Their motivation for doing so is irrlevant
So - the reason why someone is fighting/ not fighting to the end is irrlevant (sic)?
Presumably it's not "irrlevant" to them.
So why is commenting on it out of bounds?
Chat Forum
[closed]
Assisted Suicide - for or against
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
Against, unless I'm likely to inherit quite a bit of cash, in which case, for!
Posted 2 years ago # -
I have a degenerative disease,which will eventually seriously affect my quality of life.I am hoping by the time this happens i will be able to die in my own house not in a clinic in switzerland.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Dealing with the original post, and we’re discussing assisted suicide, it seems to me that Terry Pratchet's case is ever so slightly not normal.
He gets diagnosed with a rare form of Alzheimer’s, a form of dementia.
The visual image of a Dr standing over the patient just a few days after them being upright, with a Hippocratic oath in one hand and an ”on / off” button in the other is unrealistic.
A year ago my father was driving, he gets re-diagnosed in Feb’ 2009, 11 months later he doesn’t understand Christmas at all.
The future is bleak, but doesn’t involve turning off his life at any point.
Yes he will become too much for my mother to cope with, yes he will shrivel up both in body and in mind in a nursing home, one day he’ll have no idea who I am, no idea how to control his bowel movements and one day will stop breathing.
This is what awaits 1/3rd of the UK population.At what point in this process would you be still fully aware and able to make the decision about the date of your death?
I can see the scenario for patients suffering from MS, Cancer, MND etc where the mind is left largely intact & there are plenty of examples in the press who have travelled to Switzerland to end their days.
And that’s why Terry Pratchet’s case is not actually that representative of what lies in store for us, as potential victims of dementia or potential carers of those loved ones who are suffering from the disease.The reality of the situation where dementia’s concerned is you’re never going to be placed in this position outside of the actual physical diagnosis of dementia, and that’s not likely to mean you will want to end it any time soon as you still have lots and lots of living to do – witness TP’s continued crusade in the face of his impending journey through the windscreen to death, albeit in slow motion.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Sorry Junkyard, I only troll/post/contribute in my lunch break
Any evidence to support this anecdotal story?
None whatsoever - it's a hypothetical scenario we probably want to avoid.
Posted 2 years ago # -
It might be worth getting a stock of something lethal while you can then forlorn hope. This is not a flippant comment.
There was a long saga of a woman on our local TV that had cancer and wanted to die. The thing was she wanted to be killed rather than committing suicide so the courts refused. She was still walking well and could have reached any number of high places, and let's face it, a heroin overdose isn't that hard to come by.
Posted 2 years ago # -
forlorn hope - Member
I have a degenerative disease,which will eventually seriously affect my quality of life
Bummer, but best forum name ever.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think we can discuss faith if it is the reason for someones decision. TJ is correct though duckman position is well thought and not entirely a view born of faith - the view on assisted suicide that is not me as a horses arse
We do dismiss faith at times too quickly on here and face to face I would never be that rude to a person of any faith in person as I am on here. I do think we are allowed to challenge their views and many on here object to the amount of influence religion has today and did in the past. Organised religion is not exactly known for its tolerance of non believers or even dissenting believers though - I accept that most individual christians [and other faiths] I know are fairly tolerant and do actually try to live good moral lives.
Duckman at some point in the past [and possibly this thread] clearly I have offended you and I apolgise for this. You have the right to an opinion as do I perhaps we could both try and express it in a more friendly manner in the future?Posted 2 years ago # -
Sorry Junkyard, Fair point.I had posted about my experience with somebody who had a slow undignified passing, I was a bit hacked off with you and woppits post.The only reason I had mentioned the fact I am a Christian,which most of the usual faces on here will be aware of,is because it was relevant to my thinking on the subject.I also liked the point made on the previous page that anything that needs safeguards is dangerous.I played prop from the age of six and boxed/sparred/coached from seven to just under thirty, so I suppose I will be at the business edge of any legislation in thirty years.
Woppit,
"you can only speak about religion in hushed and reverential tones"
If that is what I wanted, I wouldn't be posting on STW would I?Posted 2 years ago # -
In a personal sense for, in a professional sense if it ever came in I'd have to read the reasons for it where my position stands before making a decision.
As for religion in these matters, often seems crazy to many of us I myself can't understand it but people have their beliefs and live their lives based on this belief it has to be respected.
Posted 2 years ago # -
but people have their beliefs and live their lives based on this belief it has to be respected.
Why?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Because thats ethics Mr Woppit. We are discussing personal decision here. Many people religious or not have weird beliefs that colour their decisions.
