Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
I am a district nurse and I care for dying patients at home. There are times when I feel that the family are suffering watching their loved one dying or the patient may have difficult symptoms but I still feel that if I society offered assisted suicide to people it would put people in this very vulnerable situation under pressure to consider it when it may not be what they really want. People already feel a burden when they need a large amount of care so imagine if they felt that everyone was hoping you would ask to end it all sooner. As a nurse I would not want my role to involve any part of assisting patients to die, I want to care for them until they die and treat symptoms until they die not have any part in speeding up the process it does not feel morally right to me. I think society has to consider the fact that somebody is going to have to administer the drugs to end someones life and many nurses and doctors will end up feeling that they do not have an option. Are we going to be able to opt out?
I firmly believe in the sanctity of life. I also recall the saying that I learnt as a child, "Thou shalt not kill nor yet should strive needlessly to keep alive." This I also believe provides necessary guidance.
We are not at liberty to write our own exit lines, however much we might wish to do so. Our Creator alone is the One who has the right to determine when we depart this life.
As a society we need to value everyone especially those who are vulnerable through illness. This means protecting them, not adding pressure on them to consider themselves a burden which requires their suicide to alleviate the situation.
Life is a gift from God and is time for us to prepare for eternity. It is sacred and should not be taken away by a person. The Bible teaches us that murder is wrong - and although done with good intentions to take a life is still killing a person.
We all know there are times of stress and difficulty when life seems not worth living and yet we later change and are glad to be alive. We should not take that opportunity from someone but encourage and support them for as long as their days last giving them all the pain relief and medical care possible to help them. I believe that with God's help we can complete the days He gives us and every one of thos days - even if difficult - has great importance and value.
We do not have the necessary wisdom to decide when it is the right time for another human being to die and many mistakes will be made
assisting death is wrong in itself and would also lead to intolerable abuse of the vulnerable
Fund research, hospice care and other care support.
If assisted suicide became lawful many handcapped, elderly and comotose people would be in danger. Their lives could be cut short without their consent. The elderly and handicapped people have something to contribute to life. From them we can learn compassion, empathy and inspiration. This has been shown throughout history. I am keenly aware of the suffering that many people have to endure. A comprehensive palliative care is the better route to go. Pain can be allieviated with drugs. Noone has to endure pain edlessly.
Most of us, if we see an animal that is critically injured and suffering, would wish to see that suffering ended because we believe that nothing remains for it beyond that suffering but death. That is the issue that lies at the heart of this question of assisted dying.
If we are just animals that die and have no future, then why not die as quickly and conveniently as possible? But if we believe we are more than that and have an existence beyond death, then death cannot be an opt-out and every moment of human existence potentially has a value that will endure far beyond the grave.
By fighting for better palliative care of the dying (including the right to refuse excessively invasive attempts to delay the onset of death) we affirm the value and dignity of that person's life.
But by saying that a person would be better off dead we are, at best, affirming that this person's human existence has no further potential for good and, at worst, that it never really had a value greater than that of any other animal. Either view is a message of despair to those who most need hope, and an open invitation to others to despise and dispose of that 'useless' life at the earliest convenient opportunity.
As a Christian, when my time comes to die, I certainly have no wish to unduly delay my departure. I have heaven to look forward to. So, were I to become terminally ill, I could easily become the most avid supporter of assisted dying - except for the potential consequences such a stance would have for others.
For many the last days of their lives, even though painful, can provide more hope and healing than many a previous year. And many a terminal care worker has observed how easily those who previously struggled against bitter pain to cling on to the one existence they knew, once having found real peace in this life, are then able to let go without further struggle or medical intervention, in full mental composure and with complete dignity.
Let's work towards finding ethical cures or at least ethical ways of reducing or eliminating pain for people who are suffering, rather than seeking ways to end their lives. With the unravelling of the human genome bringing many new opportunities to increase the number and speed of medical breakthroughs, it is just a matter of time before all suffering can be alleviated or cured. Each person is a unique entity and their living lifeforce in the world is uniquely special.
