Tony Nicklinson Loses High Court Right-To-Die Case
Discussion
Pesty said:
davepoth said:
Being able to find negative things to think about in every situation is clinical depression. .
If that is true then I have had clinical depression all my life.Not read all of the thread so I apologise if I repeat anything but...
Some months ago I met chap who has MND. He is in roughly the same position as Hawkins medically. Hawkins is an odd case and a bad example for many reasons. Not least as the average life expectancy for someone with MND is 4 years from diagnosis IIRC. Hawkins has survived for an amazing amount of time and seems to enjoy life but a lot of MND suffers dont. Their mind is 100%, they feel physical sensation the same as anyone else so imagine, there you are now, hooning about in fast cars and enjoying life and a year later you are in wheelchair, knowing you have a painful decent into a horrible death awaiting you. Now you can do what you want, in a years time you have to use an eye controlled computer to ask a wife who is now deeply depressed to do something as simple as move the angle of your head.Some people may be ok with this, Hawkins clearly is and has a rich life, but others don't. It should be the individuals choice what to do. Jetting off to Switzerland is all well and good but rather ignores two factors. 1) It ain't cheap so not everyone can afford it realistically. 2) You try and transport someone in that condition and ask them to make a long journey. Sure, it happens but somehow I don;t imagine Hawkins regularly travels coach. I assume, although I don't know, he travels on planes better equipped to deal with it and has huge support, something many dont have.
SO if one has a degenetritive condition, on order to end ones life, you must do so before you are unable. Maybe the person does not wish to do that at that stage or their feeling change. If you have something sudden like Nicklinson the option really is not there.
I would not want to be the one drafting the law to cover this and I certainly would not want to be involved as the medical team either but there are plenty of people who have the skills and could do a decent job of drafting a law and making such assessments.
I am not observant at all but my own faith disallows suicide. I don't happen to agree and more importantly, we live in a broadly liberal, secular country so if someone chooses not to end their life or assist someone else in so doing, fair enough. I defy anyone here though to spend time with people suffering in this way, and who have seriously considered the option of ending their own lives but are totally unable to, to see the devastation it causes to them and their families, to see smart, intelligent people knowing their own pain, emotional and physical, watching themselves die and not wonder how this can possibly be right. To be fair, I have always felt this way very strongly but meeting my MND suffering mate and his family and listening to what they have to say as people who are not observing, but living this, right now, every day has made me absolutely certain that this area of the law must be changed, and fast.
On a related note, I have been trying to give this chap and his family some good experiences and they are all massively into cars. Various car groups including ones well known here have been amazing and we even had an F1 team recently arrange a tour for him behind the scenes at their factory. I am working on another thing now for him and when you call up and try and track down people who are basically impossible to get hold of and get them a message explaining what you are after and why, the response is almost always very positive. Famous people and huge companies included! Rather serves to remind one there are still some fantastic people in the world.
Some months ago I met chap who has MND. He is in roughly the same position as Hawkins medically. Hawkins is an odd case and a bad example for many reasons. Not least as the average life expectancy for someone with MND is 4 years from diagnosis IIRC. Hawkins has survived for an amazing amount of time and seems to enjoy life but a lot of MND suffers dont. Their mind is 100%, they feel physical sensation the same as anyone else so imagine, there you are now, hooning about in fast cars and enjoying life and a year later you are in wheelchair, knowing you have a painful decent into a horrible death awaiting you. Now you can do what you want, in a years time you have to use an eye controlled computer to ask a wife who is now deeply depressed to do something as simple as move the angle of your head.Some people may be ok with this, Hawkins clearly is and has a rich life, but others don't. It should be the individuals choice what to do. Jetting off to Switzerland is all well and good but rather ignores two factors. 1) It ain't cheap so not everyone can afford it realistically. 2) You try and transport someone in that condition and ask them to make a long journey. Sure, it happens but somehow I don;t imagine Hawkins regularly travels coach. I assume, although I don't know, he travels on planes better equipped to deal with it and has huge support, something many dont have.
SO if one has a degenetritive condition, on order to end ones life, you must do so before you are unable. Maybe the person does not wish to do that at that stage or their feeling change. If you have something sudden like Nicklinson the option really is not there.
I would not want to be the one drafting the law to cover this and I certainly would not want to be involved as the medical team either but there are plenty of people who have the skills and could do a decent job of drafting a law and making such assessments.
I am not observant at all but my own faith disallows suicide. I don't happen to agree and more importantly, we live in a broadly liberal, secular country so if someone chooses not to end their life or assist someone else in so doing, fair enough. I defy anyone here though to spend time with people suffering in this way, and who have seriously considered the option of ending their own lives but are totally unable to, to see the devastation it causes to them and their families, to see smart, intelligent people knowing their own pain, emotional and physical, watching themselves die and not wonder how this can possibly be right. To be fair, I have always felt this way very strongly but meeting my MND suffering mate and his family and listening to what they have to say as people who are not observing, but living this, right now, every day has made me absolutely certain that this area of the law must be changed, and fast.
