Mother admits ending sons life

[vacay]

apple.news/AdFP-kitNRnSVPSjVgV0T_w

I'm not sure how I feel about this?
On the one hand she didn't want to see her son suffer anymore. But surely a 7 year old when he asked his mom to take the pain away didn't mean to end his life?

Sorry if there is already a thread going I haven't checked

I'd like to think I would have the strength to do this and deal with the aftereffects of what I had done - I know it was in the best interests - but dealing with it is another torure to live through - hope she is getting counselling to deal with this - and yes I think she did what right for her and dc

I think this is the bravest thing a parent can do. The most selfless.

Its painful to see when parents prolong a childs suffering because they refuse to let go. Archie Battersbee case rings a bell.

I am so sorry you have had to experience that

I think it is horrible we as a society do not allow people suffering terrible deaths to choose an easier exit. The help of family is often required right now to end things, because otherwise the sick person has to choose to leave earlier than necessary when they are still healthy enough to do so independently.

This.

Antonya Cooper loved Hamish her lovely boy. Loved him fully and unconditionally as he did her. Hamish knew that he was loved and love and trusted him mother. That is all that matters to me.
@FatmanandKnobbin @NeedyTiger You know you loved your children fully and completely. And they felt your love and knew it. Am so sorry you had to go through what you went through. No one can or should judge you

@Summerose

'God' didn't create my life. Or my husbands. Or my children. Or my parents.

Biology and love did.

I also wondered if he realised that taking away his pain meant death.

This is a truly heartbreaking story. I rarely react sharply to something I read in the news, but this one has moved me to tears.

There is absolutely no way the boy's doctor and attending nurse did not understand what has happened, by the way. It must have been the silent consensus between everyone close to the boy that this was the lesser evil.

Who gets to decide if a child’s life should be ended and who performs that act? Children don’t have capacity (certainly not at this age) to make these kinds of decisions. What about adults who do not have capacity? People rarely talk about safeguarding in this space.

Again, I disagree with pet argument. Animals have little autonomy when it comes to deciding to die - a horrible model to aspire to for humans. We want to include people’s wishes into end of life decisions. This animal analogy would be the opposite of a “good death”.

Must admit I've signed a living will via compassion in dying and handed it in for my medical records
My dad has done the same

Basically no life extending treatment including CPR, antibiotics etc etc if I have a big stroke, brain injury, dementia, Parkinson's etc

I do not believe in god, I am sure as hell not going to put religion above the wellbeing of my child or any other loved one. You have no right to tell anyone else what they should or shouldn't do, whatever your beliefs.

My husband was admitted to hospital after collapse due to a previously undiagnosed lung tumour - widely metastasised and inoperable. He was placed on a ventilator and died a few days later without regaining consciousness due to the cocktail of end of life drugs you mention in your post. It was very peaceful and he wasn’t in pain. I suppose things in the 1980’s weren’t as advanced as they are now, but even these days terminally ill can mean a lot of things. End of life drugs can’t be administered until near the end and my heart goes out to anyone in a similar situation to this mother who was brave enough to take matters into her own hands and end her sons’ suffering.

You are against people having autonomy over their lives? Off

We put animals down because we own them. Nobody owns another person.

What a wonderful selfless act. It must have been so hard for her to let him go.

We're legally able to put animals down because we own them. We do it because we wish to spare them suffering - after all, it would be cheaper to let death come when it comes and not care about their pain. We take all kinds of painful invasive life-extending measures on humans without their immediate consent and sometimes in defiance of their expressed wishes. At the moment we don't allow for anyone to assist a human who has expressed their own clear wish to die, even though that human's life belongs to them.

That's awful. Poor woman. Yes I think it was the right thing at the time - it's sad that there wasn't a legal route.

There is only one thing worse than your child dying and it is watching your child suffer - she loved her child enough to take the pain away in the only way possible.

This brought me to tears. I’m so sorry you had to endure this. I hope your pain eases with time - there’s no doubt in my mind but that you did the right thing for her.💐

But he was dying anyway

I know that.

I read this today and really feel for her. I think it was the right decision. No judgement from me.

Having seen my dad die of cancer and even the hospice not be able to control his pain ( and were downright awful to me and my brother when we advocated for more pain relief) I would support assisted dying with safeguards.

Laughably the Dr at the hospice said that opioids were addictive and that has to be taken into account. Since my dad had terminal cancer and had gone in there to die, the addictive nature of the medication wasn't something we were overly concerned about.

I'm not quite sure what you mean.
If you are referring to the fact I'm not in favour of the change in the law it's because I am very concerned about the possible repercussions: people being coerced into agreeing to end their lives by relatives unwilling to care for them any longer, wanting their inheritance etc etc. People feeling they are a nuisance to others and feeling it's their duty to end their lives.
And also people deciding to end their lives in a moment of despair that could only be fleeting.
My feeling is the possible bad consequences out weigh the good and we have a duty to protect vulnerable people
Generally speaking the law is exercised with quite a lot of sympathy when it comes to prosecutions in assisted suicide cases and I feel the current situation is preferable to the possible consequences for some people if it were changed.
I have no moral judgement at all on assisted suicide. Or in this particular case where all my sympathy is with the mother.

In the Netherlands, those who want to die have to have a life limiting illness. You can’t just walk in and purchase a quick death for 1. If I remember rightly, you also undergo psych evaluations to ensure it’s the right decision.

I remember an awful case about a wife with an illness (I think ms?) in the uk who went to court so her husband could assist her to the Netherlands when the time was right without being charged when he returned to uk. The alternative was for her to go when she was fitter and more able (before her chosen time) so she could go alone. She either had to die early, or die suffering. Does this sound like we are keeping the most vulnerable safe?

My ex would have happily ended the life of his child without a shred of guilt if he thought he could get away with it, not out of a wish to alleviate suffering, but because he thinks that disabled and sick people should be exterminated. He was furious that she was being investigated for scoliosis and was 'refusing to stand up straight', going on to say that if it was symptom of a systemic condition that she should have been aborted and I'd 'deliberately bred a defective creature'.

He called his grandmother a 'thing that needs to be shot' on the day she was diagnosed with dementia and his grandfather 'a coward who needs to get over himself and throw himself over a cliff like a man' when he was diagnosed with cancer (oh, and to 'get the fuck on with the inheritance'). He also said that of course he wouldn't do it, he'd persuade them that it would be for the best and it would make sure that they wouldn't suffer,

Of course, each time he was diagnosed with anything, he screamed blue murder for all of the treatment and expected to be waited on hand and foot and no stone to go unturned in keeping him alive at all costs.

He is the reason why I don't agree with the majority on the thread. Because there are evil bastards in the world who will use the concept/a change in the law for their own ends.

(no, he didn't appear to be like that at first, it was only when people started getting sick around him that he shared this world view).