I note Brian will only answer his supporters but has no answer to his critics.

This is clearly the thin end of the wedge for extermination of undesirables masked as the the considered opinion of a nature loving hippie.

I will reiterate -

The elderly have already PAID for their health care. They are using their OWN money

Thanks to all for many insightful posts and again, tough questions all round. Now no-one's looked at the human guinea-pig factor with new medical advancements that can be derived from our sick and aged. Lab animals can give us only so much when it come to the sciences and where would the pharmaceutical company's be with-out the terminally ill to test upon?

The sick and dieing do still have their purpose for aiding the better haft of our human populations, with all the humanity mustard one can do in this day and age.

So there's a bright side to your demise, only if you choose.

TTM.

I think I need to clarify my own position here.

I am NOT endorsing "80 and out". The tragic tale of the man in Mumbai is a red herring.

--I am calling for some realism about what it is possible to achieve technically AND financially.

--I am also saying that in some cases "passive euthanasia" – pulling out the feeding tube – is unbelievably cruel.

--Finally I think dementia sufferers are effectively brain dead long before the EEG flatlines. Certainly by then anything that made them human is long gone.

Proxy,

In the case of your 85 year old uncle of course he should have his surgery. If the company accepted his premiums they have to pay up once he claims.

What is more, if the prognosis was reasonable I think he should get his surgery even in a public hospital if he did not have private cover. In any event open heart surgery is hardly constitutes "heroic" treatment these days.

Clownfish

The person who makes life and death decisions in regard to someone who is incapable of looking after themselves should have no financial interest in the outcome. What we need is a system of court appointed neutral curators.

That was where I had a problem with the Terri Schiavo case. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case

The husband who wanted to pull the plug on his wife had a financial interest in the outcome.

Atman,
I totally agree.
Extremely sad to think that our elderly would be denied medical care just because of their age.

Proxy,
I hope your uncle will be able to enjoy life for quite a few more years.
As I said, my Grandmother had radiation therapy and a masectomy when she was 82 and lived a very enjoyable and healthy life until she died at 93. The expenses of the cancer treatment were totally worth the extra 11 years she got to live that wonderful life of her’s!

Loudmouth and Clownfish,
If you think that in countries with euthanasia laws in place, it is even possible for a family to bump off Grandma, then you are hugely misinformed.
Have you read my previous posts and you should do some research about what voluntary euthanasia entails.

Excellent post, Stevenlmeyer.
Re dementia sufferers, I would have a problem with euthanasing them because it would be involuntary, unless laws are in place that would have enabled them to make these arrangements while they were still in good mental health.

I can only support voluntary euthanasia at this stage, but it is reasonable to think about exceptions, like dementia sufferers who also suffer from a painful and incurable illness… In that case, some thought can be given to neutral curators, and a team of medical professional staff, while closest of sin’s view could be taken into account to be able to form a complete picture.

Brian
Euthanasia aside for a moment.

Re-reading the paragraph about intensive care, I don't believe that a desperate funding shortfall in one area, like community care (child protection) should be plugged by transferring funding from another area equally relevant to quality of life issues. IMO age should not diminish one's rights and we should respect those older Australians who have done much to build this country. While I advocate voluntary euthanasia under stringent conditions I would hate to see a situation where people are made to feel guilty just for getting old and for needing care. My mother always said respect your elders.

If you are concerned about child protection issues, there are so many more areas of waste that can be re-prioritised. Why select age care specifically? Who are we to draw the line on when care should be withheld.

Wouldn't you rather our decision makers channel more money into those areas that enhance quality of life rather than wasting it on over-quoted school halls and insulation debacles. It will also create long standing jobs rather than those that flux with the rise and fall of the building sector, which is good for the retail sector as well.

There is a difference between voluntary euthanasia and shifting funding priorities from older Australians as a matter of policy. As another poster said these older Australians have paid their health care costs all their lives generally much of it will be used for those the older age group who generally require more care.

The key is sustainable populations, if we keep growing populations to offset the cost of care to older Australians, we just continue to exacerbate the problem in each generation. The government line about care for an ageing population is bogus in any case, it is purely being pushed in the interests of economic growth and profit creation.

What this article is about is piggy-backing the euthanasia debate to push some very strange opinions. The author lends support to the campaign of intergenerational jealousy successfully waged by both sides of government to divert attention away from their own lack of planning, poor spending decisions and some lousy policy, two examples being:

- The invasion of Iraq. Australia's military expeditions alone have been enormously costly both to the budget and to international reputation; and

- The continuing failures in Aboriginal policy. Devastating for the public purse ever since the Whitlam government multiplied the windfalls in guvvy money for the consultants, fraudsters and crooks, both black and white, that are endemic in the victim industry.

Is the author out to support voluntary euthanasia? No siree, he has other balls in the air that are far more important to him that that. Bin the aged and put the 'saved' dough into his flakey social policies.

That is a pity because what this article does is poison the water for ernest and caring supporters of voluntary euthanasia like Robin Chapple who introduced his Voluntary Euthanasia Bill into the Western Australia parliament last Thursday:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/western-australias-euthanasia-bill-paves-way-for-legalised-euthanasia-in-the-state/story-e6frer4f-1225869523980