Euthanasia

[bogan]

Not many people would choose to end their life when first diagonised with a terminal illness. (But if they did, that should be their 'right').

But terminally ill people spend considerable time coming to terms with way their death is going to play out.

If a time is reached when they have no more hope (or energy to fight) and medicine has nothing more to offer, what 'right' do you have to deny them calling "enough's enough"?

Surely you can see the problem there? such logic is predicated on the faith that terminal means just that, so again I'll ask, who decides what is terminal?

[Katman]

......so again I'll ask, who decides what is terminal?

Like I said, this doesn't have to even apply to people who first discover they have a terminal illness.

When someone reaches a point where even the medical fraternity say there is nothing more to hope for they should have the right to say "I'm sane. This is my Will".

[bogan]

Like I said, this doesn't have to even apply to people who first discover they have a terminal illness.

When someone reaches a point where even the medical fraternity say there is nothing more to hope for they should have the right to say "I'm sane. This is my Will".

So, what is the waiting period? and who constitutes the medical fraternity? big pharma?

[Katman]

So, what is the waiting period?

Dude, I'm not the one writing the legislation.

All anyone is asking is that serious consideration be given to how a law change could best be introduced.

[bogan]

Dude, I'm not the one writing the legislation.

All anyone is asking for is that serious consideration is given to how a law change could best be introduced.

And any serious consideration must consider such things. It's a no brainer to say that a person who has 6 months of agony left and no chance of respite or recovery should be able to end it. If all you want is cursory agreement then you've got mine, but if you want some serious consideration, you need to dig deeper.

[Katman]

If all you want is cursory agreement then you've got mine, but if you want some serious consideration, you need to dig deeper.

Hey, if you agree even cursorily you could dig deeper yourself.

[FJRider]

And any serious consideration must consider such things. It's a no brainer to say that a person who has 6 months of agony left and no chance of respite or recovery should be able to end it. If all you want is cursory agreement then you've got mine, but if you want some serious consideration, you need to dig deeper.

Perhaps a poll ... to decide if Katman should be put out of his misery ...

[bogan]

Hey, if you agree even cursorily you could dig deeper yourself.

I was under the impression you wanted a seriously considered discussion. If you just want to go away and consider shit by yourself, feel free; if you just want me to do that, I'd suggest you're not after such a discussion.

Perhaps I should phrase it a different way. Euthanasia is a minefeild of grey areas, you have to weigh up how the pain causes decisions under duress, how terminal not necessarily is terminal, how the person with the most right to make such a decision is often incapable of it, spiritual/religious connotations... There just isn't the benchmarks in place to evaluate that criteria. So which way do you go? just say fuck, you're sick, top yourself if you want? or say no, you might get better so hang about?

[Katman]

I was under the impression you wanted a seriously considered discussion. If you just want to go away and consider shit by yourself, feel free; if you just want me to do that, I'd suggest you're not after such a discussion.

Perhaps I should phrase it a different way. Euthanasia is a minefeild of grey areas, you have to weigh up how the pain causes decisions under duress, how terminal not necessarily is terminal, how the person with the most right to make such a decision is often incapable of it, spiritual/religious connotations... There just isn't the benchmarks in place to evaluate that criteria. So which way do you go? just say fuck, you're sick, top yourself if you want? or say no, you might get better so hang about?

Like I said, let's talk about it - not ignore it.

(Is that you in your avatar?)

[oldrider]

Your new avatar is how I have always actually imagined you bogan "lol" - ten out of ten for that one - hilarious death kick!

[bogan]

Like I said, let's talk about it - not ignore it.

Euthanasia is a minefeild of grey areas, you have to weigh up how the pain causes decisions under duress, how terminal not necessarily is terminal, how the person with the most right to make such a decision is often incapable of it, spiritual/religious connotations... There just isn't the benchmarks in place to evaluate that criteria. So which way do you go? just say fuck, you're sick, top yourself if you want? or say no, you might get better so hang about?

[Katman]

There just isn't the benchmarks in place to evaluate that criteria. So which way do you go?

Here's an idea, we could investigate setting benchmarks.

[bogan]

Here's an idea, we could investigate setting benchmarks.

Any ideas? cos all mine come back to doctors/family judgement in addition to the patient.

[Katman]

Any ideas? cos all mine come back to doctors/family judgement in addition to the patient.

Here's an idea - there's things called Select Committees.

[bogan]

Here's an idea - there's things called Select Committees.

So, your idea is to let someone else decide? I kind of thought your unhappiness with their decision was the reason for this discussion...