Euthanasia / Assisted Suicide

Good or a bad?

In light of this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/8519681.stm

Please discuss.

This isn't assisted suicide, this is effectively a mercy killing (according to him) and wouldn't be treated as assisted suicide in the courts, it would be treated the same way as Frances Inglis who injected a lethal dose of heroin into her brain damaged son..she got 9 years.

As far as assisted suicide goes, I have no problem with it, if it's the persons choice.

shall I re-do my joke from the in the news today thread?.....no.....ok then

i forgot about this, I meant to go but was busy, did everyone enjoy themselves? http://www.lfgss.com/thread34219-2.html

he was a bit foolish admitting it in the media

i killed someone but it was a mercy killing .... judges just don't see it that way

i am for the idea in principle, imagine being in the worst pain 24/7 i would want my family putting me out of my misery in that kind of situation
in fact have felt similarly during a rather nasty bout of man flu i just wanted it all to end

in fact have felt similarly during a rather nasty bout of man flu i just wanted it all to end

PM next time ;p

he was a bit foolish admitting it in the media

i killed someone but it was a mercy killing .... judges just don't see it that way

i am for the idea in principle, imagine being in the worst pain 24/7 i would want my family putting me out of my misery in that kind of situation
in fact have felt similarly during a rather nasty bout of man flu i just wanted it all to end

Unfortunately, that's Ray Gosling for you. He's lived his life in the media, and documentaries are his life.
I support him. I think he did what he did out of compassion, and I think his public confession of what he did is his own way of taking a stand.
I don't like to see a 70 year old bloke being interrogated for five hours though, not for something like this.

I hope some fucker has the guts to finish me off if these piles get any worse.
Takers?

Good or a bad?

In light of this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/8519681.stm

Please discuss.

He may have admitted it but doesn't it have to be proven in court beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction? I suppose its down to the CPS who will decide whether to take this to court.

the issue does need to be brought out for public debate so i guess he has done a good thing

If you love or care for someone the worst thing possible is to watch that person suffer and to get worse. I don't blame him for what he did and there needs to be some clarification of the law.

YouTube- Ray Gosling - British Seaside

This little clip is filmed at Bridlington. Ace place, if you can stand biddies.
David Hockney lives there.
He's old, but he's no biddy.

My mother has been a nurse for her whole live and looked after the dead and dying. She says the only people who are against euthanasia are the pencil pushers because they are afraid of being possibly sued.

Its retarted that its illegal.

The mum that got sent to jail for 9 years was the only one who thought the son should be put out of his misery, didn't the rest of that family disagree with her?
In which case how can you call it a mercy killing? She may have thought she was doing the right thing but it still doesn't mean it's either correct or right.

Assisted suicide is different, it implies that the person is capable of making an informed choice and has choosen that path.

Actually from what I read her family completely stood by her. As I said in my first post, Assisted Suicide is a very different thing from 'mercy killing' I use that term in the descriptive sense rather than the literal one.

I think it's hard to judge others when you haven't been there yourself, I'm not saying I condone taking the law into your own hands..but I can empathise with what she has done.

This article was on the BBC about patients in vegetative states who can be communicated with, very early stages but opening up the idea that people may not be as 'brain dead' as we think, these would be another group to be at risk from others making choices for them

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8497148.stm

I can imagine quiet a few old people who were an inconvenience on their families would be in danger too, think of the money saved for inheritance if years of nursing/ care home bills don't have to be paid for. Maybe a bit cynical but there are plenty of arseholes about.

Actually from what I read her family completely stood by her. As I said in my first post, Assisted Suicide is a very different thing from 'mercy killing' I use that term in the descriptive sense rather than the literal one.

I think it's hard to judge others when you haven't been there yourself, I'm not saying I condone taking the law into your own hands..but I can empathise with what she has done.

To be honest i didn't read any of the stuff after the case, but remembered something from before the case about the family not agreeing with her and saying she was hysterical, just having had a quick search it was more like they "weren’t on the same page \ but we were getting there" maybe i read it differently before. (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6999310.ece)

I find it beyond believe that when a person wants to die, he/she has to make the decision to either commit suicide or retort ask for a mercy killing. Nobody should have to put through that amount of anguish, to see a loved one suffer and then to be asked to put them out of their misery must make it twice as hard.
I reckon euthanasia should be more like being a blood donor, opt in before death. Should I ever suffer from an incurable disease I would want a doctor to end it for me, I would not expect a friend or family member to do this.

