See other Health Articles
Title: Terry Pratchett ready to be test case for suicide law
Source:
BBC
URL Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8490062.stm
Published: Jan 31, 2010
Author: staff
Post Date: 2010-01-31 19:59:07 by Ferret Mike
Keywords: None
Views: 999
Comments: 72
Sir Terry Pratchett has said he's ready to be a test case for assisted suicide "tribunals" which could give people legal permission to end their lives. The author, who has Alzheimer's, says he wants a tribunal set up to help those with incurable diseases end their lives with help from doctors. A poll for BBC One's Panorama suggests most people support assisted suicide for someone who is terminally ill. Sir Terry is due to set out his ideas in Monday's Richard Dimbleby lecture. God's waiting room In the keynote lecture, Shaking Hands With Death, the best-selling author will say that the "time is really coming" for assisted death to be legalised. His comments follow the acquittal last week of Kay Gilderdale, of Stonegate, East Sussex, who was cleared of attempted murder after helping her daughter, Lynn, to commit suicide. Ms Gilderdale admitted aiding and abetting her 31-year-old daughter, who had the chronic fatigue syndrome ME, to take her own life and was given a 12-month conditional discharge. Lynn was found dead at their home on 4 December 2008. Ms Gilderdale is to appear in Monday's BBC One Panorama programme. A survey for the programme found 73% of those asked believed that friends or relatives should be able to assist in the suicide of a loved one who is terminally ill. Sir Terry says he would like to see measures put in place to ensure that anyone seeking to commit suicide was of sound mind and not being influenced by others. A legal expert in family affairs and a doctor familiar with long-term illness would also be part of his proposed tribunals. "It seems sensible to me that we should look to the medical profession that over the centuries has helped us to live longer and healthier lives to help us die peacefully among our loved ones in our own home without a long stay in God's waiting room," he will say. More than 1,000 people were surveyed for the poll carried out for Panorama. While there was clear support for assisted suicide for someone who is terminally ill, if - as in the case of Ms Gilderdale's daughter - the illness is not terminal, support for assisted suicide falls to 48%. Responding to the Panorama poll, Director of Care Not Killing, Dr Peter Saunders, said: "To argue that if you are terminally ill you deserve less protection from the law than do the rest of us is highly discriminatory as well as dangerous. "Many cases of abuse involving elderly, sick and disabled people occur in the context of so-called 'loving families' and the blanket prohibition of intentional killing or assisting suicide is there to ensure that vulnerable people are not put at risk." 'At peace' Lynn was bedridden by the age of 15, and was admitted to hospital more than 50 times with a succession of serious illnesses over the next 16 years. Ms Gilderdale told the programme: "I know I did the right thing for Lynn. She's free and at peace where she needed to be. Whatever the consequences, I would do it again." The survey was carried out earlier this month and the figures are broadly in line with previous surveys. Last year, the director of public prosecutions issued guidelines on when assisted suicide cases should be taken to court. But campaigners have said there still needs to be more clarity in the law. Panorama: I Helped My Daughter to Die is on BBC One on Monday 1 February at 2030 GMT.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-20) not displayed.
.
.
.
#21. To: Eric Stratton (#18)
The Oregon law is smart to avoid second party involvement in the actual death. Intravenous applications of drugs, carbon monoxide and other painless options are just ammunition useful to drum up emotional reaction to deaths with dignity. When someone goes through the process to do this and takes the barbiturates themselves, there is no gray area to argue. The person was dying, did not feel there to be quality, dignity or tolerable quality to the tag end of life to hang around. People can argue their God/Goddess/Allah or whomever would be irreconcilably pissed and punitive minded over the usurping of a celestial prerogative all they want. But who's life is it anyway? How dare anyone disrespect the needs and wishes of another so much they would force them to bear a messy, painful and undignified death that satisfies no one but the control freaks among us.
