Would you support the legalisation of euthanasia? Watch

Poll: Would you legalise euthanasia?
Yes- I am in support of legalising euthanasia (88)
76.52%
No- I would not support legalising euthanasia (14)
12.17%
I am undecided (13)
11.3%
viddy9
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
I am in favour of legalising both voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia (although I have less confidence in this), but not involuntary (forced) euthanasia.

By legalising voluntary euthanasia, we respect the preferences and autonomy of people, and we also reduce suffering in the world, just like we put down nonhuman animals when they are suffering. Evidence from Oregon, the Netherlands and other places where voluntary euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide has been legalised suggests that it is very unlikely that a slippery-slope will occur.

A 2009 review study conducted by the Dutch government into the euthanasia system in the Netherlands concluded that “no slippery slope seems to have occurred”. Similarly, another 2009 study found that “euthanasia practices have evolved in such a way that patients are more likely to talk about euthanasia than to die a euthanasia death”, suggesting that abuse of the system is rare. A 2010 paper similarly concluded that, were assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia to be legalised in the United Kingdom, “there is no evidence that legalizing [it] will lead us down the slippery slope to involuntary euthanasia.”

Opponents also often present a false dichotomy between palliative care and assisted suicide – it's perfectly possible to have widespread palliative care along with legal assisted suicide. In Oregon, for example, 86% of those who took the option of physician-assisted suicide in 2013 were already receiving palliative care. From 1998-2012, 90.5% of people were already receiving palliative care. Therefore, opponents of assisted suicide ignore the reality of the situation, because in many cases, no amount of palliative care can relieve the suffering and agony that many terminally ill people go through as they end their lives. And, even if it could, we should still respect the preferences of the individual.

As for non-voluntary euthanasia, this applies when people are in a vegetative state, for example. They are not self-conscious, rational, or autonomous, and so considerations of a right to life or of respecting autonomy do not apply. If they have no experiences at all, and can never have any again, their lives have no intrinsic value. It would better to spend money on other patients and save more lives.

We can already turn off life support and sign 'do not resuscitate' forms, and I don't see any logical distinction that can be made between 'killing' and 'letting die'.
0
reply
aoxa
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
Absolutely.

It would reduce pain and suffering for so many people, rather than them having to struggle on until their death.
0
reply
Rum Ham
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
Yes absolutely. I honestly don't know anyone who opposes the legalisation of euthanasia

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
zippity.doodah
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by barnetlad)
I am opposed.

I think it would be the slippery slope to some kind of Orwellian nightmare. It might start with people with terminal illnesses who had perhaps a few weeks to live, but then would grow to include others who would live for months if not years, I expect. The experience of the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland seems to bear this out.

I think there would be people who would be put under pressure to make the decision from money grabbing relatives, or just uncaring ones, or even because of their poor living conditions such as in a retirement/nursing home.
so you're saying that people right now who are currently enduring the most heinously painful diseases/conditions ought to continue that kind of torturing living simply because you think there will be certain families who are unbelievably (the right word to use here) selfsh
0
reply
JD8897
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
I support it as plenty of people live in horrible conditions where they cannot live without suffering or pain, such as the severely disabled. However there should be large restrictions so emo's cant just kill themselves because they "want to die"
0
reply
Normal.Person
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by Europhile)
slippery slope towards something with good intention, a liberal way of thinking, being abused by those with other motives.
Hm.. I disagree, I don't think the process will be as easy as "Hi. I want to die. [end]"
0
reply
Coffinman
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by Spock's Socks)
Yes absolutely. I honestly don't know anyone who opposes the legalisation of euthanasia Posted from TSR Mobile
I oppose for the reasons given in this article.
The majority of NHS hospitals in England are being given financial rewards for placing terminally-ill patients on a controversial “pathway” to death, it can be disclosed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/heal...e-pathway.html
0
reply
Vickyc16xx
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by Vickyc16xx)
I feel like it should be allowed but before hand the person that wants to be euthanised should go to convulsing so they know it's exactly what they want and not just an impulse decision. I think that the person should also be above a certain age.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Can I just say It was meant to say therapy I have no idea why it's says convulsing sorry everyone


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Inazuma
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by randdom)
I strongly feel that legalising euthanasia is not a good idea. I think that we only need to look at the countries that have gone before us to see the potential dangers of legalising it. There have been cases in recent years of people who have mental health issues, non-terminal illness and children all undergoing euthanasia in European countries. While these things tend to start being strictly enforced as only adults with full capacity and significant life limiting conditions precedent in many European countries suggests that it doesn't stay that way. I think to protect the vulnerable (the elderly, those with mental health issues etc) I could not support a change in the law.
You do realise people with mental health issues, non-terminal illness and children have all been allowed to die in the UK, just without euthanasia this has been a much more painful process?




