http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19989167

Would you wish to be allowed/assisted to die if you had a painful terminal disease?

I have had to deal with this situation with someone who was very dear to me. I had to stop him killing himself on four occasions, of which one at least was a serious attempt. In this case he was prevented by the hotel in Pattaya at which he had booked in, and taken to a Pattaya hospital. I flew down from Hong Kong to accompany him home. One at least of the other attempts was almost certainly an attempt to dramatise his situation rather than a genuine attempt at suicide. I was always against suicide; my ingrained Catholic faith saw to that.

But I'm not sure I'm right (or maybe wrong, come to that!). Certainly many attempts at suicide are self-dramatisation, but can this be said about someone who prepares over a period of weeks or months? Is a person in constant pain fully in control of their thoughts, or are they "while the balance of his mind is disturbed"?

My feeling now is that every person should have the right to make that decision for themselves, but I still have reservations over the mental state of such a person. In cases where the person is not much more than a vegetable, I doubt whether one can trust their decision.

I should be interested in other people's reasoned opinions (emotional reactions are easy, and not always right).

We shall die either way, so why not skip that last miserable mile ?

A guy I knew in Chiang Mai killed himself recently. There was thread about it in the Chiang Mai section. He had two strokes and could not talk correctly and could not walk either. He apparently was running out of money and had decided long ago that he would commit suicide when he did.

I don't blame him one bit. The only reservation I have about killing oneself in this situation is that being, raised a Catholic, I am afraid that it is the "unforgivable" sin and one would go to hell for all eternity. I really do not believe this, but I would hate do it and turn out to be wrong.

I was in a situation, in a Catholic hospital, where I was watching a loved one die for about three weeks. She was on morphine of course, unconscious, and being there it was quite clear how the morphine delivery worked. If you give too much morphine you die. I felt the nurses were kind of sort of hinting that I should administer the overdose. I would have liked to do that, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. It would have been an act of killing a loved one and it also would have been majorly illegal. The situation made me angry. I wanted it to be both legal and I also didn't want to be the one forced to push the button. I thought that should be done by a health professional. So yes I am very much for the right to die.

A friend of mine and i promised to assist if it comes to it,

we both think life isn't necessarily a good thing if incapacitated/others.

What kind of pills would be suitable, and how many ?

Nebutal is one of the most painless ways to go, but hard to get these days. However, in Thailand, vets have it for using on animals.

Anything to prevent more condo jumpers!

There was a programme on the Beeb a little while ago where Terry Pratchett accompanied a man and wife couple to Dignitas and filmed the whole thing. It was all very calm and serene. The only part that was a little disconcerting was that a couple of minutes after the husband had swallowed the potion he came out of his stupor for a few seconds and asked for water. The Dignitas staff calmed him down and didn't give him any as apparently this is a known reaction and giving water makes them live a little longer.

When I'm ready I want the vet to come round and do what they did to my beloved Max. Shave the fur, needle in the arm and dead as a dodo 2 seconds later. I don't want any vicars or Doctors sticking their oar in and telling me what I can and cannot do.

I don't have problems with euthanasia. If i got to a certain state of health or quality of life, it should be up to me to decide whether or not to continue existing.

I'm not sure why there is often so much effort provided in Western societies to preserving human life. Really, there are many billions of us on the planet, so a few voluntary deaths shouldn't be cause for too much concern.

As for other people taking their lives. Well, I believe it is their choice. In a circumstance of someone having a terminal disease, if their life quality is not up to scratch, then they should have the right to end it.

A guy I knew in Chiang Mai killed himself recently. There was thread about it in the Chiang Mai section. He had two strokes and could not talk correctly and could not walk either. He apparently was running out of money and had decided long ago that he would commit suicide when he did.

I don't blame him one bit. The only reservation I have about killing oneself in this situation is that being, raised a Catholic, I am afraid that it is the "unforgivable" sin and one would go to hell for all eternity. I really do not believe this, but I would hate do it and turn out to be wrong.

I knew him too, UG.

I agree that everyone has the right to make the decision themselves. If they belong to any religious body, Catholic or whatever, they have accepted that body's right to tell them what they may not do (that doesn't mean that they will necessarily obey). I agree (with VP Biden too, I gather) that Catholics do not have the right to tell non-Catholics what to do. But I don't think anyone has the right to implicate anyone else in the act of suicide. This raises a problem for those who are incapacitated, and I don't really kn ow the answer here; to put it all on the shoulders (and consciences) of medical professionals seems unfair, to say the least.

