stonerblue
Well-Known Member
No, it isn't.
Neither is people being kept alive with no quality of life and no prospect of recovery.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Assisted dying
- Thread starter law74
- Start date
Neither is people being kept alive with no quality of life and no prospect of recovery.
hilts
Well-Known Member
Not sure of your point tbh, if someone is in severe pain and there is only one way out of that pain then it should be open to them. Your assertion that someone might be in pain longer is a tad odd.How do you know it’ll be a painful drawn out death. Medical professionals are very bad at giving prognosis in weeks or months. Days and years they are better at. People given 6 months to live still alive 5 years later isn’t unheard of.
If someone lives pain free for 6 months or 5 years then they ain't likely to want assisted dying.
Unless your arguing there is some length of time that people should you know have to put with being in pain.
Some odd arguments going on.
hilts
Well-Known Member
This insistence on keeping people alive who don't want to be is fucking strange. Like you can nip down the road for a death jab whenever you like if this comes in.No, it isn't.
Neither is people being kept alive with no quality of life and no prospect of recovery.
I think the Canadian consideration/proposal for a possible expansion is something that should be watched carefully.Not sure where this notion that mentally ill people could be 'offered' AD has come from regarding the uk bill.
I presume the very limited criteria to 'qualify' rules out those who are not deemed 'sane'.
On a philosophical level, i think anybody should be able to control their own life, even those suffering depression. Most people diagnosed with a long term debillitating illness will also suffer from depression once their future is laid out before them (my mrs was suicidal on and off for a couple of years).
In fact, i'd say that somebody knowing a process is in place for when/if it all comes on top would look at their future in a slightly more positive light.
Saying all that, i think mental health issues and physical health issues shouldn't be lumped in together regarding AD.
To add to that I think if the UK allows AD for simply what is suggested at this moment then it's hard to disagree with it.
It's any expansion for purely mental illness that alarms.
johnny crossan
Well-Known Member
BBC giving the proponents and supporters of assisted dying prime time at every opportunity. (1 in 3 death prescriptions in Canada currently not used and 90% of the patients concerned still living 5 years later expressing relief that they did not go ahead!)
blue b4 the moon
Well-Known Member
It's an awfully difficult subject. My step father-in-law was severely disabled from quite young due to a motorcycle accident and gradually got worse. He was on not for rescuss 3/4 times, in/out of hospital for years, carers winching him out of bed at home, sat watching TV all day etc... basically a crap life after his wife passed for about 15 years until he passed aged 80.
He'd have signed up for the jab but his daughters wouldn't have let him if an open choice.
He'd have signed up for the jab but his daughters wouldn't have let him if an open choice.
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
No they are not.BBC giving the proponents and supporters of assisted dying prime time at every opportunity. (1 in 3 death prescriptions in Canada currently not used and 90% of the patients concerned still living 5 years later expressing relief that they did not go ahead!)
Do you think they're pushing some sort of agenda?