Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

For or Against latest assisted suicide (euthanasia) bill? Watch

    • #1
    • Thread Starter
    #1

    There is a new bill being proposed about legalising assisted suicide (euthanasia) in the UK. The British Medical Journal seem to be backing it because patients have a "choice".

    What are your thoughts?

    I am am trying to work out how to create a poll: For, Against or Not Sure?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    ****ing idiots, killing depressed people wont solve anything.

    We have to cure the root of depression and make people feel so damn happy and welcome in our society that it makes them feel worth living.

    Hell I know speech therapy costs a sheet load of money more than a pill that has adverse affects like suicide, but sometimes effective speech therapy that is proven to work is needed in order for society to progress, the worst cases need speech therapy.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    If we are talking about "locked in syndrome", then watch the big questions, their was someone that got out of it and wouldn't be here today if she had been killed.

    Call it "euthanasia" or whatever you want, but at the end of the day it's "killing" of people who are in a worse situation than us.
    Disgusting society, that's going backwards, not forwards.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    If people are suffering and want to die, then with the right procedures and clearances, then yes, it should be legal.

    It's legal to euthanise pets when they are suffering and in pain because that way is 'humane', so why is it 'inhumane' if somebody says outright that they want to die?

    And it's not just locked in syndrome either. As I said, with the right procedures and clearances, then it would be okay if this person was euthanised. It should be strictly monitored to ensure that the process is just. Because I could see an unmonitored legalisation mean that people would happily murder their relatives or friends and pass it off as euthanasia.

    The bottom line is, why would you want to see someone suffer?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LaughingKitsune)
    If people are suffering and want to die, then with the right procedures and clearances, then yes, it should be legal.

    It's legal to euthanise pets when they are suffering and in pain because that way is 'humane', so why is it 'inhumane' if somebody says outright that they want to die?

    And it's not just locked in syndrome either. As I said, with the right procedures and clearances, then it would be okay if this person was euthanised. It should be strictly monitored to ensure that the process is just. Because I could see an unmonitored legalisation mean that people would happily murder their relatives or friends and pass it off as euthanasia.

    The bottom line is, why would you want to see someone suffer?
    Your last line clears the whole thing up. Agreed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think it as a whole should be legal... I think they should make at possible in the right circumstances because some people are in a position where all they experience is pain and theres no hope of getting better and some people cant deal with that. I think it should be made probable for some but not out-right legal.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Completely approve of this new bill, no one wants to suffer with no hope of getting better but not be able to have a say in when the suffering ends. It's not okay to force people to suffer for so much longer than they want to, it's actually quite barbaric to allow such suffering against the patients wishes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    Completely approve of this new bill, no one wants to suffer with no hope of getting better but not be able to have a say in when the suffering ends. It's not okay to force people to suffer for so much longer than they want to, it's actually quite barbaric to allow such suffering against the patients wishes.
    I concur. Word for word.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kumon)
    ****ing idiots, killing depressed people wont solve anything.

    We have to cure the root of depression and make people feel so damn happy and welcome in our society that it makes them feel worth living.

    Hell I know speech therapy costs a sheet load of money more than a pill that has adverse affects like suicide, but sometimes effective speech therapy that is proven to work is needed in order for society to progress, the worst cases need speech therapy.
    depression? I thought assisted suicide they are talking about people with terminal illnesses and in physical pain every day just waiting to die
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    It's the next logical step forward for palliative care, as long as appropriate checks are in place to ensure that euthanasia isn't utilised frivolously.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by G8D)
    You realise the Bill only deals with terminal illnesses? Depression is not mentioned.
    (Original post by Greg Jackson)
    depression? I thought assisted suicide they are talking about people with terminal illnesses and in physical pain every day just waiting to die
    No this paves the way for killing anyone, ie mainly depressed people. I could cite examples, but watch the Big questions on bbc debate to see.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I am totally in favour of euthanasia - more power to the individual and their independent autonomy over their own life
    don't infanticize and patronise adults - allow them to do what they want when there is consent - they're not children, and the people who exercise power over them are adults just as they are.
    I personally, in the mean time, don't think this bill goes far enough - *anybody* should have the right to end their lives through euthanasia, provided they're an adult, or they're at least a teenager with a terminal illness with the parents' consent
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kumon)
    No this paves the way for killing anyone, ie mainly depressed people. I could cite examples, but watch the Big questions on bbc debate to see.
    That's actually one of the stupidest comments I've seen. If this bill is passed and placed there will be extremely strict measures and protocols put in place to ensure those opting for assisted suicide are in the right state of mind whilst doing so and are not being coerced. Not to mention this is for terminal illnesses, this has NOTHING to do with depression.
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by G8D)
    It doesn't do anything of the sort. It allows terminally ill people (ie those with irreversible ailments that will kill them), of requisite awareness and competence, to opt to die in a controlled and dignified way.
    The definition of terminal in Lord Falconer's Bill and the clarification on treatment in section 2 can apply to type 1 diabetes. http://www.publications.parliament.u...0006/15006.pdf

