Should euthanasia be legalised in the UK?

Watch this thread
Poll: Should euthanisia be legalised in the UK?
Yes (75)
78.13%
No (21)
21.88%
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#21
Report 7 years ago
#21
(Original post by Reluire)
Yes, but many people who want to go abroad to countries like Switzerland can't because they don't want their loved ones to be prosecuted for 'assisting' them. Why do you think it's okay for them to go abroad and do it but not in our own country?



Can you stop using the 'slippery slope' argument please. It's fallacious and fails as an argument.
you only want me to stop using it because it is true. it is ironic that you were giving me a hard time for my support for the death penalty... now you want your own version of it for the elderly !
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#22
Report 7 years ago
#22
(Original post by Drewski)
Has it not occurred to you that people may well want to end their life when things get beyond their control? That they don't want to carry on merely existing rather than living?

I know my parents have both long said exactly that, that they don't want to get to the point where Alzheimer's or dementia robs them ofeverything that makes them then.

Why deny people who are perfectly sane and rational from making a choice about their own lives? Who are you to dictate to them what they should do?
who are you to decide what people should do ?
0
reply
miser
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#23
Report 7 years ago
#23
Yes. I don't believe the state has the right to force people to live if they don't want to.
0
reply
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#24
Report 7 years ago
#24
(Original post by the bear)
who are you to decide what people should do ?
I'm not saying people should or shouldn't. I'm saying they should be trusted with the ability to make their own decision, something you seem intent on not giving them. And for no other reason than you think you know better.
0
reply
hellodave5
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#25
Report 7 years ago
#25
Not a black and white question. We would have come up with a solution already if it was a simple 'yes' 'no' response. Has such vast and multifaceted societal implications.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#26
Report 7 years ago
#26
(Original post by the bear)
you only want me to stop using it because it is true. it is ironic that you were giving me a hard time for my support for the death penalty... now you want your own version of it for the elderly !
No I want you to stop using it because it's misleading and works on the premise of presumptions. That kind of argument would never hold up in court.

The death penalty and euthanasia are entirely different issues. Euthanasia is about autonomy whereas the death penalty has nothing to do with autonomy.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#27
Report 7 years ago
#27
(Original post by Reluire)
Yes, but many people who want to go abroad to countries like Switzerland can't because they are unable by themselves don't want their loved ones to be prosecuted for 'assisting' them. At present you can be charged with manslaughter for assisted suicide abroad. Why do you think it's okay for them to go abroad and do it but not in our own country?

Can you stop using the 'slippery slope' argument please. It's fallacious and fails as an argument.
Simply because our state should not endorse such decadence. I can only imagine ever looser restrictions and eventually service on the NHS if this were allowed. The thought of my taxes paying for a citizens death is repulsive.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#28
Report 7 years ago
#28
(Original post by Reluire)
No I want you to stop using it because it's misleading and works on the premise of presumptions. That kind of argument would never hold up in court.

The death penalty and euthanasia are entirely different issues. Euthanasia is about autonomy whereas the death penalty has nothing to do with autonomy.
Euthanasia is in theory about autonomy; in practice everyone is embedded in society, no matter how special they think they are. Human nature would ensure that this theoretically noble process of leaving a tragic existence would soon descend into a de facto obligation on the unfortunate to give in to implicit or explict pressure to be killed.
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#29
Report 7 years ago
#29
(Original post by Rakas21)
I'm not convinced these people know what's good for them and I'm happy for the state to keep these people alive through force.

Its already legal to go abroad yourself to a state which allows this, that's as far as I think we should go. Perhaps I'd prefer those who go with them to be given a fine over prison.

Personally I'm not sure I can ever be convinced. I'm so against it right now that if the Tories did this tomorrow I may never vote for them again.

Allowing its citizens to end their lives is not the action of a moral state.
So do you disagree with the legalisation of suicide in 1961 (by a tory government under Harold Macmillan, I believe)?
0
reply
felamaslen
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#30
Report 7 years ago
#30
(Original post by the bear)
hard cases make bad law. again it is a slippery slope; once you open the floodgates it will soon become accepted that Granny should bite the bullet and do the decent thing.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of things which are technically legal, but still taboo.
0
reply
Doctor_Einstein
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#31
Report 7 years ago
#31
(Original post by llanber)
What are your opinions surrounding euthanasia, should it be legalised in the UK?
Considering the legal and moral aspects of the issue.

If so, why?

If you are against it, how come?


It would be great if you could reply- I'm writing a dissertation on euthanasia so I would love to hear others opinions!

Thank you
Yes it is too expensive to spend valuable resources on those who don't wish to be alive.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#32
Report 7 years ago
#32
(Original post by Rakas21)
Simply because our state should not endorse such decadence. I can only imagine ever looser restrictions and eventually service on the NHS if this were allowed. The thought of my taxes paying for a citizens death is repulsive.
Like the bear, I think you've fallen into the 'slippery slope' trap which is argumentatively flawed. It doesn't make sense to reject something because of presumption of what something could descend into. Anything could ascend or descend into anything for all we know, but we don't know - so how can we use arguments that are based on things we don't know?