On a related note, I have been trying to give this chap and his family some good experiences and they are all massively into cars. Various car groups including ones well known here have been amazing and we even had an F1 team recently arrange a tour for him behind the scenes at their factory. I am working on another thing now for him and when you call up and try and track down people who are basically impossible to get hold of and get them a message explaining what you are after and why, the response is almost always very positive. Famous people and huge companies included! Rather serves to remind one there are still some fantastic people in the world.
Sorry if this has been said before but both the cases in the news this last week have been misrepresented by the Media.
Firstly this gentleman was arguing that a judge should allow, via the development of the common law, that an defense of necessity be available for people accused of murder. There is a case in the states of a Policeman using this defense, he turned up at the scene of a bad accident to find a truck driver trapped in his cab, the cab set on fire, the driver pleaded to the policeman to shoot him, which he did, the policeman was rightfully charged with murder but allowed a defence of necessity.
This is not a straight forward, as I'm sure you can appreciate, to allow this defence to murder would open a flood gate in my opinion and you'd have every tom, dick and harry bumping people off.
The second gentleman in the news, Martin, wants to go to dignitas but none of his friends, familly or his wife want him to or want to be involved in the arrangments (he is capable of swallowing but someone would have to put the pill on his tongue). He essentially wants an employee of the state to assist in his death and be immune from prosecution - again in my opinion not a good or suitable law to have on the statute, it will never be allowed. The best they can hope for is that medical doctors be given some breathing room to be allowed to make judgment calls based on clinical needs, but any two doctors may not hold the same opinions on these things and it's unfair to ask a doctor to end a self sustaining life, where will it end? I hear dignitas are now offering their services to the clinically depressed and melancholy!
It's horrible but the truth is that it seems Tony had the ability to will himself to death at any time, he appeared to do it - I don't suppose he or his familly found any great dignity in his final demise, there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
Firstly this gentleman was arguing that a judge should allow, via the development of the common law, that an defense of necessity be available for people accused of murder. There is a case in the states of a Policeman using this defense, he turned up at the scene of a bad accident to find a truck driver trapped in his cab, the cab set on fire, the driver pleaded to the policeman to shoot him, which he did, the policeman was rightfully charged with murder but allowed a defence of necessity.
This is not a straight forward, as I'm sure you can appreciate, to allow this defence to murder would open a flood gate in my opinion and you'd have every tom, dick and harry bumping people off.
The second gentleman in the news, Martin, wants to go to dignitas but none of his friends, familly or his wife want him to or want to be involved in the arrangments (he is capable of swallowing but someone would have to put the pill on his tongue). He essentially wants an employee of the state to assist in his death and be immune from prosecution - again in my opinion not a good or suitable law to have on the statute, it will never be allowed. The best they can hope for is that medical doctors be given some breathing room to be allowed to make judgment calls based on clinical needs, but any two doctors may not hold the same opinions on these things and it's unfair to ask a doctor to end a self sustaining life, where will it end? I hear dignitas are now offering their services to the clinically depressed and melancholy!
It's horrible but the truth is that it seems Tony had the ability to will himself to death at any time, he appeared to do it - I don't suppose he or his familly found any great dignity in his final demise, there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
mattnunn said:
there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
Life isn't always precious. In fact, it has a monetary value.We should aim for quality of death as well as quality of life, and we should not prioritise life at all costs. Some prices are too high to pay.
Having been there in the final moments of several family members, I can say that, based on my own first-hand experience, I think that it's not always sad and painful at all. In one case it was a blessed release for all involved.
CommanderJameson said:
mattnunn said:
there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
Life isn't always precious. In fact, it has a monetary value.We should aim for quality of death as well as quality of life, and we should not prioritise life at all costs. Some prices are too high to pay.
Having been there in the final moments of several family members, I can say that, based on my own first-hand experience, I think that it's not always sad and painful at all. In one case it was a blessed release for all involved.
I don't think that we as a society have any right to set out the parameters for what we call quality of life. In the case of someone who chooses, who elects to withdraw from society because they want to (whether that be through 'stubbornness' or 'pride' or any other matter) they should have that right to end their lives both in a way and at a time that gives them the opportunity to regain some sense of control.
Not everyone has the desire to live life in the form that circumstance has created for them and more importantly what worries me is the this notion that someone who responds in the way that he has is automatically assumed to be 'depressed' or to have a mental illness. Some people, for what ever reason don't want to live. It is as simple as that - no matter how much life could be improved for them, by what ever means, it won't be enough.
