Home Health & Wellbeing
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Euthanasia/assisted killing

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Oxford Dictionary:
euthanasia
the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma.

I watched a film last night, it was about a woman who had cancer and died from an overdose of morphine, it had a bit of a twist to it and the father thought it was the daughter who did it and the daughter thought it was the father who did it but none of them said anything to each other until the end where you find out it wasnt any of them and in fact it was the woman herself who had ended her life to stop the pain she was going through and it was just really sad because it was about this amazing woman who was a great person friend and a mother who her husband thought was capable of anything she put her mind to and at the end it proved right by what she had done.

Anyway the mother actually asked the daughter to help her die and it has really got me thinking about 'mercy killing' and assisted suicide etc etc..

Most of you know that my mother is HIV positive and last night i was thinking about it, and i thought would i do it if i was in that position? and im not quite sure, i say i would but you never know until your in that situation yourself do you.

Like i said i dont know if i would do something like that unless i was in that situation myself, i have heard quite a few peoples opinions on this subject and i cant help but be a little bewildered with the people who say something to the affect of 'no its totally wrong i would never do it, its murder people shouldnt take thier own lives or help another individual to do so' etc etc.

I really think if i was in the situation where i was watching a family member or a very muched loved friend in an emense amount of pain and suffering and they were begging me to help them end it i really dont think i would have the heart to say no to them, and i really dont think i could live with myself knowing that i had not helped them to do something they so very much wanted.

I also know i would probably find it hard to live with myself afterwards knowing that i had a hand in helping them to die, but to know that i had helped them to die peacefully and out of pain would mean a lot to me, and to know that their last days werent spent just wishing they were dead because all they felt was suffering.

I cant help but think that someone who has been through something like cancer or another deadly desease has already had enough suffering without having to live their life out in pain and suffering, i think those people are very strong to have gotten to the point they have done, is it not enough torture to have to go through the kemotherapy (sp?), operations, hospital/doctors appointments, the falling apart of your family and friends, to have to carry on suffering until your last breath??

If you are one of those people who is totally against this well i think when you have walked in a persons shoes in that situation most likely your mind would change then, if you were the one begging for peace and painlessness.

If i was ever put in the situation where someone wanted me to help them end thier life i really dont know if i could do it, but i dont know if i could turn my back either but when i look at a situation like eg; dot cotton and ethel in eastenders, i would not put dot to prison for what she had done, and i would not class her as a murderer.

What is the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide?

Answer: In euthanasia, one person does something that directly kills another. For example, a doctor gives a lethal injection to a patient. In assisted suicide, a non-suicidal person knowingly and intentionally provides the means or acts in some way to help a suicidal person kill himself or herself.

Assisted suicide i definitely could do (i think), its the euthanasia im not too sure about.

Do you think people who are living in pain and want to die should be forced to stay alive?

Personally i dont think its is fair, we all know when we are pushed to the limits and we all know when weve had enough of something, i think to keep someone alive against their wishes would be inhumane.
someone said this somewhere but i dont know who (sorry):
There comes a time when continued attempts to cure are not compassionate, wise, or medically sound.
That's where hospice, including in-home hospice care, can be of such help

I agree with this, especially if it is against a persons wishes.
I dont know much about the legal sides of all this but i know it is wrong if someone doesnt want ongoing treatment for something and they are forced to do so.
the same person said this:
That is the time when all efforts should be placed on making the patient's remaining time comfortable. Then, all interventions should be directed to alleviating pain and other symptoms as well as to the provision of emotional and spiritual support for both the patient and the patient's loved ones

I totally agree with this as well, i mean its more important for people to be comfortable to live thier days out as well as they can and with as little pain as possible. And i think when they feel like its too much for them to cope with any more why should they have to live through it??

Studies have shown that if pain and depression are adequately treated in a dying person, as they would be in a suicidal non-dying person, the desire to commit suicide evaporates.

Surely if this is true then more effort should b made to counsel a dying person? or because their life is coming to and end are their feelings not worth anything?

I am aware that this is a very touchy subject and some people have very strong opinions about it all.