As a medical professional working in various Intensive Care Units, I
have some experience caring for critically ill patients. In my
experience assisted suicide is a completely unnecessary entity. With
good palliative care, relieving suffering and pain, no one need ever
experience the kind of torment and indignity they fear in the latter
stages of a degenerating or terminal illness. There is a vast moral
difference between relieving someone's suffering and aiding their
self-murder.
The legalization of assisted suicide would inevitably lead to those
individuals who sense they are a burden feeling under pressure to end
their life. Further, as we have seen in other jurisdictions where
assisted suicide has been permitted, there ensues the slippery slope of
other forms of euthanasia being gradually introduced. So there are now
instances of the suicide of physically healthy but depressed persons
and the culling of disabled children. Laws should not be made to govern
for the exceptions and moves to legalize assisted suicide should be
stopped for the good of society as a whole.
Lastly, I resent the implications assisting suicide would mean for my
profession. Doctors are inevitably the ones asked to perform this
assistance and, as an anaesthetist, it is likely that my skills would
be desired to be employed for this purpose. And yet assisting suicide
goes against the underlying ethics, the moral basis, and the ethos, the
very reasons for the existence, of our profession.
I urge anyone reading this to firmly oppose any attempts to legalize assisted suicide within these shores.
Who makes the decision? The patient, their relatives or the doctor? All have vested interests that may well make their decision subjective rather than objective. Current legislation gives the doctor enough authority to decide when symtom relief, that may shorten life, is indicated.
All human life is beautiful and a great gift, and remains so even when someone is terminally ill. Life comes from love and is maintained and cherished by love. Without love we are like a plant that has been refused water and so dies. The 1967 Abortion Act's 'safeguards' to prevent huge numbers of abortions have been flouted and at present there are 200,000 abortions annually. In the same way, the safeguards for protecting the seriously ill from being co-erced into taking their own lives with assistance will be ineffectual and large numbers of people would fall into categories, marking them out for having their lives ended, the sick, depressed, handicapped, etc. The Judaeo-Christian civilisations have always rejected assisted suicide, knowing full well that this would undermine the respect for life as a gift from God and would decimate their communities. To legalise assisted suicide would destroy the relatiionship a patient has with his or her doctor, and would be a total rejection of the Hippocratic Oath, which stipulates that a doctor should not harm any sick person. Which doctor could then be trusted ? There is also the fear that some political party or grouping would endorse assisted suicide, as a means of saving money on medical care. In caring for others, who are very ill, we can claim to be a civilised society; to no longer do this would turn us into barbarians, human beings who have lost the very essence of their humanity, which is best expressed in our love and compassion for the vulnerable in our midst. Palliative care and hospice-type living accommodation, for short or long-term breaks, make a most positive contribution to looking after the verty sick and dying and should be invested in by the Government and people. All people from conception to the grave should be protected fully by law.
WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD!!!! NO ONE I REPEAT, NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO PLAY OR PRETEND TO BE GOD. TO DO THIS IS AGAINST GOD'S COMMANDMENT . THOU SHALT NOT KILL.!!!!!
Whilst I do see the attraction of 'assisted suicide' - I have attended enough terminally ill patients in my medical career - it violates the age-old principle that human life is 'sacred', and for me crosses a humanity-defining line in the sand.
Regrettably it seems only a matter of time before this passes into law, and the prospect makes my heart sink. Yes, palliative care is far from perfect and assisted suicide is a quick and convenient fix. But what's that old saying - 'hard cases make bad law'?
Am I alone in finding it utterly incongruous that we have (rightly) condemned Shipman, yet some doctors will probably go on training courses to be taught the best methods of efficient killing?
'Thin end of the wedge' arguments are invariably pooh-poohed, but twenty years on I guarantee the debate will have moved on to include new categories beyond terminal illlness - see if I'm not right.
Then, there is the matter of the doctor-patient relationship. If you're sick, vulnerable and elderly, will you be wondering if your doctor is *really* acting in your best interests? What's this injection *really* for? It may be irrrational, but it will happpen, and it will be erosive.
