Hey Terry Why Are You Looking At Dying
- Thread starter graemehin
- Start date
Exactly - that's why Peter Smedley (and the other young chap) were able to die electively albeit probably sooner than ideal in Peter's case. 
But what if you're vulnerable and possibly subject to 'undue influence' or positive ill will of some kind? I know that Terry's advocating the arbitration approach as a way to mitigate this, but there's so much we don't know about certain conditions - say comas - where you hear cases where people are deemed brain dead and in fact were aware of what was going on but were powerless to show they were conscious? What if they'd signed a 'no resus' opition or have made some kind of living will that applid and then changed their mind? Or a borderline case of mental confusion/incompetency and some b*stard pressures them into asking for an end?
These are valid reasons to look really hard at what conditions have to be in place to safeguard against misuse and why we have these laws regarding this situation. Morally there may be a reason to allow death before your 'natural' span given the choice, but simply relying on people asking for this on a rational basis isn't entirely safe. For vulnerable people, even if they're legally 'capable' of making an informed choice could still be manipulated or misrepresented by the unscrupulous if this becomes too 'easy' to apply without proper legislation for all kinds of reasons and not just financial gain either.
But what if you're vulnerable and possibly subject to 'undue influence' or positive ill will of some kind? I know that Terry's advocating the arbitration approach as a way to mitigate this, but there's so much we don't know about certain conditions - say comas - where you hear cases where people are deemed brain dead and in fact were aware of what was going on but were powerless to show they were conscious? What if they'd signed a 'no resus' opition or have made some kind of living will that applid and then changed their mind? Or a borderline case of mental confusion/incompetency and some b*stard pressures them into asking for an end?
These are valid reasons to look really hard at what conditions have to be in place to safeguard against misuse and why we have these laws regarding this situation. Morally there may be a reason to allow death before your 'natural' span given the choice, but simply relying on people asking for this on a rational basis isn't entirely safe. For vulnerable people, even if they're legally 'capable' of making an informed choice could still be manipulated or misrepresented by the unscrupulous if this becomes too 'easy' to apply without proper legislation for all kinds of reasons and not just financial gain either.
Rjinswand said:
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'?
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'?
As Son of God then, he could have easily escaped crucifixion if he had wanted to. But no! He chose to die! The method he chose was crucifixion. Believe it or not, but you can't crucify yourself because that last nail is a real b*gger to get in. Therefore he had assistance ie; the Romans.
So Biblically speaking, the concept of assisted suicide is not new, and any objections based on religious grounds would be a tad hypocritical. 8)
Bless thee poohcarrot, but thou dost not get out of it that easily because thou hast ignored the overriding reason why Jesus was incarnated and born to a virgin. Yea verily, 'twas a miracle, not to mention more than a bit of of a squeeze to be born in that manner but he'd have been a lot better off emerging from the womb of a lady of more experience, so his wishes in the matter were not altogether ones of choice or comfort for he had to learn about being a man (well a baby first obviously ) the hard way... God in his paternal aspect being a rather nasty old beard in the sky. We are taught by scripture that he was sent to this world for the purpose of redeeming wretched humanity from original sin and to do that he would ultimately have to die for this purpose so that people could stop clogging up purgatory - there really was a massive overcrowding problem!
Of course Jesus was on a mission from Glod - erm, God, so although technically he knew he'd end up having to die, he didn't necessarily want to, which isn't exactly the same thing now is it?
It's a real bugger being a messiah what with pre-cognition and everything - I mean you can't even pretend not to know what comes after death so nobody's really that grateful that you come down and die for 'em because they keep making smartarase remarks like wot you just did. And then they say they don't believe in you anyhoo or in an after-life so really what is all the fuss about when you actually get down to it? You have to die whether you want to or not - sorry that's what being mortal means. Does it really matter when you go if nothing happens afterwards? I don't know - you create a lovely world for people and do you get any thanks for it *mumblemuttermumble* I don't know why I waste my time... grumblegroangnashingofteethgroangrumble
) the hard way... God in his paternal aspect being a rather nasty old beard in the sky. We are taught by scripture that he was sent to this world for the purpose of redeeming wretched humanity from original sin and to do that he would ultimately have to die for this purpose so that people could stop clogging up purgatory - there really was a massive overcrowding problem! Of course Jesus was on a mission from Glod -
erm, God, so although technically he knew he'd end up having to die, he didn't necessarily want to, which isn't exactly the same thing now is it? It's a real bugger being a messiah what with pre-cognition and everything - I mean you can't even pretend not to know what comes after death so nobody's really that grateful that you come down and die for 'em because they keep making smartarase remarks like wot you just did. And then they say they don't believe in you anyhoo or in an after-life so really what is all the fuss about when you actually get down to it? You have to die whether you want to or not - sorry that's what being mortal means. Does it really matter when you go if nothing happens afterwards? I don't know - you create a lovely world for people and do you get any thanks for it *mumblemuttermumble* I don't know why I waste my time... grumblegroangnashingofteethgroangrumble
I am a Cancer patient since January 2007 currently in remission at the age of 46 and adapting my life on the fly, I know that one day my illness will reoccur to take me prematurely as there is no cure only limited treatments and the average age for diagnosis of the form I have is 70 with a shortened life expectancy. When my time comes I do not wish to have my life prolonged so those around me suffer mentally, emotionally or financially.