Christians think the self inflated intellectual outsmarts himself while the self inflated intellectual thinks the Christian outdumbs himself. I do not consider myself an intellectual nor self-inflated. I also do not get pissed off because someone believes in Christianity, or any other invisible sky being. If that helps them get through the day then more power to them. What I do object to though is when people use their religious beliefs to dictate how others should live and/or die (or not die in this case). I find it abhorrent that a human being should suffer just because the man-God of a certain group of people (Christians) suffered and therefore believe that suffering is "good for you." I find this to be as abhorrent as a group of Muslims stoning a woman who did not wear a burka in public. I see no moral difference between the two.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
have any of you seen the film Whose Life Is It Anyway?? In interviews, Richard Dreyfuss often refers to Whose Life Is It Anyway? as having been made at the nadir of his substance-abuse problem in the 1980s. Yet it's not too bad. Based on the hit Broadway play, it's a debate about the ethics of euthanasia and one person's right to choose whether to live or die. Dreyfuss plays a sculptor who, after a car accident, is left a paraplegic. Appalled at the prospect of a life in which he has no control of anything, he pleads with hospital authorities to help him die. When they refuse, he takes them to court. Dreyfuss brings great passion to a role in which he can't even use his body; the humor is often pitch-black, but it works, both as a script and as a cinematically opened-up version of a play. it's extraordinary. wonderful acting and the story takes you through a gamut of emotions. it's one of my favorite films of all time. i highly recommend it.
No, I've never seen it. Thanks for the info. If I ever see it on TV I'll be sure to record it on the DVR.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
Then all the more reason not to let them suicide out to hell. God himself said that if you don't believe in him that you are a fool. Because a fool doesn't believe in God doesn't make it true. Fools used to say the earth was flat. If only they had read the Bible they would have known better.
www.libertysflame.com
Are you really asking the difference between the Bible and the Koran? The Bible is perfect and full of love. The Koran is flawed, evil and written by a pedophile. That is the short version. Also the muslims try to force people to convert and kill them if they don't. The Bible says to shake the dust off your feed and leave them alone if they don't want to hear about Gods true word. Night and day.
www.libertysflame.com
No and neither do you. :)
www.libertysflame.com
No, I am not asking that at all. I have no interest in either fairytale. There are much better written and more exciting fantasy books on the market if I choose to read one. The Bible is perfect and full of love. The Koran is flawed, evil and written by a pedophile. That is the short version. If the Bible were perfect there wouldn't be 38000+ denominations with different interpretations of it, all claiming they have "the truth." However, that is beside the point. Your belief in the veracity of your book of fairy tails does not give you the right to use the force of government to ensure others suffer a miserable and painful death, just like the muslim's belief in the veracity of their book of fairy tails does not give them the right to cut off the head's of "infidel's." The only difference between your belief and theirs is the length to which you will go to enforce your tyranny. The muslim's will murder an offender while you, out of "love" of course, would only imprison the offender. The Bible says to shake the dust off your feed and leave them alone if they don't want to hear about Gods true word. Then leave those who are suffering and dying a miserable and painful death alone. Shake the dust off your feet and mind your own damned business.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
God himself said that if you don't believe in him that you are a fool. Because a fool doesn't believe in God doesn't make it true. Fools used to say the earth was flat. If only they had read the Bible they would have known better. You are no different than your Muslim buddies. They are just as sure as you are that THEY are right and you are the fool. Their God tells them it's OK to cut the head off of non-believers, your God tells you it's OK to imprison them. The only difference is the degree of tyranny.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
You seem to be short sighted. You don't see the big picture. My reasons are rooted in the Bible and COMMON SENSE. Mark my words. The right to die will become the duty to die.
