Euthanasia.- Should it be legalised?

[Bruce 4play]

I recently Sky plus the film "You don't know Jack" and watched it over the week-end.
For those of you unfamilair with it here is a brief outline.

Dr. Jack Kevorkian (1928 - 2011 ) in the 1990s, when he defies Michigan law assisting the suicide of terminally-ill persons. Support comes from his sister, a lab tech, the Hemlock Society president, and a lawyer. The child of survivors of the Armenian genocide interviews applicants: his sister video tapes them. He assembles a device allowing a person to initiate a three-chemical intravenous drip. The local D.A., the governor, and the Legislature respond. In court scenes, Kevorkian is sometimes antic. He's single-minded about giving dying individuals the right to determine how their lives will end. He wants the Supreme Court to rule. He picks a fight he can't win: is it hubris or heroism?
Jack ended up serving 8.5 years.

So i thought what do the real people of Ireland think of Euthanasia.
My view is that it should be legalised. Any of you who have seen loved one suffering in there final days will know how heart breaking it is to see them suffer when the art of Euthanasia could be such a relief to ease their pain.
This of-course goes without saying the person should be of a sound mind and and not suffer from any depressing illness.
I know in my final years i would jump at the chance of this service rather than suffering the indignity of not being able to care for myself.

So here my poll.
Should Ireland have a referendum to decide?
Yes it Should be legalised
No it is an act of murder to allow this service.
I don't know Jack about Euthanasia and don't care either way.

[JAMESCORK]

Thats a toughie Bruce... I need to see some discussion before I vote....

[warmcome]

whats crucial here is only those who are terminally ill and suffering, understand
that reality. people not in that situation are not in a position
to consider the merits of euthanasia

[Lucy Chambers]

You know what makes me laugh? You ask this question of the living. The living arent the issue, and you have no clue how it will be if and when it is you.

So let me tell you something about being terminally ill. There is no refresh button. There is no decision- you don't have any. You don't know what pain you will be in and you don't know the ways in which your body will break down. You dont know if you want to live or die, because living is one pain but dying will stop another- in short, you will die confused.

Yes, people should make their own decision. To live or to die is seemingly simple- but what if it means to live, but with infinite pain? With deformities beyond capability? Euthanasia is just one form of dying but the only form where you preempt nature. I dont know if it is right- in all possibility it is wrong. What should be right is a doctor or nurse asking the patient to communicate their will, and that should be acted upon, and if the patient wishes to end their life it should be so. Anything else is too open to conjecture.

[experiencedguy]

Interesting. This is something that has affected me in the past, and I'd urge anybody interested to watch the BBC documentary that Terry Pratchett made regarding his own plan to end his own life (he is an Alzheimers sufferer).

You can trot out the old arguments about vets being able to put down animals, but at the end of the day, we are animals to ourselves only in the sense that we know we are part of nature. We also have the higher reasoning skills not seen in other species, and an empathy for each other that other species have.

From watching the documentary, it is apparent that a number of people seeking to end their lives legally in Switzerland are simply 'tired of life'. Do they have the right to do so? What about the others left behind? It's easy to die. It's not easy to cope with the loss, especially if the circumstances of death can be under question. Can people with brain debilitating fatal diseases such as Alzheimers ever be proven to be of sound enough mind to make that decision?

I disagree with you, warmcome. People who are not in that situation ARE in a position to consider euthanasia. I'm not saying that they understand what the terminally ill are going through, but if a person is depressed, they can resort to suicide. Is it not preferable to have the option of a sympathetic death with loved ones than a lonely (and possibly painful) suicide?

Anybody who hasn't had the experience of somebody dying first hand should watch the documentary. I have had that experience, and it isn't pleasant. In it, they show the real death by euthanasia in Switzerland of a terminally ill man from the UK, who is accompanied by his wife. It hammers home the reality of the choice these people make, of the reasoning they go through, and the ultimate result of the process.

[blue8671]

I agree with euthanasia in cases were a person of sound mind has made it clear that if there health reaches a point were there is no further hope of recovery and no further medical intervention can sustain there standard of living that they should have a right in law to end there suffering in a humane way. Anyone who has watched a loved one pass away with cancer for example were pain control no longer has the effect of reducing there suffering will know that hearing someone pleading for help to take away the suffering is something you never forget. I myself have made it clear to my wife that if im ever so unfortunate to be in such a position that I dont want to go on to the point were I am unable to end my own life and will before that take action to reduce both my own suffering and the heartbreak that a prolonged death brings to those I love. It's a lot more complicated in cases were a individual has been in a accident and has all control taken away from them in these cases only there next of kin should have the right to decide after they are made fully aware of all relivent medical facts and a senior doctor has concluded that they have no hope of a reasonable standard of life and that nothing more can be done to help. But this issue has two sides and i look forward to hearing from some here who are bound to oppose the taking of any life.

[experiencedguy]

And now the argument for the defense.

How do you prove someone is of sound mind? Psychologists can be fooled easily, once the person has read up on expected answers and tests, and Rorschach tests can manipulated once a person has been trained. Somebody who may be delusional could do it purely to silence the voices in their head.

How do you prove that the depressed have gotten all of the help they can get? In the case of diseases of the mind, it's extremely hard to pinpoint cause and affect that might cause suicidal thoughts, which may lead to euthanasia.

How can we put in place the necessary strategies and methods to prevent manipulation of the system for the benefit of a next of kin, who may arrange a family member euthanised for personal gain?

The best way might be to survey those actively seeking euthanasia, and see if they outweigh those who may statistically abuse the method, but how do you do that?

With modern human overcrowding, how long would it be before we, as a species, consider euthanising the non-productive?

Food for thought.

[experiencedguy]

The living arent the issue

They make the decisions, therefore they are the issue, as all decisions will be made by, and will affect the living.

[Lucy Chambers]

I agree with euthanasia in cases were a person of sound mind has made it clear that if there health reaches a point were there is no further hope of recovery and no further medical intervention can sustain there standard of living that they should have a right in law to end there suffering in a humane way. Anyone who has watched a loved one pass away with cancer for example were pain control no longer has the effect of reducing there suffering will know that hearing someone pleading for help to take away the suffering is something you never forget. I myself have made it clear to my wife that if im ever so unfortunate to be in such a position that I dont want to go on to the point were I am unable to end my own life and will before that take action to reduce both my own suffering and the heartbreak that a prolonged death brings to those I love. It's a lot more complicated in cases were a individual has been in a accident and has all control taken away from them in these cases only there next of kin should have the right to decide after they are made fully aware of all relivent medical facts and a senior doctor has concluded that they have no hope of a reasonable standard of life and that nothing more can be done to help. But this issue has two sides and i look forward to hearing from some here who are bound to oppose the taking of any life.

I agree with you to a point but surely what you actually want is a greater increase in oblivion.

[experiencedguy]

Small point, but the wording for the 'no' button is a little inflammatory. Not everyone against euthanasia may agree that it's an act of murder.