The NHS have been exemplary with my treatment and I know there will be a point where I go beyond financial viability, they will have a duty of care to see me to through to the end while I suffer so why do I not have the right to take early doors when I am ready and allow that NSH money to be better spent where needed?
I watched the programme with great interest and found many questions I had previously answered, some unanswered and a few new ones arose from lack of explanation. I will return to this site and not be a one hit wonder, I am not God Squad although I do respect those who believe should they wish.
I am also not a Terry Pratchett follower, should the opportunity arise I will take the time to read some of his writings therefore my like or dislike in that area will not come into play with my posting on this site.
Mike
The NHS have been exemplary with my treatment and I know there will be a point where I go beyond financial viability, they will have a duty of care to see me to through to the end while I suffer so why do I not have the right to take early doors when I am ready and allow that NSH money to be better spent where needed?
I watched the programme with great interest and found many questions I had previously answered, some unanswered and a few new ones arose from lack of explanation. I will return to this site and not be a one hit wonder, I am not God Squad although I do respect those who believe should they wish.
I am also not a Terry Pratchett follower, should the opportunity arise I will take the time to read some of his writings therefore my like or dislike in that area will not come into play with my posting on this site.
Mike
Rjinswand said:
Bless thee poohcarrot, but thou dost not get out of it that easily because thou hast ignored the overriding reason why Jesus was incarnated and born to a virgin. Yea verily, 'twas a miracle, not to mention more than a bit of of a squeeze to be born in that manner but he'd have been a lot better off emerging from the womb of a lady of more experience, so his wishes in the matter were not altogether ones of choice or comfort for he had to learn about being a man (well a baby first obviously ) the hard way... God in his paternal aspect being a rather nasty old beard in the sky. We are taught by scripture that he was sent to this world for the purpose of redeeming wretched humanity from original sin and to do that he would ultimately have to die for this purpose so that people could stop clogging up purgatory - there really was a massive overcrowding problem!
Of course Jesus was on a mission from Glod - erm, God, so although technically he knew he'd end up having to die, he didn't necessarily want to, which isn't exactly the same thing now is it?
It's a real bugger being a messiah what with pre-cognition and everything - I mean you can't even pretend not to know what comes after death so nobody's really that grateful that you come down and die for 'em because they keep making smartarase remarks like wot you just did. And then they say they don't believe in you anyhoo or in an after-life so really what is all the fuss about when you actually get down to it? You have to die whether you want to or not - sorry that's what being mortal means. Does it really matter when you go if nothing happens afterwards? I don't know - you create a lovely world for people and do you get any thanks for it *mumblemuttermumble* I don't know why I waste my time... grumblegroangnashingofteethgroangrumble
) the hard way... God in his paternal aspect being a rather nasty old beard in the sky. We are taught by scripture that he was sent to this world for the purpose of redeeming wretched humanity from original sin and to do that he would ultimately have to die for this purpose so that people could stop clogging up purgatory - there really was a massive overcrowding problem! Of course Jesus was on a mission from Glod -
erm, God, so although technically he knew he'd end up having to die, he didn't necessarily want to, which isn't exactly the same thing now is it? It's a real bugger being a messiah what with pre-cognition and everything - I mean you can't even pretend not to know what comes after death so nobody's really that grateful that you come down and die for 'em because they keep making smartarase remarks like wot you just did. And then they say they don't believe in you anyhoo or in an after-life so really what is all the fuss about when you actually get down to it? You have to die whether you want to or not - sorry that's what being mortal means. Does it really matter when you go if nothing happens afterwards? I don't know - you create a lovely world for people and do you get any thanks for it *mumblemuttermumble* I don't know why I waste my time... grumblegroangnashingofteethgroangrumble
You seem to be labouring under the impression that JC had no free will.
poohcarrot said:
Tosh and piffle my tiddly!
