Poll: Terry Pratchet what the...

Euthanasia?

  • I'm in favour of assisted death for anyone who chooses it

    Votes: 252 41.4%
  • I'm in favour provided the person is suffering from a terminal condition

    Votes: 301 49.4%
  • I'm not in favour of assisted death

    Votes: 31 5.1%
  • I hold no opinion about it

    Votes: 25 4.1%

  • Total voters
    609
You've got a disease and, over the years, the 'kill yourself' precentage has gone up to 96%. 96% of people with the disease nowadays choose the option.

You are getting your suicide done privately rather than by the NHS (you deserve the best you think). It's costing £20,000. Non-refundable. You want your whole family to be there .. hence people have travelled from all over for the send-off. Some people, who arn't rich, have even flown over from New Zealand. Everyone has made a massive effort. You even had arranged for you a surprise 'balloon trip', and a load of gifts foistered on you .. everyone has splashed out these last few days.

You were previously at home. Your bedroom has now been cleared out of all it's medical gear. Your bed gone. You're stuff packed away (you helped do it, when you could). Finally your 14 year old son has a room of his own, he's moved in, everything's sorted.

So everyone gathers on the day. You've also had the family gathering the night before. All the tears have been cried. The will has been clarified by an expensive solicitor. All the goodbyes have been said.

The 'doctor' hands you the poison. Everyone waits in silence.

You really think everyone placed in this position, all sufferers, would feel fine with saying 'Actually .. guess what folks .. I've changed my mind'

..

Because if not .. guess what folks .. you're effectively back to coercion. In short, you simply can't stop coercion ... even if no-one says a SINGLE WORD of persuasion .. :/

Your hypothetical situations of extreme nature mean little.
 
'Can't argue against your point' would have been quicker to write ..

lolbritboy.

Your hypothetical situations don't need to be argued against, they do that all by themselves given the extreme specificness of them.

But I will indulge you simply by saying that denying the majority of real cases the right to choose to die, solely to allow the minority of hypothetical ones the right to change their mind, doesn't balance.
 
You've got a disease and, over the years, the 'kill yourself' precentage has gone up to 96%. 96% of people with the disease nowadays choose the option.

You are getting your suicide done privately rather than by the NHS (you deserve the best you think). It's costing £20,000. Non-refundable. You want your whole family to be there .. hence people have travelled from all over for the send-off. Some people, who arn't rich, have even flown over from New Zealand. Everyone has made a massive effort. You even had arranged for you a surprise 'balloon trip', and a load of gifts foistered on you .. everyone has splashed out these last few days.

You were previously at home. Your bedroom has now been cleared out of all it's medical gear. Your bed gone. You're stuff packed away (you helped do it, when you could). Finally your 14 year old son has a room of his own, he's moved in, everything's sorted.

So everyone gathers on the day. You've also had the family gathering the night before. All the tears have been cried. The will has been clarified by an expensive solicitor. All the goodbyes have been said.

The 'doctor' hands you the poison. Everyone waits in silence.

You really think everyone placed in this position, all sufferers, would feel fine with saying 'Actually .. guess what folks .. I've changed my mind'

..

Because if not .. guess what folks .. you're effectively back to coercion. In short, you simply can't stop coercion ... even if no-one says a SINGLE WORD of persuasion .. :/

So perhaps you have to take the poison alone and only after you've made the decision can you see relatives? Coercion is a challenge, but there are many people living in enormous pain against their will because they can't end it themselves. I think any system should be long and rigorous, but I don't think we should shy away from difficult decisions purely on wild speculation about what might happen.
 
lolbritboy.

Your hypothetical situations don't need to be argued against, they do that all by themselves given the extreme specificness of them.

But I will indulge you simply by saying that denying the majority of real cases the right to choose to die, solely to allow the minority of hypothetical ones the right to change their mind, doesn't balance.

Coercion could involve people feeling guilty about changing their mind last minute because they have been talking about it for 2 weeks with their wife and don't want to appear weak in front of her last minute. Still unrealistic?


I like your 'the majority will kill themselves because they want to .. so the minority killing themselves because they feel pressured into it is kinda ok' argument. Sums it up really ..
 
Coercion could involve people feeling guilty about changing their mind last minute because they have been talking about it for 2 weeks with their wife and don't want to appear weak in front of her last minute. Still unrealistic?

What sort of world do you live in where your wife wouldn't be glad that you'd decided not to kill yourself after all?
 
I like your 'the majority will kill themselves because they want to .. so the minority killing themselves because they feel pressured into it is kinda ok' argument. Sums it up really ..

Better that than the majority being "coerced" to spend the remainder of their lives experiencing a long, drawn out and painful road to death.
 
There are far too many grey areas to allow this to become law.

- How do you determine a person of sound mind?
- What age are you allowed to decide this? (If over 50 then that's discrimination for younger people etc)
- Guilt to not become a burden to family will play a huge part, not coercion (look at amount of old people feel they should go into a home so not to be a burden on family)

From some experience on the subject the effects suicide on the remaining family can be huge. It is not pleasant and although you are glad they aren't suffering physically it is of little comfort TBH.
 
Why is it so wrong for someone to end their own life if they all ready have an ETA on their death?

I don't think it's entirely fair that legislation says you can't "pull the plug."
 
From some experience on the subject the effects suicide on the remaining family can be huge. It is not pleasant and although you are glad they aren't suffering physically it is of little comfort TBH.

Normal suicide is very different from the assisted version, as most of they time the happen suddenly and unexpectedly, taking those left behind by surprise.

Assisted will allow the person to make their peace, get closure, etc. and I'd like to think that most people wouldn't be so selfish as to want their loved one to suffer just because they want them around for longer.
 
There are far too many grey areas to allow this to become law.

So how do you explain it being law in some other countries?

From some experience on the subject the effects suicide on the remaining family can be huge. It is not pleasant and although you are glad they aren't suffering physically it is of little comfort TBH.

From close experience I can say that sometimes the grief from suicide can be overshadowed by the reasons behind it and the reasons behind it can give quite a bit of comfort to the family left behind. However because of the way the law stands at the moment it can mean someone dying earlier than they have to because they have to be physically fit enough to kill themselves without assistance.
 
I think a law on assisted suicide may even prolong life. If I had guarantees that if I couldn't kill myself someone would help me, then I would be much more willing to keep going until I simply can't go any further. If I didn't have this help then I would likely kill myself earlier when I still had the capability to do it myself.
 
Back
Top Bottom