What is your take on it?

Has anyone been in this situation where they have been asked by a family member to help them to die, and if so how did it make you feel? etc etc

I mean obviously im not asking someone if they have hepled someone to die because i have no idea if you might get arrested for it or anything like that, and i think its quite a personal thing and obviously quite traumatic for you to discuss if you have been in that stituation.

Really im just wondering if anyone has any opinions/thoughts/feelings on euthanaisa and assisted suicide.

I sort of stopped this post when i was half way through and i was on one of them rolls when i started it and sort of lost the plot when i went away from it, sorry if ive been a bit repetetive in certain areas which i probably have, and no doubt i have contradicted myself about ten times too lol.

Ill probably remember a few points i was going to raise when ive been to sleep and wake up and ill no doubt have something to add about it later.

©lovely freaks

MTS ^5 ;)

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Nice post Lee! Very informative.

    I really dont know what I'd do in that situation. I dont think that I could watch someone I love go through so much pain though.

    I think that if someone I loved had a terminal illness that couldn't be cured and they were in pain all the time that couldn't really be made easier by painkillers,

    and they didn't have a good quality of life like they couldn't go out on their own anymore and they couldn't feed themselves and that. And if they asked me to help them end it all I think I could do it. Like you, I don't think I could do euthanasia. I think I could probably do assisted suicide. But I'd feel really guilty afterwards but also feel happy that the person wasn't in pain anymore.

    I think that people who are living in pain and want to die should be able to. Isnt there a scheme in Holland or somewhere (sorry if I've got the place wrong but I watched a video on it when I was in school) and euthanasia is allowed if two doctors approve it and if the patient has a terminal illness.

    I think I could do assisted suicide. But I hope i never have to be in that situation.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i dont know, i mean if someone had really been through so much pain that they wanted me to help them end their life then it would be kinda out of order to refuse. especially if it were a friend, ib which case i would kinda feel bad about sayin no to their request, but i would also feel bad because of the personal loss. u have a lot of v interesting points tho, i just hope i never have to be in that situation ever. on the other hand, we all gotta die someday...u see what i mean? u could argue ure points 4 eva and still get no where, so i usually get confused and leave at this point. so byeee :P
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I know think may sound sick but I actually enjoyed studying euthanasia in school because it is something I really do believe in!

    I don't know if any of you have ever heard of a Dr. Jack Kavorkian (AKA Dr.Death). Dr. Jack Kevorkian helped end the lives of 28 painfully ill people. He has been tried and acquitted three times of assisting suicide (well when I finished studying the topic).

    Take a look at this article I found while looking through my old English file. Geoffrey Fieger is Dr. Jack Kavorkians lawyer, Andy Rooney is the interviewer:
    An Interview with Dr. Jack Kavorkian


    ROONEY: Is there a good way of dying naturally?

    Dr. JACK KEVORKIAN (Assisted Suicide Advocate): I don't know. I think there is. I think most people would pick sudden heart attack and in sleep.

    ROONEY: In their sleep.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Right, they would pick sudden heart attack in sleep. We assume that's the best way to die, because you never know.

    ROONEY: You're too young to get in on this conversation, Geoff.

    Mr. GEOFFREY FIEGER (Kevorkian's Attorney): I understand.

    ROONEY: I think I'll call you Mr. Fieger, if I may.

    Mr. FIEGER: You can call me Geoff.

    ROONEY: When do you decide that this person probably would be best to go?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well, actually, the patient decides when it's best to go.

    ROONEY: But is--but is he or she a good judge?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Only on what he or she wants. As a medical doctor, it is my duty to evaluate the situation with as much data as I can gather and as much expertise as I have and as much experience as I have to determine whether or not the wish of the patient is medically justified. The two must then coincide--the wish of the patient and the medical justification.

    ROONEY: What is the legal aspect of this? Does he tell you what he's going to do?

    Mr. FIEGER: No, not in advance.

    ROONEY: You just saying that because you don't want to be...

