Hey Terry Why Are You Looking At Dying

[graemehin]

Hi Terry, if you ever read this,

Where do you draw the line on this, at what point would dying be a better option? Tell you what if we met and you spoke to me you may change your mind at what point would you would want to do this!
So many people live with problems that others feel would invoke a suicide descision, its not right, life is precious and its not right, I feel it gives manner to the folks that beleive that we live in a brave new world or failing that logans run!

we all only live once, depending who you beleive,
Graeme

 

[The Mad Collector]

OK, this is tricky and I guess we are going to see more posts like this after tonights film and Terry sure isn't going to answer them as he is highly unlikely to post here even if he reads what has been written.

This is a difficult subject and I can see both sides, I'm expecting to die of cancer before what I would like to think is my natural lifeterm. My family is part of the human genome project because of our unusual cancer history where each generation all fall to a particular cancer but it is a different one in each generation. My fathers generation have all had brain tumors as they hit their 50's, just two of them, including my father I'm glad to say, are still alive. The generation below me have all (and I mean ALL) had kidney cancer as young children and whilst so far they are all alive the eldest is 18 and she has now been diagnosed that her remaining kidney is showing signs of the cancer.

I don't know what I would do if/when I find out what my generation will hit. I'm the eldest so expect to be the one that finds out. What I will however defend to the very last is the right of somebody to make their own choice.

 

[Tonyblack]

I'm fully expecting a whole bunch of these sort of one-off posts due to the programme - both for and against.

As you point out, it's highly unlikely that Terry will read these posts, or indeed that the posters will make more than one post.

If they want to make a post then that's fine, but I'd suggest that none of us regular posters get into a debate with them. I rather think it's going to be a wasted effort.

Tony.

 

[archerinwood]

I, like the mad collector, fully support people's right to choose what they do.

 

[The Mad Collector]

I wasn't getting into a debate as such Tony, merely making my own response to the program and strongly disagree with your decision to use a green ink posting following my own post

Very very not happy Tony

 

[Tonyblack]

Sorry Mad, that was not directed at you personally. You are of course quite entitled to make whatever comments you like.

What I was trying to put across was that there was little point in posting welcomes and getting into debates with people who had (probably) had their say and gone.

When Terry received his knighthood, we had a huge influx of new posters starting threads all over the place congratulating Terry. They generally made one post and we never saw them again.

Again, let me apologise if you thought that comment in green was aimed at you. I can assure you that it wasn't.

Of course, as soon as I posted the thing, the board started playing up and I had to close my Internet connection down. I didn't get to see your post for quite some time.

 

[deldaisy]

Was there a link to the forum somewhere in the program?

Well new members are new members.... if one in ten stays then thats ONE new member for the forum huh?

Mad: What a sad post. Not just for what you must feel is like a Sword Of Damocles for yourself.... but for the other members of your family. I am so sorry to hear that.

Chin up mate. It may never happen. My brothers daughter has been living all her life with a terminal illness. She wasn't supposed to live til she was past her teens... and as meds get better she gets a longer term. As my brother says, "We are all dying! We are dead when we are dead!" and her illness isn't discussed in their family past the immediate health concerns.

None of us know for absolute certain what is in our future short or long term.... so you better wear clean underwear... JUST IN CASE!

 

[poohcarrot]

Brave words, Mad. I agree with you 100%.

I'm pretty sure Tony's green ink was to stop the forum's more argumentative wimmin (like Jan, Dotsie, Del or meerkat) getting involved in heated debates with newbies.

I'm going to be a paragon of virtue and refrain from commenting at all, unless some religious loony starts spouting off. 8)

For the record (I've mentioned this once before - I believe), my parents were both very religious and my mum died of cancer when I was 21, and when I was 26, my father had a breakdown, said everything he ever believed in was bollux, then killed himself as an assisted suicide with the aid of a train.

This probably explains why I am like I am.

Look on the bright side Mad, as Del says, you aten't dead yet.

 

[Who's Wee Dug]

This made me rather sad after watching the programme,I do hope it's not true.

http://blastr.com/2011/06/terry-pratchett-begins-fo.php

 

[SpideyGirl]

all xx

 

[fabioshui]

Don't leave us yet!

Please, Mr. Pratchett, don't leave us before due time!

I know there's still dozens new books still lurking in your mind, just waiting to be thrust into paper.

As a striving author, you have inspired me deeply and it greatly saddens me that you'll consider it appropriate to end your life artificially. Please don't do it.

That's it, I got nothing more. Just... let God take you when he sees fit, don't rush it.

 

[pip]

Some interesting posts. Good points Mad. Its a battlefield of a debate to get into and i agree with Tony that its as good as banging a head against a brick wall to debate with new posters throwing in one comment. But still a topic worth talking about.
Personally i agree with Mad and pooh amongst others that the right to choose is important.
And I'm sorry for the situation Mad. Not good at all.

 

[Bouncy Castle]

One very pertinent comment on that link above:


It's funny they won't let you go when you want.
But, they can withhold the drugs that would keep you alive.