You seem to be labouring under the impression that JC had no free will.
You seem to be labouring under the impression that JC had no free will.
Gods can do whatever they like apparently so does that mean they just do stuff they want to do? They'd be wasting a lot of time doing stuff like creating a world when they knew that the people they put in it were never going to do as they were told and always needed bailing out and even when you try and help them a bit and send a saviour down they still don't listen to you practically from the same moment they shut your kid up in some tomb and go through the whole pointless resurrection thingie - what was the point of doing all of that huh?
Like this, it's about choice - Jesus chose to die for a reason that is illogical given that he didn't need to die at all 'cos he's immortal anyway and in fact he didn't need to get born in the first place. That may seem like total bollux to most sane people so why'd he bother to do all that? There's not even a real sacrifice there as he was god so he wasn't really dying so it all comes down to belief in the end. If he was just a man he did something patently suicidal in being a passive peace protester and sticking to his ethical stance when given a way out (with Pontius Pilate etc etc
), so from that PoV he's a martyr at best in dying for his principles - isn't that a reason to have faith even if it's a little deluded? If he really was god then why do it at all? Just to make a point? Well he's god so that's his prerogative and you can argue that he was giving his disciples a practical exercise in standing up for your beliefs just because, or 'in the name of love' We all do stuff we don't want to do every day don't we? Free will includes the right to do that surely?
Now - what about the non-religious ethical stuff relating to assisted death - are the disabled/disadvantaged lobby right to be afraid of attempts to legitimate aesthetic 'quality of life' issues for termination where the offending condition, like Andrew's Multiple Sclerosis, is chronically limiting in terms of quality, but not terminal in a life-treatening sense?
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what I said and was the whole point of my argument.
And you can hardly class "having to do the washing-up" as equivalent to being crucified.
I don't know. There were so many negatives in that sentence that I still don't understand what it means.
Surely it means he can decide to not do something he doesn't want to do, doesn't it?
And you can hardly class "having to do the washing-up" as equivalent to being crucified.
I don't know.
There were so many negatives in that sentence that I still don't understand what it means. Surely it means he can decide to not do something he doesn't want to do, doesn't it?
Oh I can't be bothered to log out and in again for you It means both of course.
Every day I make a decision to get out of bed, get dressed and have breakfast - this is my standard definition of how bad my mental state is at any given time and I call it my 'do one thing I don't want to do today and then I can do whatever I like after that' option. Some days getting out of bed is the one thing I do that I don't want to do. I made a rule that's completely bogus to prove to myself I have free will - it doesn't matter one way or the other whether I stay in bed or not because I don't work and have no reason to get up for anything at all should I choose. That's not living though is it? What I'm actually doing, every day, is making myself choose to live just a little bit and some days, most days even I do more than get up of my pit and do something valid, even though I don't have to do anything at all. One day I might not get up at all and just turn over and go back to sleep. I'll still wake up later on, or the next day and have to make the decision again. I don't need a poison to keep on making a decision to get up and live, so in the end I'd die of starvation or something because I was suicidal - without doing anything but refuse to get up.
It's just a choice and yes you did say that Jesus chose to die but the reason is the important thing and in the end the only issue. Death is death and the end. We're all dying from our first breath, but we all die for a reason, most of us because we're just too old or too ill. What's offensive to some people, whether or not religion or belief comes into it, is people making choices for the wrong reasons or too early and this is therefore about the personal right to choose and how that has to be defined by law so that other people cannot influence your choice improperly. Freedom is an illusion, responsibility is a fact.
It means both of course. Every day I make a decision to get out of bed, get dressed and have breakfast - this is my standard definition of how bad my mental state is at any given time and I call it my 'do one thing I don't want to do today and then I can do whatever I like after that' option. Some days getting out of bed is the one thing I do that I don't want to do. I made a rule that's completely bogus to prove to myself I have free will - it doesn't matter one way or the other whether I stay in bed or not because I don't work and have no reason to get up for anything at all should I choose. That's not living though is it? What I'm actually doing, every day, is making myself choose to live just a little bit and some days, most days even I do more than get up of my pit and do something valid, even though I don't have to do anything at all. One day I might not get up at all and just turn over and go back to sleep. I'll still wake up later on, or the next day and have to make the decision again. I don't need a poison to keep on making a decision to get up and live, so in the end I'd die of starvation or something because I was suicidal - without doing anything but refuse to get up.