    Mr. FIEGER: Maybe. But I don't think he's committed any crime. He's just doing something that's right, and everybody instinctively understands it. That's why we're winning. This isn't something that we have to teach people a lot about. They understand it. Government has no business telling you when you have to--how much you have to suffer before you die.

    ROONEY: How do you feel about what the Eskimos do? Is that a good idea?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Oh, no, no, that's brutal.

    ROONEY: Putting--well then...

    Mr. FIEGER: Leaving them on the ice.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: That's brutal.

    ROONEY: Putting older--leaving them out on ice floes?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well, we're doing the same thing by letting them starve and thirst to death in--in hospitals. You call--the Germans did that in the concentration camps. Our Supreme Court has validated...

    ROONEY: That happens in hospitals, you think?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Yeah, it sure does. It's legal. And the Supreme Court of the United States--our--our best Supreme Court, has validated the Nazi method of execution in se--in concentration camps, starving them to death. And--and...

    ROONEY: Now--now, what are you saying, please? What are they doing in hospitals that you...

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: They take away their feeding and water when they're in coma and let them die. I mean, you're validating what the Nazis did in concentration camps.

    Mr. FIEGER: See, that's what's...

    ROONEY: And what you--but you do not approve of that?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Absolutely not. That's brutal. That is inhumane. Would you approve of that? When a--when you say a person should be allowed to die, inject them quickly and painlessly, not let them wither away and starve to death. That is inconceivable. It's unspeakable. But our Supreme Court has said, `That is nice. It's ethical.'

    ROONEY: Dr. Kevorkian, I have known doctors all my life, and there has been, I believe, a tacit agreement among doctors that--that there are times when they have helped people out of this world who were terminally ill and in--in great pain, and they didn't say anything about it. It was an understanding they all had. Have you ruined that for them?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: I don't think so, but I might have. I don't think I have. Now I think the--the--the legal wrangling over this has prob--helped ruin it more than I have.

    ROONEY: And your legal problems have really inhibited you, in some sense, from doing it absolutely the best way?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: That's true. That's absolutely true. They've inhibited--taken my license away. They suspended it, made it tough for me to get any drugs. And--and then, when I use gas, they scorn it. Oh, come on.

    ROONEY: You're not a great favorite among doctors.

    Mr. FIEGER: Uh-uh.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well, among which doctors?

    Mr. FIEGER: Not witch doctors.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Which, which, which--among which doctors? Among many Catholic doctors? No. Among many Baptist doctors? No. But among doctors in general, I think more than half support what I'm doing.

    ROONEY: Are you in any way religious? Dr. KEVORKIAN: I might be, but my religion centers in different area than what's considered conventional religion. ROONEY: Any time anybody starts hedging like that, I realize they're not religious.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well--oh, no, religion is an internal spiritual world, and I have my own, with my god, Johann Sebastian Bach. I mean, why not? Every--you invent gods; that's my god. At least he's not invented.

    ROONEY: If what you do became popular--in other words, if it was accepted legally and ethically, and people in hospitals who were terminally ill and in nursing homes and everywhere else, they died through--with some help from doctors like you--would this have an effect on the income of--of doctors in hospitals?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: It could. It dep--if you let every doctor do it, it could. Just like everything else, you let any doctor do it, and some are going to abuse, because you've got crooked--some crooked doctors out there.

    ROONEY: Should they let every doctor do it?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: No.

    ROONEY: Well, what--who should do it and who shouldn't? Which...

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: They should be specified, I don't care by who--not by government, preferably--but by the medical profession, who certifies cardiac surgeons.

    ROONEY: You mean, it should be something that was--would be a certification, just like...

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Yes.

    ROONEY: ...being a--a...

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Yes.

    ROONEY: Is that true?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: That's a good way to control it.

    ROONEY: Where do you stand on capital punishment?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: I was neutral, but I will admit, like Socrates and Aristotle and Plato and some other philosophers, that there are instances where the death penalty would seem appropriate.

    ROONEY: What about--what about abortion?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Absolutely. Woman's choice. I'm for absolute autonomy of the individual, and an adult, com--mentally competent woman has absolute autonomy. It's her choice.