As a practising doctor I find the prospect of assisted suicide (or other euphemism du jour) profoundly disturbing. It runs counter to every medical instinct, not to mention my entire motivation for doing the job. I for one will resign from medicine if conscientious objection is disallowed. Blow the pension - I never went into medicine for the money anyway.
Life is a gift from God so precious to behold from conception to old age or until God call us to die in the manner that pleases Him alone. We do not have the right to take our own life let alone another. Life is God given and Only God has that right.
I fundamentally disagree with assisting the advancement of death.
However, even if I didn't, it is still clear to me from history that when man allows something like assisted dying into his society as acceptable, it will not be long before it is abused and begun to be used in a way that was never intended. For that reason alone, we simply should not even think of legalising assisted dying, because by doing so, we would cease to protect the manipulated innocents.
It is a pity that there will not be a speaker taking part at Lord Joffe's lecture on the legalisation of assisted suicide to present the other approach to this question. I recommend a paper by the Baroness Professor Finlay FRCP.,FRCGP published in the November edition 2005 of the Catholic Medical Quarterly. She is a renowned expert on palliative care and caring for the termnally ill and discusses the many aspects of euthanasia and asisted suicide. Link www.catholicdoctorsuk/AlphabetNdxFrame.htm I suggest that she could be asked to speak on these topics, and perhaps Archbishop Vincent Nichols Catholic Archbishop of Westminster would be able to make a valuable contribution also.
God alone has the right over life and death. For the Christian, all pain and suffering is not without great value, which united with the passion and death of our Lord Jesus Christ, is an opportunity to make reparation for past sins, satisfy his temporal debt, and to gain abundant graces unto life everlasting.
For the non-Christian, however, assisted suicide is an act of despair and goes against the natural instinct for survival and life. It will take away any hope of conversion and eternal salvation for that person. No one can say with absolute certainty that God does not exist; in scripture it is said: "The fool hath said in his heart there is no God". Let us have compassion and love, therefore, for the terminally ill and help them to come to terms with their illness rather than encourage them to end their lives prematurely.
Don't block the blessings of God
If passed this would lead to a loss of trust in doctors.
A much better way is to improve Palliative Care services
On a subject such as this, I am going to keep my points brief and hope the reader uses their head to put their own colour to the picture.
With 'assisted suicide', the protection of the state for the most vulnerable is diluted or, indeed, legislated out, and the vulnerable really are on their own.
Paliative care would be under threat as the cost of euthanasia will always be cheaper than a hospice - please don't think assisted suicide legislation won't affect the existence of paliative care in the UK.
Today we see that, with hospital waiting lists and the 'postcode lottery', healthcare is already being seen as "What Is Affordable?"
My sister has had MS for 21 years and she feels angry that her disease is being seen as such a good example of questioning if the life of a sufferer from disease is worth living.
While I'm sure there must be cases up and down the country and going back through the years of 'assisted suicides' it is a dangerous situation when there is no protection of the state, the society we all share.
Forgive me if I am historically wrong but a few years ago a jewish refugee from WWII said to me: "Never forget, the 1st law Hitler passed was euthanasia!"
Here in the UK, in 2009, we live in a comfortable democracy where intellectual debate can make everything acceptable, not happen, scaremongering; but none of us know who will be in power twenty years from now.
The State, society, you and me, have a duty to protect the huge number of sufferers who choose to live with hope, with pain relief, amongst friends, experiencing tomorrow. Laws should remain to protect; without these laws it would be very dificult for the state to bring a case against someone such as Dr Shipman - indeed, who would care enough to question and report him?
I think it's wrong to focus the debate on the individual 'Assisted Suicide'. Any legislation will dilute the delicate, protective membrane of law for the vulnerable. Please do not just listen to the intellectual debate but ask those who would be affected by any 'Assissted Suicide' legislation and see the bigger picture.
Thank you.