It's just a choice and yes you did say that Jesus chose to die but the reason is the important thing and in the end the only issue. Death is death and the end. We're all dying from our first breath, but we all die for a reason, most of us because we're just too old or too ill. What's offensive to some people, whether or not religion or belief comes into it, is people making choices for the wrong reasons or too early and this is therefore about the personal right to choose and how that has to be defined by law so that other people cannot influence your choice improperly. Freedom is an illusion, responsibility is a fact.
Funny you should mention that Jan. Went to the psych tonight. He showed me a GRAPH! It showed me blubbering (Waily! Waily! as Tina says) and then a sharp and sudden DIP when I was FORCED to make my daughters burlesque costumes (previous to this I was hiding under the doona in the dark getting up to feed my child and do the bare miinimum to keep her alive and off to school, kid stuff etc).
NOW... NOW!!! I have to set "goals" ohhhhh yeah. I have just spent a week having the flesh ripped from my bones (house guest) in the number of things I HAD to do just to be socially polite and acceptable with said house guest. Normally I would have been up with the larks and dragging him out. So the day after he departed I crawled back under the doona. I DESERVED IT!
Now (my little goal list) is to schedule something amazingly wonderful for every day. Today I was dressed beautifully to go to psych.... but I wore my fluffy slippers ...... Hey! At least I didn't turn up in my cuddly dressing gown.
NO amount of argueing would convince him that hiding under the doona IS something amazingly wonderful as a goal for the day Bugger!
NOW... NOW!!! I have to set "goals" ohhhhh yeah. I have just spent a week having the flesh ripped from my bones (house guest) in the number of things I HAD to do just to be socially polite and acceptable with said house guest. Normally I would have been up with the larks and dragging him out. So the day after he departed I crawled back under the doona. I DESERVED IT!
Now (my little goal list) is to schedule something amazingly wonderful for every day. Today I was dressed beautifully to go to psych.... but I wore my fluffy slippers
...... Hey! At least I didn't turn up in my cuddly dressing gown.NO amount of argueing would convince him that hiding under the doona IS something amazingly wonderful as a goal for the day
Bugger!What is offensive is having somebody else make the choice for you because of their beliefs, be it assisted suicide, abortion, or your country being dragged into avoidable wars. :twisted:
And Marianne, Terry Pratchett writes about serious stuff. But he also is a very funny writer. To keep on topic and talk about only the serious stuff would be doing him a dis-service. It's not what he'd want.
And it's pretty clear from all the posts that everyone is in agreement that assisted suicide should be made legal in the UK. Nobody's arguing against it.
And Marianne, Terry Pratchett writes about serious stuff. But he also is a very funny writer. To keep on topic and talk about only the serious stuff would be doing him a dis-service. It's not what he'd want.
And it's pretty clear from all the posts that everyone is in agreement that assisted suicide should be made legal in the UK. Nobody's arguing against it.
deldaisy said:
NO amount of argueing would convince him that hiding under the doona IS something amazingly wonderful as a goal for the day Bugger!
Bugger!
I bet he's not an insomniac either - I take it 'he' is the psych and not the oil rigger I love my bed and I crave sleep having endured nearly 20 years of disrupted and insufficient amounts as a result of simply sharing a bed with somebody else. Up until 6 years ago I was in denial and would say that bed was my favourite place and only nice things happened in it (without going into any detail this didn't include the connubial aspects of bed for a goodly proportion of that period
) - realising that actually sharing a bed in the same room even was in fact very bad for me played a big part in getting me sane and functional-ish again, so even though my sleep patterns are still completley pants a solo bed and bedroom is once again a sanctuary for me, but also in some respects a prison or sorts. It's now solely on my own terms though and that's why it's more sanctuary than incarceration - I quite enjoy my own company and a fantasy life uninterrupted by loud snoring or CPAPP machines Marianne - sorry if you think we're messing about unduly in here but this is something unique to this forum in that we don't allow ourselves to be governed by the topic necessarily and will go off on tangents that might seem nothing to do with what's at the top of the thread, but does have a skewed logic to it in that it's these little diversions that add to the experience and often 'lighten it up' so we can skirt around things and come back to the central theme from a different and sometimes more illuminating perspective. It usually works out OK but Tony'll get the green Mods pen out if we take too many liberties.