    ROONEY: But is not the fetus a person yet?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Whether the fetus...

    ROONEY: No rights?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: ...the fetus is a person or not, it can--the fetus' autonomy, if it exists or not, cannot supercede or equal the--the autonomy of the--of the mother carrying the fetus.

    ROONEY: I think the American public is puzzled about you. They don't know whether you're a--a medical philosopher or a nut. Which are you?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Probably both. You might say I'm a philosophic nut, or a nutty philosopher. It doesn't matter. Words don't mean anything. If you dig into anybody's character, you can find eccentricities if you can--you can characterize as nutty.

    ROONEY: But you--you've done some nutty things, though. I saw your picture of you in a--in a pillory, in a Thomas Jefferson ...(unintelligible)

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well, you know...

    ROONEY: Why would you do that?

    (Footage of Kevorkian bound; in wig)

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Well, for example, these are object lessons. Nothing's more powerful than object lessons.

    (Footage of death masks; paintings)

    ROONEY: (Voiceover) You seem abnormally obsessed with death.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: (Voiceover) Not at all.

    ROONEY: (Voiceover) But I've seen some of your art. I've read some of your book. Both your prose and your painting are macabre.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: (Voiceover) Well, OK, the one on war with a--where you have this body...

    ROONEY: (Voiceover) Macabre.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: (Voiceover) ...with the head on the plate in front of it.

    ROONEY: (Voiceover) Yeah, I would--I would tend to call that macabre.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: (Voiceover) What is war? When you look at that, do you get a good feeling?

    ROONEY: (Voiceover) No.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: You look at it. It's colorful. It's nice. It draws you to it. And then--which we do to war--and then you go through it and then say, `God, that was macabre!' That's the feeling I'm trying to convey with the painting. I--you look at that painting. You like looking at it. It's colorful. But you hate what you're looking at.

    ROONEY: In view of all these things, and--and how you are viewed by the American public as somewhat of an oddball, do you think that you are the right guy to have represented this cause about which you feel so strongly? Could someone else have done it better?

    Mr. FIEGER: No.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Maybe. Sure. Where is he? Where is she?

    ROONEY: Mm-hmm.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Look at--they criticize me. `You're not the poster child for this.' Fine. The reason I'm doing it in a fashion that's not entirely acceptable to everybody is because of the prosecutor--the--the prosecutor and the intimidation. They threaten me with jail; I'm hauled into court. We've got to hide things. They come in and confiscate everything in the house. This is almost brutal prosecutorial departmentalized...

    ROONEY: You haven't enjoyed it just a little bit? You look as though sometimes in court, you're enjoying it.

    Mr. FIEGER: We enjoy winning.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: What looks like enjoyment is--is the--is the sneer of contempt. That's not a smile.

    ROONEY: You're sneering?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Sneering in contempt, right. This last trial, I showed--I had to show contempt, not just say it. I've showed it.

    (From trial) Tell me I'm wrong!

    Prosecutor: You're wrong.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Prove it!

    Prosecutor: Easily.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Prove it! Cite a case on common law of assisted suicide pros--prosecution. Cite it!

    Prosecutor: Judge. You ...(unintelligible)

    Unidentified Judge: You were instructed not to ask questions. Speak before you ask.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: You can cite me for contempt, Your Honor. I don't care.

    Judge: It's time to take a break.

    Prosecutor: Thank you, judge.

    (End of excerpt)

    ROONEY: You advised him against being so contemptuous?

    Mr. FIEGER: Oh, absolutely. He doesn't listen to me. And of course, I don't listen to him. So we're equal on that ground.

    ROONEY: Now when you become involved with somebody who is terminally ill and you agree to help them end their lives, is there a charge in that?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: No. No.

    ROONEY: No money ever exchanges hands?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: No.

    Mr. FIEGER: He'd be in jail if...

    ROONEY: Is that true?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Yes.

    Mr. FIEGER: ...Andy, if--he'd be in jail if that was true.

    ROONEY: I haven't thought of that. Yeah.

