Assisted suicide / Euthanasia

Talk Electrician Forum

Help Support Talk Electrician Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Apache

Cow Fiddler ™
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
16,997
Reaction score
26
Rather topical at the moment the issue of assisted suicide. In the background as I type I am watching the Richard Dimbleby Lecture with Terry Pratchett who is suffering from Alzheimer's disease. He wants the right to have his life ended in a humane way when the time comes when he can no longer function.

I am starting this poll, mainly out of curiosity. You may (or maynot) know that Vets have a very high suicide rate, there are a number of postulated reasons for that but the one that (in my oppinion) that holds most weight is that we see it as a viable, humane end. Today I have put three animals to sleep. Two were old and not able to function properly, one has sustained such a severe injury that treatment would not have saved her life. In a bizzare paradox putting animals to sleep is both the best and the worst part of my job - the way I can relive an animal from its suffering and it goes off to a peaceful sleep I find a relief and a privilege.

So often people tell me (as their pet peacefully slips off to sleep) of their grandparent/friend/relative who was kept going for weeks/months/years unable to function, soiling themselves, becoming a vegetable in a nursing home. If you had a pet that was suffering and you didn't have it put to sleep (assuming there was no other way of relieving said suffering) the RSPCA would support a prosecution for cruelty under the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

I am really interested in what you guys think about this.

Please can people keep this thread polite - it is a sensitive subject. I have contacted Admin 2 seeking permission to post this thread. Do keep it nice

 
I have no issues if it was or wasnt private. :D

Its an open subject that should be discussed as should so many many others well done Apache.

 
Please can people keep this thread polite - it is a sensitive subject. I have contacted Admin 2 seeking permission to post this thread. Do keep it nice
Did you get permission? :eek: ] :)

I am still open minded on this one..

one one hand: YES as you say help stop long term suffering..

other hand: But the risks of "family" disagreements with the surviving family members...

'Mr a': agrees to do it,

'Mrs b': doesn't,

'Mr c': just wants granny out the way to get their hands on the family estate.

'Miss d': is the distant relative who couldn't be contacted in time and didn't get time to say goodbye.

etc..

etc..

can be a lot of remaining problems to sort that don't apply in the favorite pet situation.

Tricky one:|

I need a big cup o tea to think about it more...............

put the kettle on

 
I will keep it very polite, after listening to the radio today at work I think I can understand why some people will or would choose to assist.

My father in law always wanted to do himself in if and only if he became a burden, my wife was so upset that he stockpiled the means to do it, however he fought tooth and nail to live when it came to the end, and morphine administered by the hospital was what killed him in the end.

That apart I think a terminal illness where the dignity of the person, the obligations of the carer and the rest of the family who are in direct contact should under certain circumstances be allowed to assist in the final decisions and comply with the wishes of the person involved.

As a society we are more incline to follow our judgements when it comes to animals than we are when it comes to those we love the most, your own flesh and blood.

I am fortunate that I have never been placed in this position, but however I would not like to, I think I would if I could defy the law and help any member of my family if that was their expressed wish.

I truly do wish I am never asked, and my heart really does go out to those who have had to face this problem.

 
But you took to long writing the poll questions first time round didn't you!!! ]:) ;) ROTFWL Made me copy and paste you did.....

You naughty vet you! :eek:
You too have been caught out by the 'five minute rule'? Blushing

 
I like to think that we choose how we live so we should be able to choose how we die. I for one would rather know that if a cancer or other terminal illness affected me that i could , with dignity, choose to go when the time is right.

 
I lost both parents in a 6 month period & both of them were put on palliative care using the Liverpool Pathway. At that point living had ceased & existence had begun & I think this is the tipping point in these circumstances.

Having maintained a bedside vigil in both cases I reached a point where I would have quite happily pushed a button or turned off the machine to end their lives. There was no hope of recovery & I was merely maintaining a watching brief. I know this may sound callous but you have to be in this position to appreciate the mindset.

I was a believer in euthansia before & those events only served to harden my position.

 
I'm not a fan of restrictions or censorship or anything of that nature. I am me, I can make my own decisions and I'm reasonably happy with most of them. Only one answer for me, but then there's the opposite argument, should everyone be allowed to amke their own decisions, I also think that some people shouldn;t be allowed to make their own decisions or assist in making other peoples decisions as they aren;t capable for one reason or another. Not sure what that makes me, idealist, realist, dictator, revolutionary, other?

 
I think it is a good idea to allow euthanasia in some cases but there would have to be alot of regulations.

For example:

The decision cannot be made by a family member(unless the person is brain dead and all living blood relatives agree). It must rest with the indiviual concerned.

It should only be allowed in cases of terminal illness where as time progress's the person will suffer severe pain.

It should also not be considered as suicide ( thus giving the insurance companies a cop out)

Id like to think that the decision can be made in the form of a will, I for one have told my wife (when I was a driver) if i have an accident and she comes to see me in hospital if I am on a life support machine then get it turned off, if I cannot survive with out it then that is my time to leave this earth and no one has the right to deprive me of MY TIME, that is my own personal view and I am sure not everyone will agree with it.

I did suffer with the loss of my parents having to watch them slowly detiorate from the parents I knew and loved to nothing but vegtables .

 
If a person is comatose for example and living on life support ie being kept alive artificially then it is a matter for the relatives to decide as in wether to switch off.

If a person is alive and being fed and given drinks even via a tube then what are you going to do? remove the feed and watch them starve to death over a few weeks? Or give them a lethal drug to kill them like you would execute a criminal?

The argument is a complex one. we have no rights to end someones life. Someone may have made a living will and then could change their mind but be too ill to let anyone know. Thin end of the wedge if you ask me. Today its terminally ill, then its the elderly - then its the homeless or mentally ill. I would say no no no.....

You did ask what people thought and this is it.

 
You did ask what people thought and this is it.
I appreciate your reply! You were one of the people I thought of when I started this thread. I do see your point, although there are a number of countries with legalised euthanasia and (as yet) they haven't started putting the elderly down!

 
Goes completely against the grain I'm afraid. Life is precious and every instinct we have is to preserve and protect.
We should force someone to go on in pain that morphine won't touch? Fed through tubes, soiling themselves? Dying a slow painful death.

A simple injection can make all the pain and suffering go away?

I'm not saying everyone has to go for it, only that it's an option that should be available to those that want it.

(For the record I think the patient would need to have signed a living will expressing their wishes (with the exception of children) and then have the agreement of 2 separate doctors as a minimum)

 
Top