Part of this fear is that somewhere along the lines, we created this belief that 'everyone wants to live' and it's simply not true. For some, life is utterly unbearable and for this albeit limited number of people, I think we need to have a mechanism in place that enables them to end their misery of their life. The alternative is such as we have seen and that is a man whose only alternative was to physical starve stress his systems to the point that they are so heavily stressed they give out. That can't be right.
We cannot force someone to change their mind. We cannot force an SSRI into the mouth of someone in the hope that it improves their life, that's an appalling violation of a human being. We could leave them and say 'sorry, it's up to you to change your life and get on with it as best you can with the support that we can offer you..' or words to that effect, or we can help them end their misery. Why is it so unacceptable to suggest this option. In my view, life is indeed a precious gift but there by grace of what ever go you and me. Could we not create legislation that enables the most damaged to end their lives with dignity? Why is that so hard to do, why are we letting our fears and our perceptions prolong a misery that is not ours to share? Yes indeed we are changing the parameters of medicine, but really, is that, which has come to pass, an acceptable position to sustain. I really think not. This isn't 'state sanctioned murder', it's not a case of someone's life being taken against their will, it's the case of society accepting that some people do not want to live and we, for our part have to respect that choice and where we can offer a less brutal 'endgame', we do.
Edited by drivin_me_nuts on Thursday 23 August 14:12
drivin_me_nuts said:
CommanderJameson said:
mattnunn said:
there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
Life isn't always precious. In fact, it has a monetary value.We should aim for quality of death as well as quality of life, and we should not prioritise life at all costs. Some prices are too high to pay.
Having been there in the final moments of several family members, I can say that, based on my own first-hand experience, I think that it's not always sad and painful at all. In one case it was a blessed release for all involved.
I don't think that we as a society have any right to set out the parameters for what we call quality of life. In the case of someone who chooses, who elects to withdraw from society because they want to (whether that be through 'stubbornness' or 'pride' or any other matter) they should have that right to end their lives both in a way and at a time that gives them the opportunity to regain some sense of control.
Edited by drivin_me_nuts on Thursday 23 August 14:12
mattnunn said:
drivin_me_nuts said:
CommanderJameson said:
mattnunn said:
there is no dignity in death really, it's always sad and painfull, it's just a damned shame he chose to spend the last few precious moments of his life fighting a battle he needn't have fought, it wasn't brave it was stubborn and obstinate and there is no dignity in that.
Life isn't always precious. In fact, it has a monetary value.We should aim for quality of death as well as quality of life, and we should not prioritise life at all costs. Some prices are too high to pay.
Having been there in the final moments of several family members, I can say that, based on my own first-hand experience, I think that it's not always sad and painful at all. In one case it was a blessed release for all involved.
I don't think that we as a society have any right to set out the parameters for what we call quality of life. In the case of someone who chooses, who elects to withdraw from society because they want to (whether that be through 'stubbornness' or 'pride' or any other matter) they should have that right to end their lives both in a way and at a time that gives them the opportunity to regain some sense of control.
Edited by drivin_me_nuts on Thursday 23 August 14:12
re: mattnunn
an intersting point about 2 doctors disagreeing. particularly at present in an increasing litigious and risk averse society - the freedom of common sense and will is oft overshadowed by fear of retribution. Creativity being stifled, expression bounded.
murder by neccesity - wow, what a thought...we're not ready for that by a long way imho.
2 doctors though may disagree about ending a life, but might they agree not to sustain life and let things take their course? would that be negligent?
are we on the verge of a donor card type system? "in the even of xyz do or do not do abc...."?
Doctors make DNR (do not resuscitate) calls every day - it goes against the embodiement of the medical profession - preserve life - but sometimes death is better than life...
the mind boggles but a fantastic debate this is.
an intersting point about 2 doctors disagreeing. particularly at present in an increasing litigious and risk averse society - the freedom of common sense and will is oft overshadowed by fear of retribution. Creativity being stifled, expression bounded.
murder by neccesity - wow, what a thought...we're not ready for that by a long way imho.
2 doctors though may disagree about ending a life, but might they agree not to sustain life and let things take their course? would that be negligent?
are we on the verge of a donor card type system? "in the even of xyz do or do not do abc...."?
Doctors make DNR (do not resuscitate) calls every day - it goes against the embodiement of the medical profession - preserve life - but sometimes death is better than life...
the mind boggles but a fantastic debate this is.
Pesty said:
davepoth said:
Being able to find negative things to think about in every situation is clinical depression. .
If that is true then I have had clinical depression all my life.
No matter what a great time I am having, or looking forward to, something inside me looks for the downside. "Yeah, but what if...".
And no, it is not a choice, I don't specifically do it on purpose, nor tell other people to impress them with my cynicism.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff