I think the current system discriminates against those without the money to fly to Switzerland to end their lives there. I take it as a given that people own themselves and thus should be able to choose to end their own lives if so desired.
I am however concerned about the impact of euthanasia on the provision of palliative care for those not wishing to undergo the procedure. I can see euthanasia predominating due to cost issues, not to mention the fact that it may reduce the incentives to research cures for some illnesses.
Euthanasia is a victimless event (i refuse to call it a crime), and as such, the notion of 'protective legislation' or prosecution in such cases is ridiculous.
As for Gordon Brown, I can't see why he's against it, when it will most probably be something he'll be interested in when the penny drops and he realises just how ***** he is.
Physician-assisted suicide should really be ratified here. If patients are of sound mind and are autonomous in their decision then I don't see why not. Calling the ending of life in such a manner inhumane is myopic; surely it is also inhumane to not consider the (probably excrutiating) condition said patient is in to make them want to end their life in the first instance.
That said, it was his wife, not Sir Edward Downes himself, that was of this disposition - though to be fair I think his eyesight had severely deteriorated. The line perhaps becomes more blurred here, though I still respect freedom of choice.
I also agree that should such a parliamentary decision be taken, palliative care should not be left in it's budding state
We have a somewhat unjustifiable position at the moment. We allow, with no repercussions, for people to travel to Switzerland and end their lives, yet do not allow the same to happen in our own country.
Imo, such as system is not really acceptable as we both condone and condemn the system and give support for neither view.
Yes, we should just allow it here. It obviously works in other countries, so I don't see what the problems is in introducing that here.
There is absolutely no moral, political or social problem with euthanasia. The main issue which arises, however, is the legal possibility to kill. People might get bullied or hypnotized into it, etc. These are just case scenarios which might put people off euthanasia, but, well, you have to deal with the opposition. I stress, though, that it is very unlikely for it to be banned (kept banned) because there are a number of people who believe that life is not wonderful in its own right sometimes and suffering is better when it is stopped.
What concerns me is the possibility of people with (treatable) clinical depression to get the euthanasia without realizing that maybe in reality they would like to live. But surely the professionals who would work in those clinics are properly qualified to make the distinction between these people and their reasons for dying.
Surely having at least two doctors provide permission would solve the afore mentioned problems of elderly people being pressurised by family members or feeling as if they are an encumbrance to their family and turning to euthanasia.
As long as the appropiate safe-guards are put in place, euthanasia should be workable within the UK. The current situation with euthanasia is too ambiguous; if you accept people have a right to euthanasia you must provide for it, instead of penalising the financially less well-off who cannot afford to travel to Switzerland.
The state telling you that you don't even have the right to kill yourself really is the final insult. Euthanasia is an issue to be dealt with by the individual involved and those close to them alone - it is nobody elses right to make that decision for them, definitely not the governments.
Euthanasia is murder. No one should help another to die.
We are not pets to be put down.