Assisted dying

[LovelyBath77]

Please don't read if this upset you, but I think that it should be up to us when we choose to die, especially with an illness which isn;t going to get better. I don't want to have long term care and give all that money to it which could be left to my children, and definitely don't want to be in a position where you have no choice and considered incapable of making decisions.

I think there needs to be some change on this. AIBU?

shagged - can you explain what you mean?
In some countries euthanasia is legal such as the Netherlands but that is not about assisted suicide or assisted dying.
They are two completely separate things and are not interchangeable.
In my experience where assisted dying/ assisted suicide is legal (Switzerland for example where euthanasia is not) there are rigorous safeguards in place.

Yes, I'd thought an advanced directive about dementia was what I wanted but I can see that this is a tricky thing to do precisely because that whatever is left of me when I have dementia may not feel the same. It's not a binary thing.

I suppose you can parametrise by saying if I'm severely demented, DNR etc. But I'm not sure how else I can be sure that the euthanasia was done at the right point.

Perhaps some countries have figured this out?

Sorry posted too early:
Rigorous safe guards in place - for example Dignitas in Switzerland won't take you unless you have documented medical certificates from specialists that are treating you that confirm that within 3 months of death from a terminal illness and you also need a psychological report attesting to that fact and that you are aware that this will result in your death and confirms that you are not clinically depressed or in a state of cognitive impairment. So it is absolutely not the case that this would be availiable for people who are unhappy with their life or are living with a disability etc.
This is where someone's death is absolutely inevitable and imminent.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/oct/18/11

This is the story that sticks in my mind

And why not ? If someone wants to carry on with an extreme disability , they absolutely should be supported to do so. But if they don't want to - I know I. Wouldn't - who is anyone else to enforce years of what this person finds terrible?

I am not sitting in judgement on this person, it was more to point out that it doesn't quite fit with onemore's definition of assisted dying

Its shocking we are not allowed to die when we want. None of my cats had to suffer at the end, they died peacefully at home in my arms thanks to the local vet.
I've saved up enough to go to Switzerland at the end and it's in a separate account to be used only for that.

My grandmother had dementia and used to beg us daily to kill her, because she just didn't want to live like that. I remember her saying to my mum she'd like to go for a walk, and when mum said yes of course, where would you like to go, she replied 'a long walk off a short pier'

She had ample funds to afford her care and wasn't a burden on us because she had the best care possible. She just didn't want to live like that. Life was an unmanageable burden for her, she wasn't a burden on us.

My mum was on the Liverpool care pathway when she died (from terminal cancer) which meant she was able to die at home with her suffering minimised and to die with dignity. Everybody deserves a good death, on their own terms.

I support it totally. I know we need to protect the vulnerable. There must be a way forward, surely?

As well as assisting those who are terminally ill I think there is also a case for assisting those who are severely disabled with a degenerative condition and very low quality of life e.g. MS or motor neurone disease because those people are unable to commit suicide without assistance. Currently, some people with those conditions commit suicide before they want to because they know they won't be able to once their disease progresses. They shouldn't be in a position where the only way to die is starvation as happened with Debbie Purdy.

Do we have an answer though to how we avoid sending the signal that people ought to consider assisted suicide if they have such conditions?

I can't see a way round allowing it leading to it becoming the expected route, especially when case is so expensive.

Only those who have made an advanced directive should be able to seek assisted dying. You formulate this when you are younger, prior to illness or disability.

It's the responsibility of individuals to formally state what they want.

I can't see how it's morally or ethically right to force people to continue living - often for many years - and to use their assets to continue in a life that they find unbearable. I want to leave my assets to my children. I'm not under any pressure at all to do so, but that's what I want.

Modern medicine has artificially created this situation where people are kept alive way beyond their natural lifespan. Modern medicine and the authorities now have a responsibility to help those who don't buy into this 'prolong life at all costs' mentality.

I support it totally and wonder why people who don't are so black and white. Obviously there would need to be rigorous safeguards in place as described above at Dignitas. I can't understand the point blank opposition. Where is the compassion? When I had my cat put down I felt awful that I hadn't spotted she was riddled with illness earlier so I could have ended her suffering. My grandmother on the other hand had a miserable two final years in a care home, the guilt about which my mum didn't get over for five years, the stress of it all almost certainly caused her in turn to be seriously ill.

Do we have an answer though to how we avoid sending the signal that people ought to consider assisted suicide if they have such conditions?

I don't think it sends any such signal to those of sound mind who are not suffering from psychiatric illness. People would have to be assessed for this very thoroughly and if there was any doubt assisted dying would have be refused for those people.

I'm sure the medical ethicists could come up with some safeguards.

I've lived with a disability for over forty years which has resulted in me being in pain every day. That is not sufficient for me to want to end my life as small things still give me enormous pleasure but at the very first sign of dementia I am off to Dignitas. I have a terrible fear of dementia and have been saving as and when I can and now have sufficient money for the fare, expenses etc. It's in a box and when the time comes I'll grab it and be gone.

I do understand why people are concerned about the vulnerable and those who may be coerced but if a person is fully compis mentis we should be given the choice.

I have recently done my advance directive as helpimitchy suggests.

It is free to do unless you get a doctors signature, which is not essential . compassion in dying are the charity who help with this and have all the info and templates.

May none of us ever need it - but if I do it is there . current law will starve and dehydrate me to death, but i still prefer that to the alternative.

Let's hope the god squad stop restricting our choices.

Let's hope the god squad stop restricting our choices.

Long overdue. Let them experience a painful, distressing and prolonged decline if they believe it brings them closer to their sky daddy, just don't allow them the power to inflict their outdated beliefs on the majority of the population who want to do things differently.

Ethic commitees is hardly the God Squad

i must kill myself for bieng a worthless burden

You are being willfully ignorant. Nobody has said anything of the sort.

BurglarBillsBab
Thanks so much for supporting a world in which i must kill myself for bieng a worthless burden. Much easier than givign a shit about each othr isn't it?

Literally no.
Though shalt not bear false witness.

Blimey my objections have got nothing to do with God! Allowing people to end their suffering is consistent with Christianity for many christians (not all, I accept) and if you believe they're going to a better place it's even a less sad choice.

Yes, look, nobody is going to say those with high care needs should take up assisted dying, but you're setting up the expectation that the question needs to be asked. You can't get away from that.

I still think on the whole I'd be in favour of a policy limited to terminally ill cancer patients in the last stage, although the induced coma until death seems like something we could do now that would be uncontroversial. For the rest of it, you'd hope a commission would be setup to examine the best polices for each group of affected people.

Inside the Ethics Committee on radio 4 is a fascinating insight into the decisions that are made by doctors. They are not run by what posters are referring to as the God Squad. Most of the debates are about the limits of autonomy. I did a lot of reading in this area for a masters degree and it meant reading a lot of stuff from the medical profession. Some were in favour but a lot were not just as some religious people are in favour of assisted dying and some are not. If there was a clear cut answer we would have agreed on it by now.

In all the reading I did there was one interesting slant on the UK debate which is that palliative care is much better in the UK than in other places. It isn't perfect of course but one of the reasons that it is suggested that some European countries do allow assisted dying is that they don't have the breadth of the hospice movement that we do.