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.
Options
the right to die
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
couldn't see a topic on this, sorry if i missed it! what are people's thoughts on the tony nicklinson case? link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/23/tony-nicklinson-assisted-suicide-twitter-interview?newsfeed=true
apparently the decision is most likely to be made in september. do you think he should have the right to die? would it open up a can of worms around notions of 'quality of life' for people with a disability?
after watching the desperately sad documentary that was on last week. i think tony should have the right to die with the assistance of someone else and that the person helping should be protected from prosecution. the right to die and the right to life are inextricably linked and i believe both are just as important as the other. denying him the right do die because he is severely disabled in my mind is wrong. if one of our pets were suffering like this we would be advised to euthanise it.
i dont think that by carefully examining tony's case and hopefully allowing him that right is going to cause partners to suddenly start poisoning their wheelchair bound spouse. years ago, tony wouldn't have survived the stroke but because of new fangled medical science he was able to 'live'. if medicine has progressed so much then i think the law should follow suit.
apparently the decision is most likely to be made in september. do you think he should have the right to die? would it open up a can of worms around notions of 'quality of life' for people with a disability?
after watching the desperately sad documentary that was on last week. i think tony should have the right to die with the assistance of someone else and that the person helping should be protected from prosecution. the right to die and the right to life are inextricably linked and i believe both are just as important as the other. denying him the right do die because he is severely disabled in my mind is wrong. if one of our pets were suffering like this we would be advised to euthanise it.
i dont think that by carefully examining tony's case and hopefully allowing him that right is going to cause partners to suddenly start poisoning their wheelchair bound spouse. years ago, tony wouldn't have survived the stroke but because of new fangled medical science he was able to 'live'. if medicine has progressed so much then i think the law should follow suit.
0
Comments
I can see why people might like the idea but it's so full of pitfalls that I think we currently have it right.
There are at least two sides to the pressure to end lives earlier than otherwise might scenario though, especially for those with degenerative illnesses. If you know that once you lose more of your motor skills, you'll also lose the option of being able to chose to die, then there's potentially pressure to end your own life while you still can,
Besides, as far as I can't tell even the man in the article doesn't have a terminal illness, he just doesn't want to live the way he will with the one he has.
It does get really complicated when someone doesn't have the capacity to take their own life because it puts someone else in the frame. I don't think anyone can fully understand or judge the quality of life of someone else apart from the individual themselves.
Do you mean suicide in general or assisted suicide? Sorry if I'm being slow!
No, that's not where I draw the line at all.
If you want death, then death should be yours to have.
If you've still got the motor skills required to take your own life - then currently you can. The problem comes when you've got the mental capacity, but not the physical ability. If your carer follows your instructions - then they are lining themselves up for a criminal prosection.
To me there are almost two separate questions - one is about whether anyone should have the right to decide end their own life, if you then take the answer to that as yes, the question is then whether those with physical disabilities should also have that entitlement even if assisstance is required.
EDIT: I guess what I really think is that anyone, before making an irreversible choice as serious as this, should be confirmed to have the mental capacity AND a clear enough mind to make it. That of course raised the question of how you determine that. In some cases it might be simple but in many others it's not. When it's not, shouldn't you err on the side of caution? The question then is which side that is.
Whilst I can understand people wanting to end their own lives, and accepting that sometimes it is necessary, I think asking a doctor to actually do all of it is too much, assuming they can find a doctor who actually would.
.
Why should they not? Note I'm referring to people who would, you know, not be considered to be insane.