Switzerland: Zurich votes to keep assisted suicide

[Vonhelmet]

Question: Can you go to one of these centers, eg. Dignitas, and receive the service if you aren't terminally ill but just want to have life over and done with?

I doubt it. Why not just kill yourself yourself?

 

[Redz]

Question: Can you go to one of these centers, eg. Dignitas, and receive the service if you aren't terminally ill but just want to have life over and done with?

Yes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/maj...s-assisted-suicide-will-not-face-charges.html

He was paralysed but not terminally ill.

 

[wilko49]

What are the none-religious arguments against it?

It could be open to abuse - for example, people feeling obligated to off themselves to avoid draining money from their family.

It could also put vulnerable people at risk - say someone with a serious mental disorder gets pressured into it by their inheritors.

I am in favour of legal assisted suicide, but I think it would need a lot of regulation to avoid those problems. As far as I know, Switzerland has that regulation in place, and makes a pretty good job of it.

 

[Pestilence]

I doubt it. Why not just kill yourself yourself?

One would assume they offer a more guaranteed successful, peaceful and painless method that most could personally come up with.

 

[ikillbears]

They're not prevented from doing so. They're prevented from having someone kill them.

That's the state of the current laws.

though technically suicide is illegal. something i never really understood. If you succeed, who are they going to prosecute o_0 unless it is in place for things relating to transfer of inheritance that sort of thing

 

[Vonhelmet]

though technically suicide is illegal. something i never really understood. If you succeed, who are they going to prosecute o_0 unless it is in place for things relating to transfer of inheritance that sort of thing

I didn't think suicide was still illegal... but I could well be wrong.

 

[Tefal]

My point is that legally the two are not distinct. You clearly think they should be. But legally they aren't, so it's a bit of a stretch to discuss them as if they are. A person who is incapable of committing suicide can't kill themselves because they are physically incapable of doing so, not because the law says they can't. What the law says is that they can't be killed by someone else, as then that other person is committing a crime of a greater or lesser degree.

The constant of assisted suicide is arguably oxymoronic anyway, as if someone else kills you, then by definition it is not suicide.

It's not just that though, someone is incapable of preparing the say syringe full of a lethal overdose but can just about administer it top themselves, their friend prepares the dose and hands it to them and then leaves the room, the friend can still be charged.

 

[Pate]

In the ideal world I wouldn't be against assisted suicide, and even now I'm of the opinion to turn a blind eye.

Problem I feel is that history has shown that with a lack of sanctity of life, atrocities are committed.

 

[PMKeates]

My point is that legally the two are not distinct. You clearly think they should be. But legally they aren't, so it's a bit of a stretch to discuss them as if they are. A person who is incapable of committing suicide can't kill themselves because they are physically incapable of doing so, not because the law says they can't. What the law says is that they can't be killed by someone else, as then that other person is committing a crime of a greater or lesser degree.

This is quite why I said the "'reality of the situation" as a consequence of the legalities rather than talking about the legalities themselves.

The constant of assisted suicide is arguably oxymoronic anyway, as if someone else kills you, then by definition it is not suicide.

I think it's quite acceptable to define suicide in that case as causing one's own death rather than physically actioning it.

 

[Burnsy2023]

though technically suicide is illegal. something i never really understood. If you succeed, who are they going to prosecute o_0 unless it is in place for things relating to transfer of inheritance that sort of thing

It hasn't been illegal since 1961 :/

 

[Burnsy2023]

Problem I feel is that history has shown that with a lack of sanctity of life, atrocities are committed.

Don't you think that outweighed by all the many suffering people who we make stay alive against their wishes?

 

[do_ron_ron]

I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't want this to be legal.

What are the none-religious arguments against it?

My arguement against it is that people in that condition are usually depressed and not making rational decisions. Two years ago my mother had two cancerous tumors and begged my brother and me to kill her. She later had two operations and came through it.

For less caring offspring the chance to get at the proceeds of someone's estate might be too tempting.

There is lots of research going on and cures or part cures could be discovered soon.

Why hurry to the grave - you don't get a second chance.

 

[Destination]

Totally agree crazy that pets get more rights on the right to die that we do.

Heh, you know, occasionally on here someone makes a comment that hits home. Rarely, but this is one case.
I'd never ever thought about the assisted suicide in this way.
It is odd, if an animal has no quality of life, we will do the 'right' thing and put it down to spare its suffering.
There is no equivalent for humans. Intriguing.

 

[Vonhelmet]

It is odd, if an animal has no quality of life, we will do the 'right' thing and put it down to spare its suffering.
There is no equivalent for humans. Intriguing.

This is because animals have fewer rights, not more. We don't value a cats life enough to think it worth keeping it alive. People do typically value other people considerably more than they do cats.

 

[LordSplodge]

That's an impressive share of the votes. Well done to them, good choice.

 

[hurfdurf]

In the ideal world I wouldn't be against assisted suicide, and even now I'm of the opinion to turn a blind eye.

Problem I feel is that history has shown that with a lack of sanctity of life, atrocities are committed.

The problem with turning a blind eye to it is that people are then free to abuse the assisted suicide system in place, you would get people taking advantage of people, getting them to change their will and then helping them to commit suicide with no regulation

Source for you sanctity of life statement, because that just sounds like religious nonsense akin to "Hitler was an atheist" despite the fact he was Catholic, used the Catholic church and repeatedly said so in his speech.

 

[steve-h]

So that people have the choice to die with dignity, as opposed to being forced to live years in daily agony, watching themselves debilitate and feeling their mind slip into madness. That's why.

There are no burning fires of hell for people who commit suicide, that's archaic BS that was designed to, yup you guessed it, put the fear of an unseen God into people who may otherwise want to do so.

You seem to have misread my post!

 

[Burnsy2023]

The problem with turning a blind eye to it is that people are then free to abuse the assisted suicide system in place, you would get people taking advantage of people, getting them to change their will and then helping them to commit suicide with no regulation

I don't think anyone is advocating having no regulation. I think assisted suicide should be legalised under heavy regulation and oversight. If these are done correctly I see abusing the system could prove difficult.

 

[hurfdurf]

I don't think anyone is advocating having no regulation. I think assisted suicide should be legalised under heavy regulation and oversight. If these are done correctly I see abusing the system could prove difficult.

The poster I quoted mentioned turning a blind eye and I wanted to point out why this was dangerous when it comes to this topic.

He also said something retarded about the sanctity of life which I also wanted to call him out on.