I am a senior and if I were terminally ill, I like to think that my family would want the best of care given to me until I died naturally. I like to think they would love me so much that they would like me to be with them as long as possible to share my years of acquired wisdom etc. To want to hasten my death so there may be more of my $$$ left for them would hurt my feelings.
Also, to hasten death with passive euthanasia and starve/dehydrate someone to death as is done now, but not properly admitted to by institutions is torture and mean as well as evil. Flowers at a 'dying' person's bedside rate water, but the dying person can be uncomfortably parched & that is accepted??????
Not in my books. Also, if I am 'dying' (we are all on the road to death from the moment we are born) and in some discomfort, or loss of some dignity, according to someone who deems for me what MY loss of dignity is according to THEIR values is not right.If I am not comfortable, I could be a wonderful example to those around me of how to cope when life hands one a lemon. Often people who are not dying have sufferings & cave because of them...perhaps I could show them in the midst of my 'sufferings' if I can cope, so can they. If I take my life, I am taking the easy way out & cannot show anyone anything about how to cope. Also, I would want to be with my loved ones as long I I possibly could.
The legalisation of assisted dying would increase pressure on the vulnerable to 'do the honourable thing' by committing suicide, it would impair the doctor-patient relationship and erode familial trust, and it would adversely impact investment, training and research in palliative care. It is unethical, unnecessary and dangerous.
no human being has the right to take another ones life and should not be placed in that position
I am totally opposed to legally allowing assisted dying. If Someone you love is suffering, and you feel that compassion calls you to end their life, you should be willing to bear prosecution.
I absolutely oppose assisted dying. Although the proposed law may help some people it would put many, many more people under pressure to 'do the right thing' and request help to die so that relatives could be freed from having to care for them. This proposed law is not a good one and, like the abortion law which was supposed to be for a limited number of cases but which has led to abortion becoming a form of contraception, could lead down a slippery slope. While a small number of cases are heartbreaking, the law should not be changed to accommodate them while at the same time putting many thousands of other people at risk.
Life is God's gift and only he can rightly take it away - when he considers it correct so to do. Miracles do occur with recovery from'incurable' illness. Give miraCLES, AND PRAYER, A CHANCE.
The provision of palliative care sends out a strong message as to the dignity and worth of human life, even at its most vulnerable. Palliative upholds the dignity of the person, proclaiming him or her worthy of our care, our respect and our expense.
On the other hand, moves towards the legalisation of euthanasia, whether it be apparently voluntary or otherwise, expresses a belief that some life is not worth living: is not worthy of our care, our respect of our expense. If we are to legalise euthanasia (for that is what assisted dying is), then it will not be the individuals themselves who set the ciriteria of when a life is no longer worth living/ respecting/ defending. Someone in parliament will have to do this. Someone else will decide - and in shaping our laws, they will form public opinion.
Do yuo really want to live in a society in which the government decides when your life is worthy of protection or not? I prefer to uphold the dignity and value of ALL human life, and to pledge myself to provide as best I can the support and care, palliative and personal, that is needed to make life worth living.
As a parent of a severely and multiply disabled young woman, the thought of assisted dying terrifies me. If it were legalised, how am I to know that some time in the future when I'm no longer around to speak up for her, someone won't decide that my daughter's life isn't worth living and she would "prefer" to die? She is happy, albeit very limited, and has a normal life expectancy. The only way to be certain of protecting people like her is to continue to make assisted dying unlawful.
As a GP of 20 years experience, I have never been asked to help a patient die. I have talked, listened, supported,prescribed when needed for pain and other symptoms, treated depresseion effectively in the terminally ill. All of these enalbe people to be cared for with compassion and given dignity in the final phase of their lives. I believe the insidious pressure of legalising this move would have a negative effect on vulnerable and frail elderly and ill people. I shudder to think of those who, knowing it could be performed legally, may request death as they feel a burden on society and their loved ones. How would we police and check this?
Let nature run its course. Don't interfere with super drugs to prolong life but keep the pain minimal and palliative care going.
I do not believe that life should be prolonged on life support systems but nor do I believe in assisted suicide. To legalise suicide represents a fundamental shift in our understanding of human life and perhaps dehumanises it. More resources should be put into hospices and alleviating human suffering through first class palliative care.