(Original post by the bear)
Euthanasia is in theory about autonomy; in practice everyone is embedded in society, no matter how special they think they are. Human nature would ensure that this theoretically noble process of leaving a tragic existence would soon descend into a de facto obligation on the unfortunate to give in to implicit or explict pressure to be killed.
But you don't know that's what it would descend into. And you can't argue with presumptions. But we're making progress as it seems you accept that in its noble form, euthanasia is ethical?
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#33
Report 7 years ago
#33
(Original post by felamaslen)
So do you disagree with the legalisation of suicide in 1961 (by a tory government under Harold Macmillan, I believe)?
In practice you can't prosecute somebody who's dead and there's nothing to gain from prosecuting somebody who's just taken 20 tablets.

So in my view it should have never been illegal in the first place.

..

Assisted dying though is very different. Its the state allowing the NHS or whoever to actively end a life. Its an abomination of the states duty to protect its citizens.
0
reply
pjm600
Badges: 18
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#34
Report 7 years ago
#34
(Original post by felamaslen)
It is not directly comparable. Abortion involves another life - I oppose late-term abortions, and even mid-term ones. Euthanasia is the exercise of one's rights over one's own self, and only one's own self.
No, it isn't. Assisted suicide is allowing to use that right, euthanasia is killing them.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#35
Report 7 years ago
#35
(Original post by Reluire)
Like the bear, I think you've fallen into the 'slippery slope' trap which is argumentatively flawed. It doesn't make sense to reject something because of presumption of what something could descend into. Anything could ascend or descend into anything for all we know, but we don't know - so how can we use arguments that are based on things we don't know?



But you don't know that's what it would descend into. And you can't argue with presumptions. But we're making progress as it seems you accept that in its noble form, euthanasia is ethical?
in a purely theoretical case it would be acceptable. as i said, in practice everyone faces implicit or explicit pressures which would make it unacceptable.
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#36
Report 7 years ago
#36
(Original post by the bear)
in a purely theoretical case it would be acceptable. as i said, in practice everyone faces implicit or explicit pressures which would make it unacceptable.
Well, if I had the power to introduce assisted suicide legislation, I would work to ensure that those theoretical standards were at all times and in every instance met. I would enforce high levels of safeguarding to make sure that misuse and abuse were near impossible. And the doctors who approved any assisted dying would be held accountable if abuse of the system was to take place. If they approve a case, they have to be able to substantially justify it and ensure it meets all the criterion of someone eligible for assisted death. This wouldn't be an easy approval by any means.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#37
Report 7 years ago
#37
(Original post by Reluire)
Like the bear, I think you've fallen into the 'slippery slope' trap which is argumentatively flawed. It doesn't make sense to reject something because of presumption of what something could descend into. Anything could ascend or descend into anything for all we know, but we don't know - so how can we use arguments that are based on things we don't know?

But you don't know that's what it would descend into. And you can't argue with presumptions. But we're making progress as it seems you accept that in its noble form, euthanasia is ethical?
Of course you can. To not act on the basis of what could happen betrays taking a long term view.

You wouldn't send you entire armed forces to the Russian border and order them not to fire because their near presence could provoke a military reaction. Plenty of people object to making Heroin illegal because it could lead to an increase in the number of users.

With something as important as euthanasia one must look at what could happen. To not do so is to betray your duty to make decisions for the benefit of those you represent in parliament.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#38
Report 7 years ago
#38
(Original post by Reluire)
Well, if I had the power to introduce assisted suicide legislation, I would work to ensure that those theoretical standards were at all times and in every instance met. I would enforce high levels of safeguarding to make sure that misuse and abuse were near impossible. And the doctors who approved any assisted dying would be held accountable if abuse of the system was to take place. If they approve a case, they have to be able to substantially justify it and ensure it meets all the criterion of someone eligible for assisted death. This wouldn't be an easy approval by any means.
none of your so-called safeguarding measures would work. soon it would become part and parcel of growing old and frail... "still here Dear ? you are nearly 80..."
0
reply
Everglow
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#39
Report 7 years ago
#39
(Original post by Rakas21)
Of course you can. To not act on the basis of what could happen betrays taking a long term view.

You wouldn't send you entire armed forces to the Russian border and order them not to fire because their near presence could provoke a military reaction. Plenty of people object to making Heroin illegal because it could lead to an increase in the number of users.

With something as important as euthanasia one must look at what could happen. To not do so is to betray your duty to make decisions for the benefit of those you represent in parliament.
My point is, though, anything could happen. But we don't know. Risk assessment is important for making realistic predictions, yes, but I believe with the right level of safeguarding, which I have to emphasise is very high for legislation as serious as this, these slippery slope arguments are irrelevant and redundant. Examples like the one the bear gives below just wouldn't happen.

(Original post by the bear)
none of your so-called safeguarding measures would work. soon it would become part and parcel of growing old and frail... "still here Dear ? you are nearly 80..."
But it wouldn't because that would never be approved.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#40
Report 7 years ago
#40
(Original post by Reluire)
My point is, though, anything could happen. But we don't know. Risk assessment is important for making realistic predictions, yes, but I believe with the right level of safeguarding, which I have to emphasise is very high for legislation as serious as this, these slippery slope arguments are irrelevant and redundant. Examples like the one the bear gives below just wouldn't happen.



But it wouldn't because that would never be approved.
you have a touching faith in the medical profession's independence and the selflessness of relatives. in the real world it is different :rolleyes:
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

How did your AQA GCSE English Language Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (73)
18.96%
The paper was reasonable (146)
37.92%
Not feeling great about that exam... (110)
28.57%
It was TERRIBLE (56)
14.55%

Watched Threads

View All