Poll: Terry Pratchet what the...

[Beerbaron]

I didnt watch it last night, i just saw it on the news this morning

 

[krooton]

There will always be exceptions. The best we can do it make sure they are very few and far between. That doesn't mean we should avoid the whole issue though and to say that we can't guarantee 100% therefore we shouldn't allow it isn't a very realistic position.

While we are at it, we should never leave out homes, lest we get hit by a car crossing a road, blown up by an extremist, attacked by a chav, or any other countless bad things that could hypothetically happen to us.

 

[Burnsy2023]

2) Yea. They wanted to live, but felt like a burden on the family so if assisted suicide was the expected 'norm' and most people chose it in their predicament, would have felt duty bound to take that option despite deep down wanting to fight to the end ...

You're making unfounded assumptions again. How do you know what they accepted norm will be? People on life support aren't coerced in to having "Do not resuscitate" instructions.

 

[krooton]

1) No, it would cost far too much in vet's bills.

Oh look, it's all about you, and how it will affect you, it's no wonder someone as selfish as you seem to be would be against this.

 

[Judgeneo]

Just finished watching the documentary, a very good watch indeed.

 

[Andy_82]

I've always thoughts its crazy the difference in attitudes and ways of treating animals and people. Is about time the subject is debated maturely. I can see the arguments from both sides, but from my own experience living with severe pain day after day even with large amounts of morphine, i have thought about suicidie many times over the last ten years but i can't do that to my family.

At the end of the day it's all about quality of life, not quantity. Only you can really make that decision. I do fear though that if euthanasia is legalised, as someone mentioned earlier in this post, that coercion will happen either from relatives, government. And also, from the individually feeling they are a burdon.

I also fear, what happens after legalisation, we could find ourselves on a very slippery slope, for example the decision could be made by others for the patient. A fterall its happened before in history.

 

[Burnsy2023]

A fterall its happened before in history.

Such as?

 

[Craig1981]

Even if you approve of assisted suicide, surely that method used was a pretty bad one? Poison that kills the person slowly and leaves them gasping for water as their life fades away? No thanks!

Wouldnt it be best to give them a high dose of a pain killer like morphine and then up the dose past the lethal dose once they were suitably....subdued?

 

[krooton]

I've always thoughts its crazy the difference in attitudes and ways of treating animals and people. Is about time the subject is debated maturely. I can see the arguments from both sides, but from my own experience living with severe pain day after day even with large amounts of morphine, i have thought about suicidie many times over the last ten years but i can't do that to my family.

At the end of the day it's all about quality of life, not quantity. Only you can really make that decision. I do fear though that if euthanasia is legalised, as someone mentioned earlier in this post, that coercion will happen either from relatives, government. And also, from the individually feeling they are a burdon.

I also fear, what happens after legalisation, we could find ourselves on a very slippery slope, for example the decision could be made by others for the patient. A fterall its happened before in history.

Why would it though? Most people who are pro the idea are so as they believe a person should have control over how they die, no-one wants to give that choice to anyone but the person themselves.

I would like to choose how I die, I would not like someone else to be able to choose it.

Most people would feel the same, so why would we pass a further change to allow that to happen?

 

[krooton]

Even if you approve of assisted suicide, surely that method used was a pretty bad one? Poison that kills the person slowly and leaves them gasping for water as their life fades away? No thanks!

Wouldnt it be best to give them a high dose of a pain killer like morphine and then up the dose past the lethal dose once they were suitably....subdued?

I agree, didn't watch the doc, but I would rather be put to sleep than just poisoned whilst conscious.

 

[Burnsy2023]

Even if you approve of assisted suicide, surely that method used was a pretty bad one? Poison that kills the person slowly and leaves them gasping for water as their life fades away? No thanks!

Wouldnt it be best to give them a high dose of a pain killer like morphine and then up the dose past the lethal dose once they were suitably....subdued?