I would dismiss out of hand any religious influence on policy over this so on decisions that affect others. However on personal decision religion is one factor to consider.
Would you insist a catholic have a termination because the foetus is badly damaged? Would you insist a vegetarian eats meat?
For policy decision that affect others religious influences should abe dismissed out of hand. for personal decisions its a clear part of the decision process.
I think your ideas on this are completely wrong and muddleheaded. I have no idea the basis for you deciding the way you do. However its your decision and must be respected.
You need to read up on competency and decision making. People have the right to make stupid decisions and the reasons why they do are irrelevant.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Mr Woppit - Member
but people have their beliefs and live their lives based on this belief it has to be respected.
Why?
Liberal tolerance ???
People can make any decision they wish without restraint. The point at which we should be concerned is when they then try and impose their views on others - you [ and I] think religous people do this but we are in danger of doing the exact same thing to them that we are objecting to. As TJ says people can make strange choices if they wish - many think our choices are strange we must all tolerate each other.
With morality very few thingsa re absolute I dont eat meat I think it is morally wrong it doe snot give me hte right to prevent you eating meat nor does it give you the right to force bacon butties down my kneck. TolerancePosted 2 years ago # -
"Many people religious or not have weird beliefs that colour their decisions." Fine.
"Would you insist a catholic have a termination because the foetus is badly damaged? Would you insist a vegetarian eats meat?" Of course not. I don't have any power to insist anything of the sort, and why should I have? What a silly question.
"for personal decisions its a clear part of the decision process." Obviously.
"I think your ideas on this are completely wrong and muddleheaded" So, it's muddleheaded to want to suck every last second out of life because it's the only one we get? Seems completely unmuddled to me.
"I have no idea the basis for you deciding the way you do" See above.
"However its your decision and must be respected." Not at all.
"You need to read up on competency and decision making" Not really.
"People have the right to make stupid decisions" Absolutely.
"and the reasons why they do are irrelevant. " Not at all. Different reasons result in different outcomes and are completely up for discussion, AFAIC.
Are you suggesting that a person should be a complete hypocrite and have "respect" for something that one finds contemptible? Without denying anyone the right to anneal themselves to the despised item, of course.
Perhaps that's what you mean by "respect". In which case we don't have an argument.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Whats that wooshing noise? its the point flying right over Mr Woppits head.
Yes I do think your views are crazy and I have no idea how you can come to the decision you do. That my view from my experience.
No matter how stupid I think your view is however I must and will respect it. Why you have decided that is irrelevant. All that is relevant is that you are competent to make that decision and that you have decided.
Its respecting the decision not the reasons for it - thats the bit you seem to have difficulty with
""You need to read up on competency and decision making" Not really."
You clearly do as you have no understanding of either the law or the ethics on this one. We are talking about personal decisions. People have the right to make them and no one has the right to question them.
This is one of the crucial legal decisions surround this sort of case for example
Re C [1994] 1 WLR 290
The patient was an adult detained in Broadmoor mental hospital. He had gangrene in his left leg and the doctors considered that amputation was necessary to save his life. He refused such treatment. Although he was a paranoid schizophrenic his mental illness did not render him automatically incapable of making a decision about his medical treatment.
Posted 2 years ago # -
"You clearly do as you have no understanding of either the law or the ethics on this one. We are talking about personal decisions. People have the right to make them and no one has the right to question them."
Wooooosh.
Posted 2 years ago # -
TJ is ocrrect perfectly rational and irrational people make decisions we have to respect,If someone doe snot want blood because it offends their beliefs then that is their choice [ i am rather coincerned when this is applied to children though]. It i sbinkers and illogical and IMHO not even consistent with the bible but it is still their choice.
Posted 2 years ago # -
TandemJeremy - Member
Whats that wooshing noise? its the point flying right over Mr Woppits head.
Yes I do think your views are crazy and I have no idea how you can come to the decision you do.
"want to suck every last second out of life because it's the only one we get" - don't know what's so hard to understand about that. Perhaps you're having your own "wooosh" moment.
If I feel like discussing someone's professed reason for doing something, I will. Whether it's about scrambling eggs, riding full suspension, thinking there's a "god" involved in dying or any other damn thing.
Like it or lump it, matey.
Posted 2 years ago # -
TandemJeremy - Member
Whats that wooshing noise? its the point flying right over Mr Woppits head.
Yes I do think your views are crazy and I have no idea how you can come to the decision you do. That my view from my experience.
I can't for the life of me (oops) think what is so hard to understand about "want to suck every last second out of life because it's the only one we get" - perhaps you're having your own "wooosh" moment...