Don't worry about it too much in other words, just enjoy the journey and come back in when you feel so disposed
I hear you Jan! When I had my first baby she was a night owl. I asked my mother... "Shouldn't babies sort of sleep around 7?" She said to me... "Darling YOU were number 11 and I suddenly had a baby that would rather stay up until midnight and talk to the curtain or the reflection in the moon til she was tired.... live with it. You are both night owls... enjoy it!"
I have always been a night owl..... NOW I am an insomniac... there is a HUGE difference.
Yeah GETTING sleep is no: 1 priority now. I informed the psych that not getting sleep for three days while still having to do stuff on alternate days MEANT getting sleep when it came... so the aim is to get to sleep when I used to get to sleep. But that involves reading again... as I always read before I sleep and I have had problems reading Concentrating. Hence my rereading of Witches Abroad lately.
As towards "distractions" in the bedroom...... hmmmmmmmm. Yeah. Okay. Oh yeah I get that one too. Nice visit by the oil rigger but ummmmm lets see..... that or a night without someone snoring for the other glorious hours I wish to float off to la-la land in deep and sumptuious slumber? Hmmmmmmm. Nope!
Is it socially acceptable do you think to ask man home on the first date to SLEEP? "Look Honey! You are a dish, totally fascinating, intelligent and I am highly attracted to you, and I daresay we could embark on a wild encounter of nocturnal (and dare I say daytime) encounters..... but if we are going to consider seeing each other for more than a week (the maximum amount of time I can physically go with seriously reduced sleep) or heaven forfend a LONG TERM relationship.... I need to know if you snore! Because if you DO snore then I think we should just pay the cheque right now and go our seperate ways."
Some might say I'm being picky..... but sleep is kind of important.
I have always been a night owl..... NOW I am an insomniac... there is a HUGE difference.
Yeah GETTING sleep is no: 1 priority now. I informed the psych that not getting sleep for three days while still having to do stuff on alternate days MEANT getting sleep when it came... so the aim is to get to sleep when I used to get to sleep. But that involves reading again... as I always read before I sleep and I have had problems reading
Concentrating. Hence my rereading of Witches Abroad lately.As towards "distractions" in the bedroom...... hmmmmmmmm. Yeah. Okay. Oh yeah I get that one too. Nice visit by the oil rigger
but ummmmm lets see..... that or a night without someone snoring for the other glorious hours I wish to float off to la-la land in deep and sumptuious slumber? Hmmmmmmm. Nope!Is it socially acceptable do you think to ask man home on the first date to SLEEP? "Look Honey! You are a dish, totally fascinating, intelligent and I am highly attracted to you, and I daresay we could embark on a wild encounter of nocturnal (and dare I say daytime) encounters..... but if we are going to consider seeing each other for more than a week (the maximum amount of time I can physically go with seriously reduced sleep) or heaven forfend a LONG TERM relationship.... I need to know if you snore! Because if you DO snore then I think we should just pay the cheque right now and go our seperate ways."
Some might say I'm being picky..... but sleep is kind of important.
Sleep is the little death... But ordinary sleep's about renewal too of course, something that isn't an option for assisted death - you know that's a patronising bloody term too! Call a spade a bloody shovel or put a pink ribbon around the handle and wear black velvet gloves to use it and it'll still dig a grave for you. :x
Mercy killing - a deliberate act done as an expression of charity or however you want to put it. How's that for grasping the nettle? Someone dies as a result of a kindness done for them because they're too far gone to keep on living - nothing wrong with that is there? It's done every day in virtually any hospital in any country and sometimes for less reason than because the person wants it to happen sooner rather than later. It happens already and sometimes, rarely one hopes, it happens for the wrong reasons and it's this that scares people aside from the wrath of god aspect.
On the Newsnight debate there was a bishop as well as a disabled lady on the ante lobby side of the table and even he agreed that it has to the individual's choice in the end and if it's made legal then, although he still couldn't condone it on spiritual and moral grounds, it was a valid option open to people to take provided they were certain that was what they wanted and were in a position still to make that rational choice. His actual objection to the Dignitas option being made available in this country at present is because he fears that the weak and the vulnerable might not be sufficiently protected and, rightly, that there would be ways around the legalities of consent for mercy killing for the sufficiently motivated for other non-altruistic reasons.
What if it's an option for people who are chronically ill and in dire physical shape, who aren't being cared for by people they love? They might get pressured into saying they wanted to die for what might appear to be sound quality of life reasons, even though they'd not want that unless they were being bullied or mistreated in some way. It's that situation that's the reason we haven't got this law in place already. It may not be a good enough reason not to have assisted death (there you go I've caved in already because it sounds so much 'nicer' ) with the proper legislation put in that will make this 'foul play' scruple/quibble recede and not be covered under the otherwise needful decriminalisation of helping someone who wants to die do so, as opposed to manipulating them into death or thinking they want it. There have to be sufficient safeguards in place to stop that likelihood of truly criminal abuse, irrespective of hysterical spiritual qualms.