    Mr. FIEGER: He would be in jail.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Why--why--first of all, money should--a transfer of money should never be involved in this profound situation. Although illness is profound, too, but medicine's a business today. It's a business. There is a way to solve it. The doctor who does this must be salaried. Now what you've done with that, you've had two--you've made--you create two big advantages. First, there's no incentive for the doctor to do more than he has to do. In fact, he wants to do less now. All salaried people would like to do less for the money. And second, you--you--you prevent abuse.

    ROONEY: Do you have a low opinion of other people in the medical field, doc--doctors?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Not of the--some--not of any of the people in the field. I have a low opinion of the organized profession, which I now no longer call a profession.

    ROONEY: What do you do about money?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Oh, I'm--I--first of all, I saved a little, because I knew what was coming.

    Mr. FIEGER: Dirt cheap.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Yeah, and I live cheap, right.

    ROONEY: You enjoy any--food or anything like that?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: No, I don't--I don't enjoy good food. I don't enjoy flashy cars. I don't care if I live in a dump. I don't enjoy good clothes. This is the best I've dressed in months.

    Mr. FIEGER: Tell him how much that suit cost.

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: But...

    Mr. FIEGER: He's proud of it. How much did that suit cost? It's a genuine ersatz Armani, isn't it?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Armani--it's an Armani copy, right. Right.

    Mr. FIEGER: Yeah, it's cheap. He told me it's genuine. Now...

    ROONEY: How much was that suit?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Fifteen bucks.

    Mr. FIEGER: Who shined that...

    ROONEY: Fifteen dollars.

    Mr. FIEGER: Who shined that suit?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: Oh, it came with the suit. There was original shine--right--$15.

    ROONEY: I didn't realize that you two were--were such a team. I can see that.

    Mr. FIEGER: Hm. Mm-hmm.

    ROONEY: Has this been good for your practice, or bad?

    Mr. FIEGER: Eith--neither. Well, they've gone after me, just legally. They're going after my license because of my defense of Jack.

    ROONEY: Did you really seriously worry about going to prison?

    Dr. KEVORKIAN: No, never. Am I a criminal? The world knows I'm not a criminal. What are they trying to put me in jail for? You've lost common sense in this society because of religious fanaticism and dogma. You're basing your laws and your whole outlook on natural life on mythology. It won't work. That's why you have all these problems in the world. Name them: India, Pakistan, Ireland. Name them--all these problems. They're all religious problems.

    ROONEY: You don't seem to feel very strongly about this issue, do you? What do you do for fun, Dr. Kevorkian? Dr. KEVORKIAN: Irritate people.

    ROONEY: Irritate people.


    OK Nobody will read any of that but basically Dr. Jack Kavorkian puts terminally ill people out of their misery by injecting his patient with a lethan overdose. Well Dr. Kavorkian doesn't actually kill the patient. There was one device where the patient would press the button to end own life.

    All cases were recorded on video and every single patient wanted to die and Dr. Kavorkian only did what the patient and family wanted and thats to put her/him out of their misery.

    Why should a human being be forced to suffer? If a dog is suffering then we put them to sleep. Why can't we do that with humans?

    OK I've said enough waffle now!



    I had an IQ test. The results came back negative
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    BOOOOOO!

    OK now your awake <IMG alt="image" alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/tongue.gif"&gt;

    I had an IQ test. The results came back negative
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well when you told me youd done a long reply to this thread mark i wasnt prepared for one that long <IMG alt="image" alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/eek.gif"&gt;

    From what ive heard of this Dr Kevorkian, i think what he did was ok.

    I have heard about this letting people starve to death and not giving them any thing to drink, and i really find that quite disturbing actually, i mean do the people actually have a choice in the matter?

    Or do two doctors just decide this person should die and they do?

    The thing im more interested in i suppose is the side of it when ur at home with a loved one and not in hospital if u get me.

    I find the whole hospital thing i dont know i just dont think it feels right especially starving someone to death, i mean if u dont want to eat u dont have to eat and if u dont want to drink u dont have to drink, so if u die then it has been ur choice but for someone to have that taken away from them is a bit cruel isnt it?

    I mean surely there are quicker ways to kill them than leave them to starve to death, well we know there is!