Nebutal is one of the most painless ways to go, but hard to get these days. However, in Thailand, vets have it for using on animals.

it seems extremely difficult to find a vet in Thailand who administers Nembutal. recently an American friend of mine who's dog suffered from terminal cancer contacted without success a dozen vets in the Pattaya area. finally he found a general physician who ended the dog's suffering by injecting an overdose of Insulin.

I find it amazing how we let millions and millions of people die every year through war, starvation or just a lack of medical supplies. I would imagine the majority of these would prefer to live and yet we cannot let someone die who is willing. As you may guess, I'm up for having the right to choose.

Nebutal is one of the most painless ways to go, but hard to get these days. However, in Thailand, vets have it for using on animals.

it seems extremely difficult to find a vet in Thailand who administers Nembutal. recently an American friend of mine who's dog suffered from terminal cancer contacted without success a dozen vets in the Pattaya area. finally he found a general physician who ended the dog's suffering by injecting an overdose of Insulin.

Yes, putting a suffering animal out of its misery is considered humane, but putting a suffering human out of their misery is considered a crime.

My father was in ICU, unconscious, on life support, wasting away for six weeks before he finally died. My mother, a year later when she was in the hospital, had me sign the DNR (Do Not Resusitate). Like most people, she didn't want to live because a machine was keeping her alive.

Would you wish to be allowed/assisted to die if you had a painful terminal disease?

I don't see why it must be limited to a "painful terminal disease". "My body, my choice!" shouldn't only apply to pregnant women. Long life is over-rated, what comes next is the greatest mystery, and one that all of us learn sooner than later. Some may prefer not to wait any longer. From a practical point, it would free up a lot of pension money.

Yes, koheesti, I see all these arguments, but I still have one question. Who should be allowed to put another human being out of his/her misery? And how do you stop this right being abused?

When my mother was in hospital dying of cancer, the nurse said to my sister, "Don't worry; we won't let her suffer." So, I suppose, the doses of morphine were gradually stepped up.

Thou shalt not kill, but need'st not strive

Officiously to keep alive.

(A.H.Clough)

Health officials are caught in a dilemma. Their profession says, Keep alive. But modern medicine has developed so many aids to keep the body functioning, even when it's brain-dead, that keeping a person alive artificially may follow their professional oath, but it can be torture for relatives of that person.

Yes, koheesti, I see all these arguments, but I still have one question. Who should be allowed to put another human being out of his/her misery? And how do you stop this right being abused?

When my mother was in hospital dying of cancer, the nurse said to my sister, "Don't worry; we won't let her suffer." So, I suppose, the doses of morphine were gradually stepped up.

Possible abuse is the only problem I see with this.

Some relatives might want to pull the plug too fast to get inheritance. Nothing in life is perfect. Safeguards, living wills, whatever...someone will find a way to abuse it. I should be so lucky to have someone there anxious to pull the plug if I ever get hooked up to a machine. Maybe I had better go out and get rich quick before it happens.

Yes, koheesti, I see all these arguments, but I still have one question. Who should be allowed to put another human being out of his/her misery? And how do you stop this right being abused?

Dignitas seem to do a reasonable job. It's a shame that people have to die earlier than they would like in order to make sure that they're still capable of travelling rather than being able to do it when they want.

http://www.telegraph...med-by-BBC.html

My father died in a hospice last month after a long fight with cancer.

His last days were as comfortable as possible and he genuinely enjoyed spending time with friends and visitors and a couple of weeks before the end he refused (which he was allowed to do) all medication except painkillers.

I'm not sure that this was classed as suicide but it certainly hastened the process and it was always his decision to make.

I got to know the superb and very compassionate staff at the hospice and they assured me that they resuscitated nobody, everyone who entered that facility was allowed to die as quickly and painlessly as possible.

I'm not sure I approve of state encouraged suicide, one of my core beliefs is that if governments are allowed to kill their own citizens, and I do believe there's no shortage of people who warrant it, it gets out of hand.

I certainly believe anyone who wishes to kill themselves should not be hindered in anyway as long as they are capable of doing it themselves.

No person should ever have to, or be allowed to, assist another's death, either compelled to or as a volunteer...

I'm not sure I approve of state encouraged suicide, one of my core beliefs is that if governments are allowed to kill their own citizens, and I do believe there's no shortage of people who warrant it, it gets out of hand.

it did not get out of hand in Switzerland and neither in the Netherlands. Euthanasia is legal in both countries.