No because no one has the right to terminate another's life.
No because there is no guarrentee any change made to this law will not be abused.
No because any change to the law that protects the Right to Life will engender fear in those who are vulnerable and whose life may be terminated for personal advantage eg anyone who may benefit from Insurance or bequest.
If the will to live has died, the person will die without any help, this I have experienced in Medical Practice.
Civilised medicine is not compatible with killing. The Hippocratic Oath enjoins the doctor never to kill even if asked to do so
Our task is to respect life from conception to natural death and to serve the sick not to kill them
I firmly believe that voting for assisted dying would be another step on the slippery slope to unnecessary killing. We have seen how the number of abortions quickly rose when it was legalised. Who knows where it will end once we start this kind of lawful killing?
I shudder to think!
I am a surgeon and as a doctor who often cares for dying patients - it is unthinkable to take a person's life but we must make sure the patients are given the best care to help them through the dying process without pain and with their families around them
When by assisted dying it is actually meant that death is hastened it is wrong, and would be dangerous to allow the medical profession to practice this in any way. Once this replaced the proper care of dying patients the flood gates would be opened and life would be increasingly devalued.
I lady at my exercise class was diagnosed with 4 brain tumours; she had been in a coma for some time and her medics wanted to switch off her support system. Her husband refused and she has since made a good recovery and is now back at her exercise classes.
Murder is murder no matter how you dress it up as humane!
We have the most propfound sympathy for those who are in a "terminally ill" condition - and indeed have 2 friends who are locked-into what appears to be just such a condition - and would wish to do whatever were in our power to assist. However, we do not believe that legislating for such an "exit route" is a correct solution and believe that legislation could never be sufficiently tight to protect vulnerable nor to cater for the wide range of conditions which would present nor to be sure that such a course would remain acceptable to someone whose initial intent might have been to seek assisted suicide but whose view might have altered but be unable to express it in their debilitated condition. A definition of "terminally ill" is also tricky and indeed we could all be said to be terminally ill. Scientific invesigation also progresses quickly and its future benefits cannot now be anticipated by those (and their families) who might currently be said to be in extremis. In conclusion, could it not also be argued that "assisted dying" is yet another expression of a Society which seeks the easy, comfortable "quick-fix" solution without accepting the weightier and demanding consequences of caring for the sick and the lessons which we can all learn in the process - though, as we said at the outset of this note, this is not to minimise the challenge and sadness of sufferers and families caught in such a situation.
I would like to see much more palliative care available for sick or terminally ill people - not a law which encourages them to kill themselves.
Legalised suicide presents a serious risk to disabled and elderly persons, which together constitute a much larger group than those few who say they are unable to benefit from the extensive palliative care now available.
a dangerous and frightening idea with horrific implications for those who feel they are a burden on their loved ones but would essentially choose to live
It is of paramount importance that we develop a more humane attitude towards the terminally ill. A vitally important part of this involves ensuring that their physical suffering is minimised by medication and nursing care. However, it is also crucial, if British society is to aspire to any kind of civilised standard, that citizens and legislators alike should think much more seriously about the philosophical implications of ending a human life. If the disposibility of a life is judged to be a function of the individual's perceived capacity to cope with it- itself a very questionable assumption- must we not ask ourselves if our own unexamined attitudes are perhaps influencing our friends and relatives in this perception, persuading them that they represent to us a burden or a reproach? Only death is the end of life: being ill, even gravely so, is still part of life, and many of us who have looked after people we love until they died have reason to cherish that time in our memories. Life involves suffering and illness of all kinds, and people do not become less human as they experience these things. Being the person who suffers does not give one the moral right to demand that dignity should be defined according to solipsistic notions about being in control.The human person is dignified in herself, however helpless she may be, and her dignity is enhanced as she enables other people to provide the help she cannot give herself. This is what society is for, to bear each other's burdens, to understand need as a property of humanity rather than a cause of resentment, whether we encounter that need in others or in ourselves.
