Euthanasia need to be considered in UK?

I think the really sad thing and where I do very strongly support is most life insurance etc won't pay out following suicide. I don't know how it would work for this?

But to me, the thought of someone having to suffer severe pain for the last short time of their life which is guaranteed to end is horrendous, and your family getting screwed over for not suffering?

That seems wrong to me.
 
In the old days medical euthanasia for suffering and for dreadful birth defects was commonplace, mainly unchallenged. Today at birth, MUCH less so, too many are likely to have an agenda of ill placed sensitivity.

Today under suffering the usually diamorphine syringe driver is used, probably the time / volume graph is manipulated differently by different "health professionals", but as a way to normalise euthanasia it's certainly in use. I've got my own morphine supply secreted away and enough knowledge to make a viable syringe driver, hopefully if the worst comes to the worst and I'm compus mentis enough to know when to use it I can make my own decision.

Time for a beer, what a depressing thread, sorry the OP has the dilemma of thinking of and discussing this subject, life's a bitch :(
 
I think it should. I watched my grandfather decline mentally (Alzheimer's) and physically (throat cancer) in the space of 1.5 years.

But more painful, was having to watch my grandmother (and aunties) looking after him, and the pain in their eyes.

We initially put him in a home, as he needed round the clock care and oxygen. Then due to £££ moved him back home with a nurse coming round a few hours a day to help my grandma.

When he died, I was sad of course, but also happy that my grandma could get some rest and hopefully move on....

Not sure if my relatives would've accepted it however, but from my point of view, and as he was no longer with us and in need of round the clock care, it would have been the right thing to do.
 
Last edited:
GaryTheSnail said:
I’m not sure I would trust it. There’s things supposed to have been wiped out by now but they still happen.
Click to expand...
I mean to be fair we can keep going in this direction. Maybe the consent is only valid if it's done in a specific room, maybe a court room, and videotaped by a specifically licensed camera that signs the footage using public key cryptography so that anyone can irrefutably verify its authenticity as well as the physically signed document. You can raise the bar on this pretty high fairly cheaply these days.

Edit: it's also worth considering that getting away with regular murder is also an option here, so really we just have to make the consent system harder than that to beat. I think what I've outlined above goes way beyond that bar.
 
Last edited:
I whole heartedly agree it should be an option for anyone suffering but until there’s a sure fire way (or as close as possible) to ensure it’s not abused I doubt it will make it into law. Much like the death penalty, 1 innocent person executed or in the case of euthanasia, 1 person coerced into ending their life early is 1 too many and that will be a big barrier to it becoming an option, imo.
 
I agree it should be a thing.
It should be heavily vetted.

I sure would want to be able to choose if I got One of the many horrible ways to go.
 
I definitely think it should be an option.
I won't go into details, but i'm currently going through something similar with my mother being bedbound and having no quality of life. It's horrible to watch a person you love deteriorating before your eyes.
She's actually said she just wants to die, which is heartbreaking but at the same time I can completely understand as I think I would feel the same way if all my freedom was suddenly taken away and stuck in a bed with carers having to do personal care.

Stay strong @area51_for_psx
 
Last edited:
On a mildly lighter note, it will never cease to amuse me that King George V got euthanised against his will by his private doctor who decided to take full advantage of his position to decide there was too much suffering and make sure the death was in time to be broken in the superior morning papers not the evening ones. The doctors diary recorded that the actual last words from the king were to curse at him so hardly knocking off a cabbage.

Of course if that was a vet putting down a dying animal no one would think twice about it.
 
Hotwired said:
On a mildly lighter note, it will never cease to amuse me that King George V got euthanised against his will by his private doctor who decided to take full advantage of his position to decide there was too much suffering and make sure the death was in time to be broken in the superior morning papers not the evening ones. The doctors diary recorded that the actual last words from the king were to curse at him so hardly knocking off a cabbage.

Of course if that was a vet putting down a dying animal no one would think twice about it.
Click to expand...

To be fair the doctor was just engaging in a proud historical tradition of offing the monarch, he just updated it for the 20th century a bit.
 
Thekwango said:
I whole heartedly agree it should be an option for anyone suffering but until there’s a sure fire way (or as close as possible) to ensure it’s not abused I doubt it will make it into law. Much like the death penalty, 1 innocent person executed or in the case of euthanasia, 1 person coerced into ending their life early is 1 too many and that will be a big barrier to it becoming an option, imo.
Click to expand...
We don't ban people from driving cars or taking part in high risk sports because some die. The benefits to the many outweigh the downsides to the few. Surely euthanasia should follow the same principle. I mean even without it we've had murderous doctors, there will always be the risk of that sort of thing even with the best will in the world and screening processes.
 
thenewoc said:
We don't ban people from driving cars or taking part in high risk sports because some die. The benefits to the many outweigh the downsides to the few. Surely euthanasia should follow the same principle. I mean even without it we've had murderous doctors, there will always be the risk of that sort of thing even with the best will in the world and screening processes.
Click to expand...

The people dying from driving or riding motor vehicles tend to be younger, active and healthy. The same for people taking part in high risk activities. With age comes caution and usually a realisation that riding ton up without a helmet is not a completely sensible activity.

If I was gaga, demented and incompetent I may welcome the needle to oblivion, until that point I shall sip the odd glass and maybe the occasional toke in the privacy of my own armchair.
 
I think it should be legal in specific circumstances.

My mother is heading in the direction of OP's mother.

I think someone with a sound mind should be able to end their own life.

Of course there will be debates about when the option should become available. But I think it should be available.

We already have the DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) when certain types of patients go into hospital, usually elderly.
 
Lightnix said:
I mean to be fair we can keep going in this direction. Maybe the consent is only valid if it's done in a specific room, maybe a court room, and videotaped by a specifically licensed camera that signs the footage using public key cryptography so that anyone can irrefutably verify its authenticity as well as the physically signed document. You can raise the bar on this pretty high fairly cheaply these days.

Edit: it's also worth considering that getting away with regular murder is also an option here, so really we just have to make the consent system harder than that to beat. I think what I've outlined above goes way beyond that bar.
Click to expand...

That could work. With video evidence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom