Euthanasia Your thoughts

[happy_tiger]

Currently they are talking about this on QnA on the ABC

Was wondering if you are for it or against ??

It is difficult subject and has so many branches to it

In the sense that I believe if you have a disease or illness that we are far away from a cure and you have a timeframe which you will suffer painfully and insufferably for years I am totally in agreeance that you should have the legal right of choice to end your life

It must be under controlled conditions and obviously you would need multiple doctors opinions in agreeance

However each case should be handled seperately by an independant commission

Hopefully we are all mature enough to treat this thread with the respect it deserves

 

[tigerdan]

Very difficult topic.

In principle i am for it but i can't possibly see how to properly legislate it.

Laws would have to cover what diseases eathanasia applies to and at what time it can be performed.

This may seen easy in common sense but to properly cover this in a law that will no doubt be tested in the courts is near immpossible.

In responce to sum of your thoughts

"It must be under controlled conditions and obviously you would need multiple doctors opinions in agreeance" This is a good solution as it make the choice a medical decision rather that a legal one. Probably the one way to ever get anywhere. Although doctors will need to work within an illness/time frame work to hopefully prevent poor decisions.

"However each case should be handled seperately by an independant commission" Cant see this working it would be a bureaucratic nightmare. People would die before there case ever gets heard. And funding would be a further issue.

 

[underdog]

You get to live life by your own terms. You should be able to make the ultimate choice when the time arises.

Yes, i'm for it.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

You get to live life by your own terms. You should be able to make the ultimate choice when the time arises.

Yes, i'm for it.

That pretty much echoes my sentiments.

 

[stryker]

For it. Always have been.

 

[Stripes96]

I'm not really sure, because it really depends on the patient. Yeah, sure if they are 90-odd and going to die, but what if a 20-year-old has some fatal disease? How do we know there won't be a cure tomorrow, or they miraculously get better? That's where the fine line is I think
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[slacko]

Very much for it
And I'll go as far as saying the following, of you have lost a love one to cancer you are for it. And we won't see it in my life time due t the Australian Christian Lobby group, scum group who want everyone to live their way.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[dermo]

Im all for the concept of it but there are some grey areas I think. For example, I feel that the person needs to be deemed in a state of mental health that is such that they can make an informed decision on it. I no it sounds bad but you could have people influencing the decision for the own monetary gain following that persons death. Also as others have said should there be an age limit? How low does the chance of someone living have to be before they can choose this or is it up to them?

 

[cktiger]

This quote always makes me think twice about where legalising euthanasia might lead …
_"Those who promote this last, fatal escape as a "right" should remember that such a "right" may quickly become an expectation and, finally, even a "duty" to die. We fear eventually some individuals and families will be forced to put financial concerns above the needs of loved ones."_
There would have to be pretty strict guidlines in place to make sure the person suffering isn't agreeing only for the financial benefits to their family (even though they may feel this is a good enough reason).
Having been in the situation in the last month where my wifes cousin (who lives overseas) did not want to be operated on for cancer because it would be a financial burden to his family brings this to light.
Although not strictly euthanasia it leads you to think money could be a factor for a lot of people.
In his case my missus and the rest of her family put in the money for the operation only to get the bad news he was too far gone to help and only had a few months to live.
Who knows though - maybe it could have gone the other way?

 

[happy_tiger]

I'm not really sure, because it really depends on the patient. Yeah, sure if they are 90-odd and going to die, but what if a 20-year-old has some fatal disease? How do we know there won't be a cure tomorrow, or they miraculously get better? That's where the fine line is I think
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

That's why we would need multiple doctors involved

If scientests were close to a cure , the doctors could be made aware

But then again with the time taken for studies to be done on the drug or cure and to be tested to see of it fits all the criteria you would probably find it would be in vain

 

[DonnyBrasco]

I'm not really sure, because it really depends on the patient. Yeah, sure if they are 90-odd and going to die, but what if a 20-year-old has some fatal disease? How do we know there won't be a cure tomorrow, or they miraculously get better? That's where the fine line is I think
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

That's why we would need multiple doctors involved

If scientests were close to a cure , the doctors could be made aware

But then again with the time taken for studies to be done on the drug or cure and to be tested to see of it fits all the criteria you would probably find it would be in vain

Cure?

