Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Do you agree with euthanasia?


lifetime fan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yup, I agree with Euthanaisa, it must be utterly horrible to have live out your remain days in horrific discomfort and depression. If the person is congnitively sound and they have discussed it at length with their family and are still determined to go ahead then it should be allowed and done in a manner that is clinically safe and humane (i.e. tonne of morphine followed by lethal injection) with last minute checking of consent etc.

 

 

Though I do rember hearing recently that ones mood after something horrible happening (e.g. losing a limb or becoming unable to walk) actually returns to it's previous level within two and half years, so it's definetly not something that should be rushed into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's a little too simple mate.

 

A living will, written in sound mind knowing what you would and wouldn't be prepared to endure towards the end of your days should be accepted and honoured by family, friends and the law.

 

The scenario you outline would prevent a person with a terminal illness from having a loved one decide it 'had now gone too far now, far further than they had wanted it to'. They know their wishes, they'd spoken about them enough together, they're written down and yet to honour a dying persons wishes you'd risk prosecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that's a little too simple mate.

A living will, written in sound mind knowing what you would and wouldn't be prepared to endure towards the end of your days should be accepted and honoured by family, friends and the law.

The scenario you outline would prevent a person with a terminal illness from having a loved one decide it 'had now gone too far now, far further than they had wanted it to'. They know their wishes, they'd spoken about them enough together, they're written down and yet to honour a dying persons wishes you'd risk prosecution.

I thinking though that what a healthy person might think they could and couldnt tolerate may be different than the reality so I would be cautious about wanting that to be seen as a binding document

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thinking though that what a healthy person might think they could and couldnt tolerate may be different than the reality so I would be cautious about wanting that to be seen as a binding document

I'm talking from a perspective of a massive advocate of euthanasia and personal experience. I started this thread years ago stating I would come back and haunt Carly if she ever let me get to 'that stage'.

 

I had those conversations with Carly, she had the same opinion.

 

We had an agreement...I let Carly suffer further than need be. Medical science and even the amazing St Peter's Hospice couldn't alleviate the pain for 24 hours the Saturday before she passed away. She should never have been forced to go on another 2 days.

 

If we were not living at her parents that Saturday I honestly would have kissed her and out a pillow over her face. I would not have let her suffer any more. It wasn't the threat of prosecution that stopped me but the fact we were in her parents home. I'd have taken any punishment from the legal system but wouldn't put her parents through the trauma of the added stress on top of everything else.

 

How can a modern civilised society not accept and respect the wishes of a dying woman with so little control over the rest of her life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was only talking in the most general terms and wasn't for a minute questioning your own experience.

I didn't think you were Cath, but it's a very emotive subject.

 

And if the god squad are going to pull at the heart strings then the opposite point of view should equally be heard. I don't think you can have strong opinions on the subject either way without listening to the reality of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey says he will support legislation that would make it legal for terminally ill people in England and Wales to receive help to end their lives.


 


Lord Carey writes in the Daily Mail that he has dropped his opposition to the Assisted Dying Bill "in the face of the reality of needless suffering".


 


But the current Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has called the bill "mistaken and dangerous".


 


Peers will debate the bill on Friday.


 


Tabled by Labour peer Lord Falconer, the legislation would make it legal for adults in England and Wales to be given assistance ending their own life. It would apply to those with less than six months to live.


 


Two doctors would have to independently confirm the patient was terminally ill and had reached their own, informed decision to die.


 


Some 110 peers are already listed to speak when the House of Lords debates the private members bill on Friday.


 


Insisting it would not be "anti-Christian" to change the law, Lord Carey said the current situation risked "undermining the principle of human concern which should lie at the heart of our society".


 


He added: "Today we face a central paradox. In strictly observing the sanctity of life, the Church could now actually be promoting anguish and pain, the very opposite of a Christian message of hope."


 


When Lord Carey was still the Archbishop of Canterbury he was among the opponents of Lord Joffe's Assisting Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill, which was successfully blocked in the House of Lords in 2006.


 


But in his article in Saturday's Daily Mail Lord Carey said: "The fact is that I have changed my mind. The old philosophical certainties have collapsed in the face of the reality of needless suffering."