I agree. Richard Hammond did a programme the death penalty and how the lethal injection had flaws and alternatives. Euphoric hypoxia via breathing an inert gas (I forget which one) seems the best way to go.

 

[RDM]

Such as?

Are you trying to force a Godwin?

Even if you approve of assisted suicide, surely that method used was a pretty bad one? Poison that kills the person slowly and leaves them gasping for water as their life fades away? No thanks!

Wouldnt it be best to give them a high dose of a pain killer like morphine and then up the dose past the lethal dose once they were suitably....subdued?

Possibly because even in Switzerland you still need to administer the poison yourself. Someone can assist you by providing it and by providing a place for you to die but cannot actually administer the poison. I could be wrong there, but I think that is the reason.

 

[Burnsy2023]

I would like to choose how I die, I would not like someone else to be able to choose it.

Absolutely.

 

[britboy4321]

Oh look, it's all about you, and how it will affect you, it's no wonder someone as selfish as you seem to be would be against this.

I'd say that 98% of the people that choose to have pets put down are because of financial reasons.

They just say its to be nice to the animal to justify the act to themselves.

For example, we are perfectly capable of repairing a race horses broken leg and them having a full normal life but never racing again. But we always have them put down. It's a financially motivated decision. Having animals put down almost always is ..

 

[Craig1981]

Are you trying to force a Godwin?



Possibly because even in Switzerland you still need to administer the poison yourself. Someone can assist you by providing it and by providing a place for you to die but cannot actually administer the poison. I could be wrong there, but I think that is the reason.

That seems like a pretty stupid distinction. I thought the idea was to assist the person to die with dignity? Shouldnt that include making sure the method is as humane and painless as possible?

 

[Vonhelmet]

Possibly because even in Switzerland you still need to administer the poison yourself. Someone can assist you by providing it and by providing a place for you to die but cannot actually administer the poison. I could be wrong there, but I think that is the reason.

Yep. Self ingested barbiturates seems to be the easiest option that can be successfully administered by the suicidee.

 

[Burnsy2023]

Are you trying to force a Godwin?

I did think it was a silly example.

Possibly because even in Switzerland you still need to administer the poison yourself. Someone can assist you by providing it and by providing a place for you to die but cannot actually administer the poison. I could be wrong there, but I think that is the reason.

Yep. They also had to record that part on video to prove no force or coercion was used.

 

[RDM]

I'd say that 98% of the people that choose to have pets put down are because of financial reasons.

Anything to back this up or just another Britboy statistic pulled from your ar...the air?

They just say its to be nice to the animal to justify the act to themselves.

Maybe the problem is that you are looking at the rest of the world through the lens of your own perceptions?

For example, we are perfectly capable of repairing a race horses broken leg and them having a full normal life but never racing again. But we always have them put down. It's a financially motivated decision. Having animals put down almost always is ..

Yes because a family pet is directly comparable to a financial investment.

The two times I have had to make the decision to put a pet down have had nothing to do with the financial implications, one of them costing me more than just letting it die naturally.

 

[Burnsy2023]

I'd say that 98% of the people that choose to have pets put down are because of financial reasons.

They just say its to be nice to the animal to justify the act to themselves.

For example, we are perfectly capable of repairing a race horses broken leg and them having a full normal life but never racing again. But we always have them put down. It's a financially motivated decision. Having animals put down almost always is ..

Sometime I grant you it may be financial. I wouldn't say your made up statistic has any merit though.

 

[Vonhelmet]

That seems like a pretty stupid distinction. I thought the idea was to assist the person to die with dignity? Shouldnt that include making sure the method is as humane and painless as possible?

The person still has to do it themselves. You are providing them with a reliable means of killing themselves, but you still can't be seen to be doing it to them.

It's like leaving someone in a room with a gun, or a noose, or whatever. You just can't shoot them yourself or hang them yourself. This is why it is such a legally grey area, because you are facilitating death but you are not actively causing it. Or are you?