I think that there is a good case to be made to allow those who are truly terminally ill, with no possible chance of redemption, and who are suffering beyond description, to be able to make the request to be allowed to die, immediately or preemptively. HOWEVER, we do not have the safeguards to prevent unscrupulous professionals, or uncaring relatives from misusing such a possibility. We are far from living in a Utopian society in which everybody can be implicitly trusted absolutely, and therefore I believe that assisted dying would be an extremely dangerous road to embark upon. Euthanasia would be only a few steps away.
I believe life begins at conception and ends at natural death!
To me, this is in principle similar to the issue of abortion - nobody is in favour of of killing their spouse, parents or children, and nobody actively wants abortion, but there are occasions - and too many of these - where assisted suicide (as with abortion) can be the least bad option. And don't let your religion get in the way - it is not for you or me to decide how other people want to live, or how other peiople want to die.
Although everything possible should be done to assist suffering people in the latter stages of their lives by way of palliative treatment and tender, loving care and support for the dying person and relatives etc. I oppose the so-called 'assisted dying programme' knowing that this is no more than euphamism for assisted suicide.
Life is sacred, From the first moment of conception to natural death' it must be protected
I find it rather absurd that as a society we (rightly) do all we can to prevent young people who are troubled from committing suicide, while at the same propose that we should assist someone a bit older to do the same.
Where would we draw the line. its the terminally ill now, would it be the depressed next, then the profoundly disabled.
Before long we'd be as bad as the Nazis. Hitler is well remembered for his crimes against the Jews. We must never forget he committed even grewater crimes against disabled people, homosexuals and anyone else not thought 'fit' for his vision for Germany's future.
The scary thing is he almost succeeded.
Britain take note!!
As a GP I feel that instead of assisting dying, we should be investing in better care for those who are terminally ill-ie more macmillan nurses, hospice care etc, to allow people to die in dignity and peace.
Dying should be an organic part of living; suicide destroys the integrity of the life thus ended. Our task is to provide better and better palliative care and emotional support.
This opens a door to the next step of deciding for others whether their life will be worth living. We already do this for children still in the womb if we feel there is a chance (not even a certainty) that they may be not 'normal'. We need to help more people to enjoy more of life in the difficult times. I pray churches and others who have a strong view on this will put as much effort into helping those in distress as they put into opposing these measures. Both are important.
I feel the people who promote assisted dying and euthanasia are pessimists. Where people really care for the dying there is love and palliative care. Lets have more good hospices and help for those dying at home. For those who are depressed let us have positive care for them too.
When a person is old or very ill and needs a lot of nursing/care they might feel that they are a burden and would be better out of the way. Although nobody might exert pressure the person might still feel that they don`t want to be a burden.
Also when a person is very ill or facing life with a disability they might wish to end it but later could well come to terms with their situation and find fulfillment.
It is possible that new treatments and cures may become available.
Better nursing care needs to be given to people with painful illnesses so that they can be kept comfortable as is done in hospices.
It is a dangerous step as it legalises killing.
However, where doctors are keeping someone alive with drugs or machinery, if the person wants to die and there is NO hope of recovery according to the doctors, then that should be considered. Non-assisted dying.
The current poll results (Oct 16) show 5% for 95% against. I can't believe any sample would be so one-sided - has a pressure group got hold of this poll and tried to rig the result?
Our Christian God who is the only true God, is the only one who can give and take life.
Facing up to life's challenges, including medical ones, is a key part of sound human growth and character development. It is the "Olympic" way. Modern Palliative care, can usually control pain well; and the depression from loneliness, can be minimized by personal friendliness, from others. C.S.Lewis offered some comforting thoughts, on "The Problem of Pain", in human life.
Modern Science has shown that we live in a complex, digitally-programmed Universe. The dominance of Mathematics, a transcendental, personal science of the Relations of Quantity, of everything, from before Time onwards, confirms the Eternal Existence, Nature, Powers, and Prerogatives of a Supreme Mathematician / Programmer / Lawyer / Scientist / Engineer / Artist Creator, whom humans call "God".