I certainly believe anyone who wishes to kill themselves should not be hindered in anyway as long as they are capable of doing it themselves.

No person should ever have to, or be allowed to, assist another's death, either compelled to or as a volunteer...

This is more or less what I think.... but so often the people who really want to commit suicide are not capable of doing it themselves. This is exactly where the problem arises.

Euthanasia laws may rarely be abused.... but they open up the possibility of abuse. How do you safeguard helpless people who do not want to die?

I certainly believe anyone who wishes to kill themselves should not be hindered in anyway as long as they are capable of doing it themselves.

No person should ever have to, or be allowed to, assist another's death, either compelled to or as a volunteer...

This is more or less what I think.... but so often the people who really want to commit suicide are not capable of doing it themselves. This is exactly where the problem arises.

Euthanasia laws may rarely be abused.... but they open up the possibility of abuse. How do you safeguard helpless people who do not want to die?

come on Honourable Sir I-Birder! do you think Swiss or Dutch jurisdictions have no strict rules and multiple checks on Euthanasia cases? which is/was your home jurisdiction? Papua New Guinea? Central African Republic? Khmer Rouge-controlled Kampuchea Pracheathippadey?

Yes, +1 Naam,

there probably ain't a single subject under more scrutiny than Euthanasia

in either Swiss or Dutch

It gets plenty of scrutiny from outsiders, generally those hindered by moral, political or religious beliefs... on both sides.... when it comes to presenting the "facts".

I certainly believe anyone who wishes to kill themselves should not be hindered in anyway as long as they are capable of doing it themselves.

No person should ever have to, or be allowed to, assist another's death, either compelled to or as a volunteer...

This is more or less what I think.... but so often the people who really want to commit suicide are not capable of doing it themselves. This is exactly where the problem arises.

Euthanasia laws may rarely be abused.... but they open up the possibility of abuse. How do you safeguard helpless people who do not want to die?

come on Honourable Sir I-Birder! do you think Swiss or Dutch jurisdictions have no strict rules and multiple checks on Euthanasia cases? which is/was your home jurisdiction? Papua New Guinea? Central African Republic? Khmer Rouge-controlled Kampuchea Pracheathippadey?

I'm sure they do, Naam! But I'm also sure that some jurisdictions wouldn't be so scrupulous. And people should not have to travel to Switzerland or the Netherlands...... which is, I suppose, the point of this discussion.

I watched my dad fall apart mentally with Alzheimer's. In his last days his brain was no longer controlling his breathing. He used to say. "I never want to be in a position, that my smallest needs are looked after by others". However, that's exactly what happened for almost 10 years. Even his daughters in law and Son in law became strangers to him. I for one never want to be in a position like that, and would prefer to go with some shred of my dignity left to me. It should not to be up to some religion influenced law when that happens.

I watched my dad fall apart mentally with Alzheimer's. In his last days his brain was no longer controlling his breathing. He used to say. "I never want to be in a position, that my smallest needs are looked after by others". However, that's exactly what happened for almost 10 years. Even his daughters in law and Son in law became strangers to him. I for one never want to be in a position like that, and would prefer to go with some shred of my dignity left to me. It should not to be up to some religion influenced law when that happens.

Religion-influenced? No! I think most civilisations worthy of the name have regarded human life as sacred. That's not to say the stricture has always worked very well! Life was cheap in the Roman Empire, it was cheap in, say, mediaeval England.... and you weren't all that safe in 18th Century England either. Throughout the Islamic world, and also in the civilisations of India and China, life was very cheap indeed.

I think we should be proud to live in countries where the laws against taking life are pretty well observed (even Thailand, which is much worse than Western Europe, is not all that bad). In particular, medical professionals have always prided themselves on saving life, not taking it.

Previously, doctors had to choose, Can we save him or not? Now we ask them to choose, Is his life worth living? The first is absolute, the second is a value judgment.

I agree (I've said this earlier on in the thread) that a person should be allowed/aided to die when life is too painful or the quality of life falls below a certain difficult to define level. Naam has taken me to task for implying that the authorities in Switzerland and the Netherlands do not take adequate safeguards; I'm sure they do. I'm also sure, from experience in the case of Switzerland, and from report in the case of the Netherlands, that these are two of the countries best organised and most likely to take every possible care. What about other countries? On a descending scale, I would think. How well do you think Thailand, which most of you live in, would shape up? A small backhander to BIB, perhaps?