    So yes this *is* about deciding that some people with depression are right to be suicidal while other people will have their depression treated.

    and because the voices of the people most at risk from this bill are rarely heard:
    http://porbeagle.blogspot.co.uk/2013...some-many.html
    http://mikesivier.wordpress.com/2014...-them-to-live/
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mik-...b_5472241.html
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mik-...b_5528919.html
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with the bill. It's about time the actual person in the situation should have their own say in whether they want to die or not. Other people will not understand so this needs to be taken into account. Personally, I would rather die with dignity than endure a low quality of life to the extent that I can't even speak to my family about how I feel because they won't understand.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    The definition of terminal in Lord Falconer's Bill and the clarification on treatment in section 2 can apply to type 1 diabetes. http://www.publications.parliament.u...0006/15006.pdf

    So yes this *is* about deciding that some people with depression are right to be suicidal while other people will have their depression treated.

    and because the voices of the people most at risk from this bill are rarely heard:
    http://porbeagle.blogspot.co.uk/2013...some-many.html
    http://mikesivier.wordpress.com/2014...-them-to-live/
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mik-...b_5472241.html
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mik-...b_5528919.html
    I have read all of those accounts, and they are very touching. As they suggest, it does have huge societal implications.

    Though, I did notice how you only compiled the against side :P

    One of the problems it seems it that it applies to a fairly broad set of people - those with a prognosis of 6 months to live. Surely, as they say, that could lead to those being killed or choosing to be killed - when it is not the best decision for them.

    Maybe with better regulation it could work well such as the approval of family members required; greater regulation, with more than 2 physicians; and greater definition on when it is allowed to be carried out - as it stands it as they say, it could lead to a culture of an obligation to die.

    The point about the conflict of interest of GP's as they are financially responsible for health care is quite a big one, whilst the similarities drawn to Hitler's Germany was fairly potent (though hopefully very sensationalist).
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anonymous)
    There is a new bill being proposed about legalising assisted suicide (euthanasia) in the UK. The British Medical Journal seem to be backing it because patients have a "choice".

    What are your thoughts?

    I am am trying to work out how to create a poll: For, Against or Not Sure?
    'Absolutely opposed'!!!!

    For the state to effectively endorse suicide is something I find utterly abhorrent and offensive, indeed as the old saying goes "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

    Evidence from countries in Europe where this is legal suggests that what starts out as being restricted will slowly be expanded to include "suffering" and the definition will expand. Having a mother who has been sectioned and been able to kid the doctors into releasing her by lying about how well she feels (more than once) means that I have absolutely no faith in the ability of this law to apply only to a select few in the long term and i'll be dammed if the state will allow my family members to die whether they want to or not.

    As a card carrying Tory and Orange Book sympathiser I will even say that should any government party officially endorse this bill, I will rip up my membership and never ever vote for them again.

    One of the first duties of the state should be to protect its citizens from harm, even themselves. I don't give a crap whether that's authoritarian or not.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    'Absolutely opposed'!!!!

    For the state to effectively endorse suicide is something I find utterly abhorrent and offensive, indeed as the old saying goes "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

    Evidence from countries in Europe where this is legal suggests that what starts out as being restricted will slowly be expanded to include "suffering" and the definition will expand. Having a mother who has been sectioned and been able to kid the doctors into releasing her by lying about how well she feels (more than once) means that I have absolutely no faith in the ability of this law to apply only to a select few in the long term and i'll be dammed if the state will allow my family members to die whether they want to or not.

    As a card carrying Tory and Orange Book sympathiser I will even say that should any government party officially endorse this bill, I will rip up my membership and never ever vote for them again.

    One of the first duties of the state should be to protect its citizens from harm, even themselves. I don't give a crap whether that's authoritarian or not.
    Have you even read the bill?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    Have you even read the bill?
    I'm aware that's its currently restricted to terminal illnesses but then so it was in European countries. I can well see a slippery slope.

    I will never believe that the state should be permitted to endorse suicide for its citizens regardless.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I'm aware that's its currently restricted to terminal illnesses but then so it was in European countries. I can well see a slippery slope.

    I will never believe that the state should be permitted to endorse suicide for its citizens regardless.
    I hate the slippery slope argument it's a complete fallacy and I doubt anything like that would happen in this country.

    And it's not endorsement, it's giving an option. They aren't going to be putting up billboards saying "hey, why don't you kill yourself?".

    I think it's disgusting to force someone who is in so much pain and is going to die very soon anyway to live when they don't want to but don't have the strength to do anything about it themselves.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.