www.libertysflame.com
That is a completely different argument that has nothing to do with your bible.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
I find it abhorrent that a human being should suffer just because the man-God of a certain group of people (Christians) suffered and therefore believe that suffering is "good for you." My response wasn't aimed at you or anyone in particular but more of a general observation. Religious beliefs imposed upon others without invitation amounts to coercion or at a minmum harrassment. I think we can agree on this sentiment. When governments (through agents or agencies) use religion to promote an agenda the religious concepts inserted or alluded to are generally a red herring foisted upon both the believer and non-believer by someone or some group that couldn't care less about the religious implications. I often recognize that the entity injecting religion or religious dogma into the dialogue is actually dividing to conquer. All religious points of view should be open to debate amongst willing debaters in a private setting. Even if the belief that you find abhorent is actually a commonly held belief by a sect or group, that shouldn't give rise to an effectual application to you. Many religions have a variey of belief systems usually generated by someone that has taken an authoritative position within a group. Then, it seems to me that the party in authority has a tendancy to abuse both his/her authority and the religious dogma purposed to further some agenda. I guess my point is that zealots are a pain in the ass everytime they direct their voices to an unwilling audience, especially when they're recent converts to some orthodoxy and unlearned. I suppose I could be accused of some zealotry myself in the past, but that was before I realized just how little I know and thought it more important to prove something than to engage myself in learning so as to have a more personal (and complete) understanding. People that are inclined to "show others the way" should do so by example and not by imposition of their will using God as a weapon. EDIT: I felt that I had to add this: It seems to me that many people involved in Christianity "talk" about the importance of faith in their belief system without demonstrating it by practical application in their own lives. Additionally, these "believers" deny the power of their omnipotent God by imposing theirselves upon others rather than leave any of the conversion process to God.
Whoever would return government to the "will of the people" must first return the United States to the use of CONSTITUTIONAL COINAGE as a medium of exchange and through it return the Constitution as law in the United States.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
Socialists are gang bangers. They are pussies until they have government backing and then they become mass assassins. With respect to your comment above ... it's perfect. In a diverse and "free" society we should leave the decision of life or death to God or the nearest relative and physician ... never should the government have authority to make such a determination. That being said, it's a difficult and often touchy subject without simple solutions. The world is trending towards State control of life and death decision making, which I abhor. Governments abuse any and all authority relinquished by the people.
Whoever would return government to the "will of the people" must first return the United States to the use of CONSTITUTIONAL COINAGE as a medium of exchange and through it return the Constitution as law in the United States.
Here is a seed for you that may save your life and soul someday. Revelation chapter 13. When everyone has to take a mark to buy or sell let it trigger a memory of this thread in your mind. Let you remember that it was foretold in the word of God. That is my goodwill towards you.
www.libertysflame.com
Not really. Gods word teaches values. Your position is kind of like stealing shouldn't be a crime because that is a religious matter found in the Bible.
www.libertysflame.com
Thou shall not murder. I guess you have a problem with that. Because people with religious views convinced almost everyone that it was wrong. You aren't making much sense.
www.libertysflame.com
So Jesus was a fairy tale. lol. Even the dumbest historians recognize he was real.
www.libertysflame.com
Taking your comments at face value would leave me to conclude that you think the government was harassing Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. You have a sick mind.
www.libertysflame.com
Like I said you are the only one with sense on this thread. Besides me of course.
www.libertysflame.com
I can believe it. There are many who reject Gods word. Leaving them to swing in the wind like a dead leaf.
www.libertysflame.com
NEWS FLASH. There are fake christians leading people astray and ignorant ones too. Here let me buy you a clue. If they support something that isn't in the word then they aren't what they are claiming. Go to the first english versions for the true word.
www.libertysflame.com
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
Ok. I will give him some credit too. But only 75 percent.