 

[Geoff Eldridge]

Choosing to die

Terry you may (or may not) remember me as a voice from our childhood in Forty Green - And you may not get to see this - but I watched your programme with interest. My wife died six years ago after battling terminal cancer for two years. She would not have opted for an easier way out but even if she had the choice that fee of £10000 I heard quoted would have beyond us and many more in the lower income bracket.

Congratulations for gettine the debate opened up on TV - I'm on your side by the way.

(I know you've been Knighted and already had an OBE but I thought I ought to tell you that I've got an MBE - which isn't bad from the kids that played in Roundhead Wood all those years ago. We've got the set between us.)

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Hi to all the new guys and deep empathy for people's takes on this, even if they're anti-choice for themselves - just don't expect other people to be effected by that in the same way that Terry won't be effected by what you'd say to him on the subject.

I think it was very clear in the programme last night (I actually forgot it was on and so I've only just watched it on iPlayer ) that Terry hasn't actually made his mind up on whether he will do this himself - but he wants to have the unequivocal right to make that choice for himself in time. I'm going to comment fully in the thread we've had running in advance of this programme, but to all the new guys, whether you stay here or not, and whether or not you think Terry's a hero or a wimp for wanting this right to die do you really think it's right for rational, responsible people like Andrew and Peter to be forced to go to another country and die on a noisy industrial estate in a glorified portakabin (albeit a very nicely fitted out one with very kind 'escorts') just so there's little risk of their loved ones being prosecuted for helping them into death?

(((((hugs to MAD and to pooh)))))
Life should be lived well and make us strong enough to die, however we leave it, because that is something we ultimately have very little choice in, except, perhaps, for the time.

 

[Who's Wee Dug]

I saw that BBC had a link to this site futher down from where they were giving the chance to catch up and see it.

 

[dthunt]

I've helped care for someone with advanced Alzheimer's disease, and currently have a relative who is suffering.

It's a difficult thing, and I appreciate the complexities involved. I applaud Sir Terry Pratchett for exploring the issue of death with dignity in his BBC documentary - and respect the ultimate decisions of Terry and the people close to him.

Nobody who has witnessed an affliction like Alzheimer's, which destroys the character before the body, escapes without an earnest look at these questions, especially when they know they themselves are at risk.

I will choose to remember Terry at his best, which as far as I am concerned is that part of his life where he is an accomplished author, close to his family, and someone who has conquered life's final obstacle with unusual dignity and composure. I urge all like-minded individuals to do the same and offer what support fans can: wish that Terry's last years are fruitful, thoughtful, and defining, as is the natural right of all of mankind.

 

[archerinwood]

@fabioshui none of us want him to go early, but we can't actually stop him from doing it. Whatever he decides in the future must be respected by us, the fans.

 

[Marianne]

If you have affection, admiration, or both, for Terry Pratchett - then you have to respect his wishes. Sadly, the law both in the UK AND in Switzerland makes it very difficult for people with Alzheimers to decide their fate- even with a directive made whilst of sound mind. This means that Terry will have absolutely NO choice but to make his decision at a fairly early stage of the disease, as it may well be otherwise too late. Even in Switzerland, the law requires that a person must be of sound mind and totally aware of what is happening to be helped. Tragic really. One should be able to decide in advance where the line is to be drawn in one's particular case- then get the help required. People would then be able to relax and enjoy the rest of their life, knowing that a precise decision has been made as regards boundaries- and will be respected when the time comes. Switzerland is mo better in this case than the UK.

 

[Rjinswand]

I'm going to be a paragon of virtue and refrain from commenting at all, unless some religious loony starts spouting off. 8)

Be careful what you wish for - looks like there's not going to be too many Holy Joes coming in here to do the honours for the reactionaries. We could alway get a reverse devil's advocate opinion I suppose so how about this, based on some of the points brought up in the Newsnight debate by the worried 'antes'?

Whether or not you're religious most people will at least appreciate the 'sanctity' of life argument and it's this that makes a lot of people very concerned about the type of legislation that Terry's championing. The disabled lady on the Newsnight debate was most vocal about the dichotomy between someone being terminally ill, as opposed to someone having a very poor quality of life because of disability that isn't life-threatening. She didn't claim to be speaking for all people with severe disabilities, but her objections will no doubt be shared by many people and families affected by major disability. God does come into it really strongly in respect of abortion, which is of course legal in the UK up to the 6th month of pregnancy on the grounds of the child being severely disabled in some manner.

Choices are made in that situation, at the beginning of life (depending on where you think that starts) that inspire genuine as well as rabid antipathy for the Pro-Life lobby, that are being used for assisted death, except of course the person with the disability will have a say in it as they've had a life. Isn't this a perfectly valid argument for being really tight on how we define 'intolerable' quality of life. Is it really any different to terminate an infant in vitro with Down's Syndrome for instance - to actually test for this and offer a termination as a matter of course as late as 6 months into pregnancy when the foetus is a discernible child and possibly a viable one too? I can definitely see that lady's worry over people with severe communication disabilities in addition to physical ones who are not in ideal or straitened situations, in care or in unloving communities being quietly and legally 'got rid of' if quality of life is an elective issue however well safeguarded. Who decides what's intolerable - plays god with any life?