I'm for this concept wholeheartedly and would opt for it myself without hesitation when life ceases to have any good meaning for me, or is too painful (in whatever manner that is) for me to carry on deciding to get out of bed every single day. However, the nay-sayers do have a point in those respects which may be tricked out in Holy Joe speak, but can't be ignored because this is death we're talking about and the living have a duty to help desparately sick people stay alive too. Perhaps it's more a question of defaults that's the sticking point and what assisted death presents is too much of a change to be regarded as an automatic right if you decide that's it without too much thought one day after your lover's walked out, the dog's bitten your bum and your lumbago's playing you up something chronic because the winds coming from the north-west... That's what people aren't happy about really - that they'll be commiting to something that will become unstoppable and maybe even become the norm where its assumed that's the route everyone will want. The little niggle that says - what if there's a miracle? Maybe they'll find a cure the day after I go? What if he/she comes back to me? What if I just change my mind and I can't tell anyone not to do it? What if nobody listens to me or say it's too late for me to back out? It's a human choice so there have to guidelines and clear safeguards for everyone, but especially for the weak and the friendless.
But ordinary sleep's about renewal too of course, something that isn't an option for assisted death - you know that's a patronising bloody term too! Call a spade a bloody shovel or put a pink ribbon around the handle and wear black velvet gloves to use it and it'll still dig a grave for you. :x Mercy killing - a deliberate act done as an expression of charity or however you want to put it. How's that for grasping the nettle? Someone dies as a result of a kindness done for them because they're too far gone to keep on living - nothing wrong with that is there? It's done every day in virtually any hospital in any country and sometimes for less reason than because the person wants it to happen sooner rather than later. It happens already and sometimes, rarely one hopes, it happens for the wrong reasons and it's this that scares people aside from the wrath of god aspect.
On the Newsnight debate there was a bishop as well as a disabled lady on the ante lobby side of the table and even he agreed that it has to the individual's choice in the end and if it's made legal then, although he still couldn't condone it on spiritual and moral grounds, it was a valid option open to people to take provided they were certain that was what they wanted and were in a position still to make that rational choice. His actual objection to the Dignitas option being made available in this country at present is because he fears that the weak and the vulnerable might not be sufficiently protected and, rightly, that there would be ways around the legalities of consent for mercy killing for the sufficiently motivated for other non-altruistic reasons.
What if it's an option for people who are chronically ill and in dire physical shape, who aren't being cared for by people they love? They might get pressured into saying they wanted to die for what might appear to be sound quality of life reasons, even though they'd not want that unless they were being bullied or mistreated in some way. It's that situation that's the reason we haven't got this law in place already. It may not be a good enough reason not to have assisted death (there you go I've caved in already because it sounds so much 'nicer'
) with the proper legislation put in that will make this 'foul play' scruple/quibble recede and not be covered under the otherwise needful decriminalisation of helping someone who wants to die do so, as opposed to manipulating them into death or thinking they want it. There have to be sufficient safeguards in place to stop that likelihood of truly criminal abuse, irrespective of hysterical spiritual qualms.I'm for this concept wholeheartedly and would opt for it myself without hesitation when life ceases to have any good meaning for me, or is too painful (in whatever manner that is) for me to carry on deciding to get out of bed every single day. However, the nay-sayers do have a point in those respects which may be tricked out in Holy Joe speak, but can't be ignored because this is death we're talking about and the living have a duty to help desparately sick people stay alive too. Perhaps it's more a question of defaults that's the sticking point and what assisted death presents is too much of a change to be regarded as an automatic right if you decide that's it without too much thought one day after your lover's walked out, the dog's bitten your bum and your lumbago's playing you up something chronic because the winds coming from the north-west...
That's what people aren't happy about really - that they'll be commiting to something that will become unstoppable and maybe even become the norm where its assumed that's the route everyone will want. The little niggle that says - what if there's a miracle? Maybe they'll find a cure the day after I go? What if he/she comes back to me? What if I just change my mind and I can't tell anyone not to do it? What if nobody listens to me or say it's too late for me to back out? It's a human choice so there have to guidelines and clear safeguards for everyone, but especially for the weak and the friendless.