www.libertysflame.com
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
Try talking ideology with someone in pain. There's no room for it. What's "horrific" is being in pain with no way out. Sometimes not even the strongest pain killers help. I say let them go. Anything less is pure distilled sadism. We treat our pets with more mercy than we treat people.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
That was good. It's its own aritcle now http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=6075
www.libertysflame.com
Did I hit a nerve? I will respond line by line. Quit with the sob story liberal line of reasoning. Sob story? Liberal? Do you really think that the kind of pain I write about does not exist? IIRC, Christines husband is a doctor. Perhaps you could ask her to ask him about this kind of never ending (until death) kind of pain. I'm not talking about stubbing your fucking toe on a table leg here. Life isn't fair. It ends for everyone, some horrifically and beyond anyone's control. (aka see Haiti) No life isn't fair. We were never promised that it would be "fair". But life is just. But we can make it more fair. Sorry, but I have a rather difficult time in equating pain with fairness or the lack thereof. No one begrudges anyone dignity, but quite frankly, your line of reasoning that I'm inherently denying anyone anything is bullshit! Did I accuse you of this? No. HAve you ever made this kind of decision? I doubt it. Neither have I. But your posts make it plain that you would deny it when faced with the opportunity. Pain is a fact of life. Also a fact of life is that the eternal side is far greater than this side. For people that do not believe that, fine, their choice. Pain = fact of life? Duh! Pain serves a purpose. It tells us when something is wrong. That is not the kind of pain we are discussing here. But I think you already know that. And what does this "hell" hoax have to do with anything? Tell ya' what. Where did this word "hell" come from? Lets see if you can answer that simple question. Hint: Its pagan in origin, just like so many churchianities doctrines are. But to put other peoples' pain on me/us is flat out wrong just as it is to put their financial burdens on me/us!!! And I did that how? YOU are not the one burdened with their pain. THEY are. But you evidently do not want to be burdened with making a decision to let them out of that kind of pain. OK, your choice. But you should then be forced to sit by their bedside while they are in agony. It doesn't make me callous, but at times of excruciating pain in my life or in those that I've known, I haven't blamed society for it! Society did not cause the pain. But society is callous enough to ignore it. Out of sight, out of mind, huh? You people need to get a grip! Yes, shame on those that treat animals with more dignity than people, fine, but the two are mutually exclusive! Get a grip? You are angry arent you. It's not mutually exclusive. The same principles apply. Mercy seems to be a foreign concept here. People arguing for government intervention, involvement, approval, legislative action, etc., etc. are to me no better than liberals on this. I dont recall the last time I ever argued for any .gov involvement in anything. This should be between a doctor(s) and the patient and if the patients can't represent themselves then the families and maybe a attorney can represent them. No .gov interference needed. This just in, sorry, but life isn't fair. Many people live with pain. And frankly, if we're going to get into the business of managing it for them, then I'd like to fucking scrutinize their entire existence to see if anything that they did via voluntary lifestyling could have contributed to it. How do ya think they'd enjoy that? You need to calm down. You are not making sense. Honestly, I cannot believe that here, on Freedom4um, people are actually arging for Government involvement at worst, or setting the table for it at best, in the control of life. I simply cannot believe it! I said nothing about the government interference. This just in, someone else's pain is none of my fucking business anymore than their financial, mortgage, or healthcare disconnects are. OF COURSE it's not your business. Stay out of it.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or i guess i'm missing something, but i'm not seeing people argue for government intervention, involvement, approval, etc. i'm seeing that folks want to be able to get the help of a physician without government involvement. i think they are saying that the decision should be the patient's own. their family members shouldn't be burdened with the assistance. should they? to me, that would set them up for prosecution for murder.
yes, he works in nursing homes and the suffering by many of his patients is absolutely horrific.
Why do you support government intervention that allows for prosecution of doctors to perscribe medication that patients want and feel they need? You support government intervention that control freedom of choice, that dictates that a person cannot end their own life in the manner of their choice. YOU think YOU should determine the choice--cyanide okay, barbituates not okay AND you support government involvement to keep it that way. That doesn't make sense, Eric. You claim that doctors are assisting, but they are only perscribing and not administering the drugs to patients. BTW, cyanide is just as highly regulated as the medications these people are seeking. Oh, and folks suffer inability to breath and then cardiac arrest which doesn't sound "painfree" to me. And isn't somebody responsible for dispensing this cyanide to people who want it? Do you or do you not support governement involvement in regulating the sale of cyanide?
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
Gracias.
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
The "emotionalism" is coming from you. I just lost all respect for you, FWIW, which probably isn't much...
Click for Privacy and Preparedness files Alex Jones is the Robert Tilton of the conspiracy world. ~Mister Clean Live free or deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
That scares me about your argument. If someone wants to kill themself, then let them or their family do it. And what now, there aren't ways to kill oneself "with dignity," etc. now? And you people that argue this way, don't bitch when Government sponsored euthanasia roots up and "blossoms!" Because that is the logical outcome to this. I'm finished even discussing this. Anyone that cannot see that far needs to take their brain out of park. I see. So you are a drug warrior as well as a zealot. You are an enemy of a free people and should be shunned.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
I have plainly stated that the government should not be involved in any way, shape or form. Neither a terminally ill patient nor anyone else for that matter, should have to have government's permission to purchase any drug. The only reason the government and doctors are involved is because they regulate the drugs in such a way that a doctor is required to obtain access to the drugs.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
Revelation chapter 13. When everyone has to take a mark to buy or sell let it trigger a memory of this thread in your mind. Let you remember that it was foretold in the word of God. That is my goodwill towards you. Obfuscation and distraction from the issue at hand.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat
Comments (62 - 72) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest"Cyanide isn't suffering."