Creation is a vast, long, symphonic DVD, with a dynamic beautiful Natural, Park-like, background, in which there is the Stage, on which each human is called on cue, to be Instructed, then to perform, and then Adjudicated, on each ones competence, in the knowing, willing Moral issues in our lives.
Each human has been specifically created, and uniquely endowed with semi-Divine powers of mind, will, conscience and "heart", as talents, backup systems, assignments for credit, opportunities, and periods on duty; with accountability to each other, and finally to the Creator, at our bodily death.
Such a noble origin, nature, and destiny must preclude our falling back on the "Veterinary" approach, of "putting the poor thing out of its misery", when adversity hits. Compassion means sharing our friend's difficulties, not helping him / her to end their bodily life.
Our body is only on loan, from the Creator, per Nature ;we cannot order, buy or own it!. Like a loaned vehicle, our duty is to take good care of it, so that it is in as good a condition as possible, when recalled.
The ultimate purpose of our lives, is to prepare well, for our merciful Final Oral Exam at bodily death, that will decide our fate for the major part of our existence, in Eternity, in happiness or misery.
Hence, it is very unwise and very unkind, to send our soul, or push those of any one else, to Judgement early, and ill-prepared. We need all our assigned lifetime, in the Lab-part of the Course, for our deeds, to possibly finish our work well. And busy Professor God, will not be pleased with students who "gatecrash" his Appointments schedule, or with others who send them into his Office early, in a similar state!.
The Hippocratic Oath was instituted long ago in ancient Greece, to isolate the role of Caring, from the killing of patients, by Physicians. About 80 years ago, Germany abandoned this, and when Hitler came to power, he soon greatly expanded the killings, with little opposition. The "Quality of Life" slogan soon justified the slaughter of millions; and it will do the same for us, if we let it over-ride the intrinsic dignity and worth of everyone. None of us, are at the disposal of others, as property!.
Once Physicians become involved in killing patients, directly or indirectly, the crucial trust between them and their patients will be shattered; with tragic effects for all of us. Control becomes impossible; even children are now being killed in Holland!.It is an admission of failure by the Physician; and hopelessness by the patient. It will brutalize human relationships, like mass Abortion has. And will deter R&D on ameliorating human medical and other problems, for which good solutions may still be possible.
So it is time again, to think with our "heads", not just our emotions, to find rational, moral, truly helpful solutions to our problems, that sustain the noblest traditions of Medicine, and human kindness.
Sincerely Dr Reg Gallop
terminally ill people should be provided optimum palliative care. In almost all cases, pain can be effectively controled. If, as a result of providing adequate pain control, the person's death is hastend, that could be acceptable, as long as the intent is not to end life but to control unbearable pain.
Doctors should always be seen as healers not as killers. It would definitely, affect the doctor/patient relationship adversely and greatly erode trust on part of the patient. All initially touted "safeguards against abuse" would quickly "fade away" and give way to "routinely dispatch" modus operandi, in case of cost or other pressures.
I just spent 10 days of watching how a friend's dear husband was treated at a local hospital. He was 89. The immediate mind set was "he's old, he's finished, let him die."
How is that attitude right in any way?
There are 70 year olds ready to die. There are 90 year olds going strong. We do not have nor should we have the right to assume when anyone is due to die. Beause a person looks old, or poor - does not entitle anyone the right to assume they are finished. I just hated the treatment he didn't receive. And yes, he died - no wonder!! We need advocates for seniors in all our hospitals.
This is NOT a debate about free choice as some would have it.
It is about the kind of civilisation and society we want to have, and about our ackowledging of the true intrinsic dignity of every human life.
Being in a diminished or/and dependant condition does not make one's life less dignified. THis IS real life, and maybe we live in too aseptisized environments, so we tend to ignore it.
It is not caring enough for our fellow neighbors and refusing human solidarity that is UNdignified.
Murder is murder. Reduce their suffering, yes. But by killing them? NO.
That was Hitler's solution. Can't you come up with something better?