I was allocated to work on a Gynae ward until I found a post.
Even though the abortion act had been passed. It was very difficult for woment to access termination of pregnancy. Many Doctors would not refer women for it.
I had the job one Sunday morning of dealing with a desperately ill woman who had sought the services of a local abortionist.....she already had eight children and could not face another pregnancy (no matter what her priest said).those children came within an inch of losing their mother that morning......it was only the skills of the late Hamish Kirkpatrick who saved her life.
I decided that I would work permanently in that area of medicine.....and it was that event that determined that.
I stayed on that unit for 25 years. I like to think that over the years I helped many women.
The fact that I still hear the call 'Sister P' across the street when I am out and about confirms this for me.

Point four - sometimes what starts out as an option can become an obligation.....or can be manipulated by the unscrupulous to become so.

Point five - See point four....Maybe our civilised society would be less keen to offer the care and attention needed by people who have life limiting conditions...or maybe they would put a time limit on how long someone would be supported as this kind of care is expensive and the NHS is not a bottomless pit.
As I said previously it is a slippery slope to be setting foot on.

Point six - yes well laws are broken every day.....and are subject to the vagaries of interpretation by judges(for example look at how Human rights law is administered in this country....contrast this with how it is administered in France, same laws....not the same outcome). Hard cases make for bad laws.

Point seven - named and shamed in newspapers? I think that the majority of us who read such stories think 'there but for the grace of God'.
I think there are few people who would castigate someone for such action.....unless of course it had been done with the aim of profiting by such action.
I think most communities would recognise the situation, it is just that the authorities don't..which is precisely why the law is unequal.

Point eight - although you think this is irrelevant and not part of the argument, I have to disagree. This man thought he was doing good by dispatching,peacefully members of the community whose lives were no longer valid.
He thought he was doing them a favour.
Up unti recently Doctors in hospitals were doing something vaguely similar. It was called the Liverpool Care Pathway....and it had nothing at all to do with care.

Point nine - yes we are in agreement...We agree to disagree, although I reserve the right to change my mind should circumstances change.

Point ten....my father wanted to live right up to the very end.
My mother too.....but had they not wanted to, then that would have been my dilemma rather than theirs.

For those of you who have waded through all this...you deserve a medal.
I am sorry but felt a response was required.

Ok, since the brunt of your argument rests on the fact that abortion law has moved to abortion on demand…which according to law is allowed under the first trimester…..are you in all seriousness telling me that doctors are routinely breaking the law because this is not policed?

Can I ask your honest opinion, given your experience, the percentage of those who asked for abortion on demand (excepting those who had ‘valid’ reasons’) would have made good mothers.

I really fail to see how the abortion argument relates to the right to choose death for those who are terminally ill with less than six months to live and have a high court judgement that agrees.

Not for one minute am I stating that those who choose to fight should not have the right to the best possible care, regardless of cost, to enhance their fight or ease their passing.

And again I’d argue that Shipman did not think for one minute about easing anyones pain, he is a proven psychopath who just so happened to be a doctor.

The relevant word here is ‘choice’...what right do YOU have to take away that choice and force me to live in pain, or a morphine induced semi-coma, possibly lying and defacating in a bed with the same four walls staring at me for the last six months of my life.

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes.

Most of them.

Hard cases make bad law and I have already said that laws are subject to interpretation.....and that this can be corrupted at worst, flawed at best.

YOU may want the best care for the terminally ill, those who have a tenuous grip on life.....but this may morph into something very different. As previously noted, this a slippery downward slope to set out on.

Harold Shipman may have been all the things you say, but he THOUGHT he was doing his patients a favour by releasing them from their lives.

I do not make that choice for you....the law does.
I am pretty sure that if faced with the scenario you portray, both you and I have the knowledge and the wherewithal to make our own choices concrete....law or no law.

[Margaret Pilkington]

I used the abortion laws as a point of reference because I have long experience of it...And it is a law which involves the legal taking of life.....so in this way, it is a similar thing.
Laws are useless if they are not policed....the abortion law is not policed.....well unless you count someone who blows the whistle....and you and I both know how the NHS deals with whistleblowers.
Some doctors act as though they are above the law.
I know this for a fact as I have seen the evidence with my own eyes...but I think it best to draw a veil over this.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Guinness

The relevant word here is ‘choice’

You got it Pontiac ... and that is exactly how the Supreme Court of Canada sees it. The Governments of Canada have no right, in the case of abortion and doctor assisted suicide, to condemn Canadians to physical and psychological suffering by means of laws which restrict their access to medical care. That is why we have no abortion laws. And I believe Canadians like it that way. Even tory governments are unwilling to "re-visit" the question. And I believe that any laws, either Federal or Provincial, which limit a woman's right to a free, safe medical procedure, would, if appealed to the Supreme Court, be declared in contravention to he letter and spirit of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and therefore ultra vires.

However, other matters, such as seat belt laws and recreational drug use, are totally different issues. I presume that you can all see why this is the case.

[accyman]

my dad died from cancer , i remember him been let out for a day which i now know to be a day where he got to say goodbye to me and my brother as it was the last time i ever saw him.What i am sure of is that from what i recall as a child he didnt die for a while later in which time im sure he suffered a great deal of pain and possibly unable to comprehend or function as it was brain cancer so god knows what happened between then and his death i will never know

one thing i do know is that if after that day he spent with me he took a pill and ended his suffering i would understand and would have probbably saved my mum a lot of grief in seeing her husband decline in such a terrible way and be powerless to help

maybe not as a 6 year old child but i would get it now

i dont promote suicide i think in most cases it is a cowardly and selfish act but there are instances where you just got to say .. yeah i dont blame ya i would too

[Margaret Pilkington]

I would not blame anyone either.
I would not blame any family member who assisted their loved one......but I am against legislation because I really think it would be open to corruption and before long those who were elderly might be 'encouraged' to shuffle off this mortal coil.
They may be made to feel like they are a burden on society.
Goodness knows there are all kinds of pressure on us grey old biddies.
Like they want us to vacate our homes and live somewhere more appropriate.
Never mind that most of those of my generation saved and did without holidays, new furniture, nights out etc...just so that we could buy our homes.

How long would it be before someone suggested that all those with long term conditions should be taking this road out to save money for those younger members of society?

If my father had wanted to die, I would no doubt have helped him...but he didn't.....he hoped that someone would come up with some miracle treatment and he would have been the first in line to try it.....he had so many things that he wanted to see and do.

[accyman]

one argument is that new treatments are been developed at an increasing rate

the counter argument to that is that the NHS will either not fund those treatments or run a postcode lottery as to if you can have that treatment not a system based on your likely hood to benefit from it