    And yet again ive lost the plot of my post as everyone is talking to me DOH!!
  • Girl-From-MarsGirl-From-Mars Posts: 2,822 Boards Guru
    i just read all of this post, like every last word all of it lol, but im not really in the right frame of mind to post a reply, having been almost falling asleep all day. this is a really interesting post i think!! just hope the length of the posts doesnt put some people off coz its a worthwhile t opic to discuss.

    no doubt ill write a proper reply sometime, but for the record im pro-euthanasia totally.

    It only takes one tree to make a thousand matches, only takes one match to burn a thousand trees
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i think this is a really hard topic to post about. i don't know what my feelings are. its kind of hard.

    i spose its ok, if the person is really suffering but i know that i would never be able to bring myself to do it to anyone. i just wouldn't be able to let go <IMG alt="image" alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/frown.gif"&gt;



    There's a girl in my mirror
    I wonder who she is
    Sometimes I think I know her
    Sometimes I really wish I did
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I personally am for Euthanasia, for pretty much every reason that has been outlined already by the excellent posts before. I think the problem really lies with emotion, because this is such an emotive subject, that can clearly be seen by society who doesn't have to see the pain and suffering that terminal illness brings to sufferers and thier families. As Mark said if an animal is suffering a terminal illness a vet wouldn't think twice about putting it to sleep, the only difference between an animal and a human is an animal can not comunicate its thoughts and feelings.

    I have never been in a position myself where someone I love has been in such physical and emotional pain where a mercy killing would ease the pain, I hope I never do. If I ever do find myself in such a position I hope I can be strong enough to respect what my loved one's wishes. If it ever went to a public vote, I would vote in favour of it.

    One thing that does get to me, is why people call it assisted suicide, which is a contradiction in terms <IMG alt="image" alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/frown.gif"&gt; (sorry me being perdantic)

    LUK

    I think it's because I'm clumsy
    I try not to talk to loud
    I think it's because I'm crazy
    I try not to act to proud
  • Girl-From-MarsGirl-From-Mars Posts: 2,822 Boards Guru
    whenever we've debated about euthanasia in schools or ive written about it in RE or something, ive used the example of pets too. we can put pets to sleep if theyre terminally ill and in terrible pain, why isnt there an equivalent for humans? more so because we can communicate feelings. i mean obviously the person would have to have some kind of counselling and doctors would have to certify theyre not gonna get better or that their quality of life would be awful if they carried on in that state. i mean people can commit suicide (i did hear somewhere, probably on that www.dumblaws.com that suicide used to be a capital crime!! madness), if theyre physically unable from being too weak or bedbound or something, and that is what they want, then why should they not be allowed to die with dignity instead of perhaps degenerating more and more and losing physical ability and mental faculties?

    whether or not id be able to go through with assisting someone's suicide is another matter. i think, like drifter, i wouldnt be able to let go. at the end of an illness, when someone dies, there are so many mixed emotions. yes relief that they are no longer in pain and dont have to suffer as they were doing any more.. but then theres the loss. i still miss my grandad and sometimes i feel that hes still there and think about seeing him again, until suddenly it hits me: hes gone. and that was a year ago last xmas.

    it was relatively quick, his death, he had cancer but no one realised until he went into hospital to have a minor operation, and then it all got worse and worse. i dont know what its like to witness someone going through a long, drawn out illness. i didnt even see my grandad after he got ill, my parents gave me the option of coming with them to see him in wales on xmas eve of 1999, but i wanted to remember him how he was, not in pain in a hospital bed. maybe goign to see him might have helped me accept his death and maybe then i wouldnt be expecting him to come down again soon. i dont think i could have helped him to die, i couldnt live with myself after it and i wouldnt want to lose him and would hold out every hope to the end. i cant imagine what it'd be like for someone i was really close to, like a best friend, my mum, or a partner.

    id like to say id be strong enough to do it, but i just dont know. and i hope i never have to find out.

    It only takes one tree to make a thousand matches, only takes one match to burn a thousand trees
Sign In or Register to comment.