If I want to discuss the reason why somebody is doing something, whether it's scrambling eggs, riding full suspension, thinking "god" has something to do with suicide (or anything, really) or any other damn thing, I will.
Like it or lump it, matey...
Posted 2 years ago # -
if a person wants to deny thesmesleves a blood transfusion for example due to a belief [ which I think is a misinterpretation of the bible anyway but that is another point] it is their choice to do so. DO I find it starange yes, Odd Yes , Incorrect Yes it is still theri decision though.
This entire thread is about the right to choose - if you choose to die I have no issue with that - assuming mental competency etc if you choose to live again I have no issue with it. Surely everyone is pro choice - even when that choice is daft?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Bump 'cos its glitched
Posted 2 years ago # -
and again
Posted 2 years ago # -
Junkyard - Member
if a person wants to deny thesmesleves a blood transfusion for example due to a belief [ which I think is a misinterpretation of the bible anyway but that is another point] it is their choice to do so. DO I find it starange yes, Odd Yes , Incorrect Yes it is still theri decision though.
This entire thread is about the right to choose - if you choose to die I have no issue with that - assuming mental competency etc if you choose to live again I have no issue with it. Surely everyone is pro choice - even when that choice is daft?
Yep.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Mr woppit - I have seen many folk die painful and undignified deaths hence I think your attitude is wrong towards this. Thats my opinion. However in this debate I have no right to question your decision. I would go furtehr and say your view is irrational and stupid. However Imust still respct your decision as I have no legal moral and ethical right to question it.
No one has any right to question these sorts of decision so long as the person making them is competent. This is clear legally, ethically and morally.
It is nothing like the decisions about scrambled eggs. fortunatly you are not in a position to be involved in these decsions.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I may have spotted where we are at cross purposes - you are talking about questioning in the context of idle debate on a forum. I and junkyard are talking about the people who are involved in this as it happens in a professional role.
Posted 2 years ago # -
A-ha.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Perhaps as we have established that my views are to do with my own attitude to my own life and not an attempt to establish a series of professional paradigms, you might consider withdrawing your accusations of stupidity and derangement.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I still think your wish to fight to the bitter end is irrational and stupid. Thats my opinion from waht I have seen. Not that you are irrational and stupid but that decision is. It would appear to be a competent decision tho.
Edit. we are still somewhat at cross purposes here and I see no way of clearing up the confusion
Posted 2 years ago # -
It was a simple question:
Assisted Suicide - for or against?Reading the above posts, it's clear that both sides slugging it out here are equally blinkered, coloured and opinionated.
Perhaps a simple Yes / No?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I heard on the news this morning that the figures for those with dementia are 850,000 in the UK, up by 15% from previous estimates
And it's only likely to get worse...The future is bleak, but doesn’t involve turning off his life at any point.
Yes he will become too much for my mother to cope with, yes he will shrivel up both in body and in mind in a nursing home, one day he’ll have no idea who I am, no idea how to control his bowel movements and one day will stop breathing.
This is what awaits 1/3rd of the UK population.eeek, a dreadful prospect, particularly for those obliged to care for them. I certainly intend to die by my own hand before losing competance to choose.
Posted 2 years ago # -
TandemJeremy - Member
I still think your wish to fight to the bitter end is irrational and stupid. Thats my opinion from waht I have seen. Not that you are irrational and stupid but that decision is. It would appear to be a competent decision tho.
Edit. we are still somewhat at cross purposes here and I see no way of clearing up the confusion
"Edit": No, I think we're there.
You're talking about professional ethics.
I'm not.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Junkyard; the Jehovahs witnesses believe,and it is not for me to judge anothers religion, that you should not have any part of another person inside of you,be it blood or organs.This had a few high profile cases where children were refused medical care because of parental wishes.I am pretty certain that there was a landmark case a couple of years ago in which a judge made a 14 yo a ward of court to ensure she received treatment.But it is another example of how other people can impact and influence the decision(sorry off topic)
Posted 2 years ago # -
that you should not have any part of another person inside of you
no sex then ?
edit: or babies
Posted 2 years ago # -
...means....
Less Jehovah's Witnesses!!! Result!!!!
Sorry, IGMC shall I?
Posted 2 years ago # -
Agree with Ti29er's comments re dementia. Every week I visit my father in a nursing home for dementia sufferers. He is 88 years old and reckon will go on for a few more years yet, his mother reached 94.
Every week I leave the nursing home feeling that he, and all the others, have a wretched existence.
I'm a bit of a control freak and will set out on paper my wishes and my children will be implored to abide by them if I am unable to.
This country can not sustain the elderly population and the associated cost of care homes. We need to have a choice in this matter, so, yes, I am in the 'for' camp.
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