The thought of becoming a nightmarish burden to my family and loved ones as some neurodegenerative disorder destroys my mind and body is horrifying. But it is a big step for a society to make something like this legal. Debate that doesn't boil down mildly hysterical "your trying to wipeout anyone with disabilities!" freakouts is hard to find but i think that is partly due to the fact that death is pretty taboo subject socially. It'll be good when our societies grow up sufficiently to admit this is something we need.

on a lighter note:
I really want to setup a veterinary euthanasia clinic/crematorium called "dognitas"

In inconvenience on their families would be in danger too, think of the money saved for inheritance if years of nursing/ care home bills don't have to be paid for. Maybe a bit cynical but there are plenty of arseholes about.

Cynical it may be but this is something that we need to protect against. I doubt it would happen with the frequency that some of the reactionary right wing opinionists in the media would have you believe. Alas you have to be cynical here that some of these people don't really care so much about the issue at hand as much as they do about the attention they'll get and the sound of their own voice.

As Clefty says, you have to distinguish between assisted suicide and mercy killing. The Ray Gosling case awkwardly straddles both as without a clear declaration of intent it cannot be the former but with a clear absence of unilateral motivation it is hard to determine the latter. A clear law on this permitting assisted suicide would ultimately prevent most accusations of mercy killing and a better legal position on living wills and associated culpability would probably also be useful.

For assisted suicide I think that there should be a clear process that would need to be followed. Firstly to ensure that the above situation cannot come about and secondly to ensure that any applicants be given due and reasonable counselling to ensure that their motivations are personal and consequences are understood.

For any assisted suicide law to be acceptable to me, I would expect that three basic steps be followed.

1) A clear declaration of intent to pursue assisted suicide be lodged by an applicant with a purely administrative body that is devoid of the capacity to judge the applications other than that they are completed in accordance with reasonable requirements.

2) An assessment of the applicant be made by an appropriate medical professional to determine whether or not the applicant meets clearly defined criteria. These criteria themselves should be broad and not limited to any specific medical conditions but based around projected life expectancy, quality of life and current available medical treatment. The assessment should in the first instance be acceptable from a medical professional who is a personal acquaintance of the applicant although if there is a suspicion that there is any bias or collusion then the opinion of an independant medical expert could be ordered by the governing body.

3) The case should then be set before a tribunal who would review the case including all and any reasonable submissions from any reasonably relevant party. They then would determine if assisted suicide is an acceptable course of action for the applicant and impose conditions (typially based around deterioration) that would have to be met before the act could take place. Anyone rejected by the tribunal would be free to appeal the decision should they feel it unfair or re-apply should their circumstances change significantly.

In response to the OP, calling assisted suicide good or bad is rather reductive and not useful to debate on what is clearly a very complicated matter. What really needs to be determined is whether it is ever an acceptable course of action within our society and, if so, within what perameters.

Food for thought. Pets and other domesticated animals are regularly and routinely put down in order to prevent undue suffering. Why are humans not worthy of such consideration?

on a lighter note:
I really want to setup a veterinary euthanasia clinic/crematorium called "dognitas"

Repped

• goes to amend will to ensure pain free final days of my life *
  
  

amend your wills people

My mum stubbed her toe late last year, nothing too painful, but I saw it as an opportunity to kill her - I smothered her with a pillow - I'd like to say she went peacefully but the truth is that from the moment the attack started to her final screams was at least 40 minutes.

The point I am making is that this kind of mercy killing is not as easy as you might think, it is a profoundly difficult and emotionally draining undertaking, she escaped twice and at one point even managed to reach the phone.

The law must be changed.

Applied ethics questions are currently always bedevilled by the fact that there is no meta-ethical agreement, i.e. which theory of ethics we take as our agreed basis for thinking about individual ethical problems--part, if not all, of the reason why there typically develops a 'for' and an 'against' in such questions.