 


He said it was the case of Tony Nicklinson, who had locked-in syndrome and died after being refused the legal right to die , who had had the "deepest influence" on his decision.


 


Mr Nicklinson's widow Jane, said Lord Carey's switch was "huge".


 


"I'm amazed actually and thrilled because the Church has always been one of our greatest opponents," she told BBC Radio 5 live.


"Someone shouldn't be forced to stay alive with daily suffering - his life was a living hell."


 


Lord Falconer told BBC Radio 5 live that Lord Carey "makes the point that it's not anti-Christian to support the change in the law that my bill proposes".


 


"I believe it reflects the view of almost everyone in the debate that - whatever view you take about the issues - nobody wants people who are properly motivated by compassion to be prosecuted. And he puts those arguments incredibly powerfully."


 


However, the current Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby warned Lord Falconer's bill would mean elderly and disabled people coming under pressure to end their lives.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard that headline this morning and thought of you. That's a huge shift for an albeit retired Archbishop of Canterbury. So far all the church's representatives seem to be defending the status quo but I can imagine it giving others permission to express similar views

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its been the top news headline on R4 throughout the morning with various church ministers peddling that 'it'll leave old people feeling that they have no choice' line

 

All the elderly people I'm related to are miserable, stubborn cunts who'd do the exact opposite of what everyone else wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fair play to him. He has been big enough to argue against what he believes god has told him.

 

Mate from work has a dad with terminal lung cancer he is in pain.Why make the man suffer so he can live another month? He won't recover.

 

One of my dogs was put to sleep at Christmas.She was old and suffering she went peacefully.Why does society say a dog can die a more dignified and peaceful death than a consenting adult?

 

My dad is in a care home.He is the best in there by a mile and his condition won't get worse but the indignity some suffer and their families as well again makes me agree with euthanasia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assisted dying: Church of England seeks inquiry

 

The Church of England (CofE) has called for an inquiry into assisted dying.

 

It follows a U-turn by former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, who said he would back legislation to allow the terminally ill in England and Wales get help to end their lives.

 

The current Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby says the Assisted Dying Bill is "mistaken and dangerous".

 

But the Church said an inquiry would include expert opinion and carefully assess the arguments.

 

Speaking on behalf of the CofE, the Bishop of Carlisle, the Rt Rev James Newcome, said a Royal Commission would allow the "important issue" to be discussed at length.

 

He said the bill should be withdrawn to allow the inquiry to take place - a call which was immediately rejected by Lord Falconer, the Labour peer who tabled it.

 

Some 110 peers are already listed to speak when the House of Lords debates the private members bill on Friday.

 

Bishop Newcome also said the Church was "surprised" by Lord Carey's change in position, which had brought the issue to the public's attention.

Lord Carey wrote in the Daily Mail that he had dropped his opposition to the Assisted Dying Bill "in the face of the reality of needless suffering".

"The fact is that I have changed my mind. The old philosophical certainties have collapsed in the face of the reality of needless suffering."

 

He said it was the case of Tony Nicklinson, who had locked-in syndrome and died after being refused the legal right to die , who had had the "deepest influence" on his decision.

 

Lord Falconer's legislation would make it legal for adults in England and Wales to be given assistance ending their own life. It would apply to those with less than six months to live.

 

Two doctors would have to independently confirm the patient was terminally ill and had reached their own, informed decision to die.

 

Bishop Newcome said: "We were surprised by both the content and the timing of [Lord Carey's] article, but recognise that actually, quite a lot of good things have come out of it, including that it has brought some of the issues to the forefront of public discussion and highlighted just what an important issue this is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for it.

 

In my uni days I worked as a delivery man for a local pharmacy, taking medication to nursing homes over large areas of the city. What I saw whilst doing that job terrified me.

 

I would definitely want the option of real death as opposed to a prolonged, undignified, living death incarcerated in one of those places.

 

I would also like to add I make no criticism of the nursing staff in these establishments; from my (admittedly limited) experience, they were all committed to their charges and did the best they could.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...