#22. To: noone222 (#17)
What I get the biggest kick out of is how pissed off people get because someone else is so stupid that they believe differently. And this is true in both directions.
#23. To: F.A. Hayek Fan, noone222, Eric Stratton, Ferret Mike, Lod, All (#20)
#24. To: christine (#23)
#25. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#14)
What if they do not believe in your invisible sky beast?
#26. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#14)
What makes you any different than the muslims you constantly bitch about who demand that others follow their religious rules?
#27. To: Ferret Mike (#15)
You don't listen very well.
#28. To: A K A Stone (#26)
Are you really asking the difference between the Bible and the Koran?
#29. To: A K A Stone (#25)
(Edited)
Then all the more reason not to let them suicide out to hell.
#30. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#28)
#31. To: A K A Stone (#30)
Mark my words. The right to die will become the duty to die.
#32. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#22)
(Edited)
What I do object to though is when people use their religious beliefs to dictate how others should live and/or die (or not die in this case).
#33. To: Ferret Mike (#21)
#34. To: F.A. Hayek Fan, All (#20)
#35. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#20)
#36. To: Eric Stratton (#33)
That's fine, just keep the Government the fuck out of it.
#37. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#29)
You are no different than your Muslim buddies.
#38. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#31)
That is a completely different argument that has nothing to do with your bible.
#39. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#22)
What I do object to though is when people use their religious beliefs to dictate how others should live
#40. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#28)
No, I am not asking that at all. I have no interest in either fairytale.
#41. To: noone222 (#32)
Religious beliefs imposed upon others without invitation amounts to coercion or at a minmum harrassment.
#42. To: Eric Stratton (#34)
I'm finished even discussing this. Anyone that cannot see that far needs to take their brain out of park.
#43. To: Eric Stratton (#35)
And frankly, I cannot believe that there are people in this forum arguing for what in essence will be Government involved, either directly or indirectly, and if indirectly then soon to be directly, killing!
#44. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#28)
If the Bible were perfect there wouldn't be 38000+ denominations with different interpretations of it,
#45. To: A K A Stone (#42)
#46. To: Eric Stratton (#45)
#47. To: A K A Stone (#46)
#48. To: Eric Stratton, A K A Stone, all (#47)
Kinda gives us some insight as to why certain horrific "Big Government" ideologies with full support of people are even allowed to gain traction, eh.
die kill ~~ Me
#49. To: PSUSA (#48)
#50. To: Eric Stratton (#49)
#51. To: Eric Stratton (#49)
die kill ~~ Me
#52. To: Eric Stratton (#49)
People arguing for government intervention, involvement, approval, legislative action, etc., etc. are to me no better than liberals on this.
#53. To: PSUSA (#51)
IIRC, Christines husband is a doctor. Perhaps you could ask her to ask him about this kind of never ending (until death) kind of pain.
#54. To: Eric Stratton (#49)
(Edited)
Honestly, I cannot believe that here, on Freedom4um, people are actually arging for Government involvement at worst, or setting the table for it at best, in the control of life. I simply cannot believe it!
#55. To: christine, Eric Stratton (#53)
yes, he works in nursing homes and the suffering by many of his patients is absolutely horrific.
die kill ~~ Me
#56. To: christine (#52)
#57. To: Eric Stratton (#56)
I'm finished with this thread. It reeks of emotionalism.
die kill ~~ Me
#58. To: PSUSA (#57)
#59. To: Eric Stratton (#34)
Regulated
#60. To: Eric Stratton (#35)
And frankly, I cannot believe that there are people in this forum arguing for what in essence will be Government involved, either directly or indirectly, and if indirectly then soon to be directly, killing!
#61. To: A K A Stone (#37)
Here is a seed for you that may save your life and soul someday.
.
.
.