Anyway, my own point having extensively studied it is that we should have the autonomy to decide for ourselves.
The law as it is is horrific for people currently - while we say it's not legal, it is in many ways. You can go abroad, and chances are you won't be prosecuted - but the guidelines are uncertain and that's not right.
In addition it's allowed in some cases (as above) but in much worse ways. (Re A, Nancy Fitzmaurice etc.)
Not to mention passive euthanasia - what's the difference between switching off a machine (arguably an 'action') and giving an injection? - It's pure luck who ends up with certain illnesses that give rise to passive euthanasia, than those like Pratchett who end up with incurable diseases but no allowance for active euthanasia.
And anyone disabled has no right to be able to commit suicide simply because they aren't able bodied enough to do so alone.
0
reply
FelixTheKat
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
I am opposed, not because of the slippery slope or because safeguards will overtime fall.
I am opposed because if you want to to die, you are BY DEFINITION not in the right mental state to make that decision.
0
reply
Arbolus
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by FelixTheKat)
I am opposed, not because of the slippery slope or because safeguards will overtime fall.
I am opposed because if you want to to die, you are BY DEFINITION not in the right mental state to make that decision.
According to who? Not any of the definitions of "right mental state" that I've heard of.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Asolare
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
Absolutely support it.

It's your life and you have the choice whether you want to end it or not.
0
reply
izzz98
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
Its like religious GCSE all over again
0
reply
thunder_chunky
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
Legalise it. Unless you want to force people with terminal illnesses to suffer to the bitter end.
If someone with Dementia wants to end it then let them, and to hell with your goddamn slippery slope arguments.
1
reply
RF_PineMarten
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
I'm not sure. I understand the arguments for it, like terminally ill people who would rather die quickly via euthanasia than die slowly and in extreme pain. But at the same time I feel like it could end up being used in cases where it shouldn't, like people possible being pressured into doing it when they don't really want to, or perhaps people with perfectly treatable mental conditions.

There would have to be very strict guidelines and regulations in place to prevent that sort of thing before I'd be able to support it. I don't know what exactly is in this particular bill though, for all I know it could cover all this stuff fine.
0
reply
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Birkenhead)
This isn't the principal concern with euthanasia. The principal concern is that many people, whether out of their own sense of guilt or coercion by others, will sign up to die when their heart isn't really in it. Another concern is that the boundaries will be stretched (as they inevitably will) to the point that it becomes little more than a suicide booth for people who may be overwhelmed by treatable mental health problems, financial worries and other fixable and temporary problems.
Like this:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/red...l-suite,33084/
0
reply
HuggleyDuck
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
I'm not entirely sure where I stand on this as I believe people, not the state, should be have full autonomy of their own bodies, but there are also vulnerable people who may be at risk... I think if it was legalised it should happen slowly so the full impact can be assessed (e.g. for the first years only individuals with terminal illnesses, and then expand the range of people slowly).
0
reply
Actaeon
Badges: 11
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
I think we should really make clear that the Right to Die bill is not about euthanasia!

This bill is about Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS), aka Assisted Dying, which is an apparently similar, but very different procedure.

Euthanasia means the doctor kills the patient upon their request.
PAS means the doctor provides the means for the patient to kill themselves, upon their request.

It is entirely possible to be against euthanasia, but in favour of PAS, like me.

Furthermore, this bill is aimed at those given 6 months to live. It places the emphasis on an alternative means of dying, rather than an alternative to life. This is for people who are dying painfully, have no hope of recovery, and would like to take control over their own death. This is again different to euthanasia, which is generally a broader concept.

PAS means that the patient has total control over the process until the end, provides a clear demonstration of free will, and prevents a lot of the fears over euthanasia, which is why I support it.

So it would be good if everyone could de-associate the Falconer bill and euthanasia - they are two very different things.
0
reply
SarcasticMel
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
Yes. No question about it.

I don't see how anyone can be so audacious as to be against it - what two people decide to do has nothing to do with you. And simply saying well I'm against it because how can we be sure the person wants to die, that's silly. How can you be sure of anything...


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Ripper Phoenix
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
(Original post by SarcasticMel)
Yes. No question about it.

I don't see how anyone can be so audacious as to be against it - what two people decide to do has nothing to do with you. And simply saying well I'm against it because how can we be sure the person wants to die, that's silly. How can you be sure of anything...


Posted from TSR Mobile
don't you think that family pressure and money matters whereby a rich person dying can be "forced" into euthanasia so that the relatives can take advantage of his property and finance is a sufficient reason! You have talked about the autonomy of the patient. You have however forgotten that we are all humans and some people are easily influenced by others. I could play the perfect relative taking care of my multi billionaire uncle so as to extort money by getting my name on that advanced directive.

Also it is religiously not right and in obvious common sense that someone else should not have the right to decide whether someone should live or die! I'm totally against it.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (23)
6.74%
They might tell the bully (33)
9.68%
I don't think they'd understand (52)
15.25%
It might lead to more bullying (131)
38.42%
There's nothing they could do (102)
29.91%

Watched Threads

View All