When was the last time a cure was found for something decent, there is no money to be made in cures, but heaps to be made to keep alive long enough to make zillions.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

 

[foreveratiger]

I work in a hospital and get paid to look after patients a definite yes.
Patients can choose to be NFR while there in hospital , which means Not For Resus in the event of an emergency. You have that legal right.

 

[Saturnalia]

**People would die before there case ever gets heard**. And funding would be a further issue.

Have to admit I laughed at that.

I'm 100% for it. Although I can understand the governments reluctance to allow shrinkage of the workforce.

 

[happy_tiger]

I'm not really sure, because it really depends on the patient. Yeah, sure if they are 90-odd and going to die, but what if a 20-year-old has some fatal disease? How do we know there won't be a cure tomorrow, or they miraculously get better? That's where the fine line is I think
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

That's why we would need multiple doctors involved

If scientests were close to a cure , the doctors could be made aware

But then again with the time taken for studies to be done on the drug or cure and to be tested to see of it fits all the criteria you would probably find it would be in vain

Cure?

When was the last time a cure was found for something decent, there is no money to be made in cures, but heaps to be made to keep alive long enough to make zillions.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_

Watched a very interesting programme in regards to autism and possible cures and they were talking about a possible cure or reversing of the affects of autism It is an antibiotic which is the top of the line which they have no back up for currently if something was to become viral and go global they have no back up which could cause millions or billions of death My understanding of what they were explaining was that once they find a stronger top of the line Antibiotic than they have they will start to use the original antibiotic for cures of some diseases

 

[Peaches]

I am definately for it.
I am not sure how, but it has to happen. Freedom to live I think also means you should be able to choose your time.

 

[GoldXR50Leroy]

There are so many variables here that this a a subject fraught with danger, I have seen my Father suffer from Pancreatic cancer that wracked his once healthy body to a mere skeleton, once having been diagnosed I'm sure Dad would have favoured euthenasia as I commented 'carelessly' that you couldn't open the hospital window to allow some fresh air in, Dad replied that if he could have opened the window he would have jumped.
In this day and age where we think you can freeze a body by cryrogenics why shouldn't all patients in a vulnerable state of health have the right to be snapped frozen so that when the science evolves to cure their diseases they can be thawed and cured.
According to reports a cure for cancer is just around the corner but how long are we prepared to wait, does it all revolve around money, yes, if you have the means you can be cured, if you can wait an eternity.

 

[citizen_cub]

Been examining the issue closely in PRS (Philosophy and Religious Studies) at school.

Very situational IMO. I'm not in favour of paraplegics being granted the right to euthanasia as they can still maintain a certain quality of life I.E. They can read, write, talk and in some instances move. You need look no further than the paralympics to see how fulfilling a paraplegic's life can be through resilience and an optimistic outlook on life. It is also demoralising for other and future paraplegics, as they are led to believe their lives are useless and not worth living.

HOWEVER, if somebody is essentially a 'vegetable', both heavily mentally and physically constrained, needs 24 hour care, is in constant pain and facing an imminent death I'm ALL for it. NO quality of life can be maintained and you'll find it is almost ALWAYS within the best interests of family and friends to have their loved one put out of their misery. But they can't due to Australian laws.

 

[Saturnalia]

I'm not in favour of paraplegics being granted the right to euthanasia

Do non-disabled people have a right to commit suicide?

 

[citizen_cub]

I'm not in favour of paraplegics being granted the right to euthanasia

Do non-disabled people have a right to commit suicide?

No, they don't. They can maintain a good quality of life and any problems they may have I.E. Mental illnesses, can be overcome providing the correct measures are undertaken. It would be an insult to those are disabled, who would do anything to walk again, to see able bodied people throwing their lives away.

 

[Saturnalia]

No, they don't. They can maintain a good quality of life and any problems they may have I.E. Mental illnesses, can be overcome providing the correct measures are undertaken.

Regardless, it's not illegal to commit or attempt suicide (at least in NSW afaik). Bearing that in mind, I think it's stupid you can be **convicted for assisting someone, to do something not illegal.**

It would be an insult to those are disabled, who would do anything to walk again, to see able bodied people throwing their lives away.

Should not even be a consideration, they can live their lives how they wish.

**ALTHOUGH**

you could take a person who has commited suicide, and transplant their organs/marrow/spinal cord/ other bits and pieces to help a disabled person…..