feels good to revert back in this forum....its a wonderful experience coz posting is very easy here....thank you for making it so interactive....

__________________________________________________________________
Want to get-on Google's first page and loads of traffic to your website? Hire a SEO Specialist from Ocean Groups [url=http://oceangroups.org/]seo pecialist [/url]

In the (vain) hope of trying to take this further I sent a very polite letter to all 5 candidates standing in my electorate (Fadden) requesting information on and their intentions to support or otherwise any possible future legistation on euthanasia.

I regret to say that 4 candidates totally failed to reply, not even to acknowledge the letter. The only reply I got was from the "One Nation" candidate and he produced the very suitable reply to the effect the this subject should be the subject of a referendum. As a protest about the behaviour of the major party candidates I will now vote One Nation and make it into a Langer vote by putting the majors equal last.

What can you do with irresponsible candidates. How can we get a referendum

Decades ago most people were born and died
at home. Births and deaths happened when
they happened, often without medical
intervention. If a baby was too premature or
defective, or if a seriously ill person was dying,
there was little the family doctor could do
about it other than to offer comfort.

Today, most people are born and die in hospitals
under the supervision of medical personnel who
sometimes decide to keep them alive long beyond
the point at which they would normally have died.
Patients can be hooked up for days, months, or
years to machines that sustain their lives, and this
step may be taken even if they are in constant pain
or even if they are permanently comatose.

Technologies that were intended to save people
from unneccessary death may actually have the effect
of depriving them of a dignified death.

Physicians are expected to do all they can to sustain
life, but in cases where people have lost their
functional and mental independence and the preservation
of their lives helps no one, and is desired neither by
the patient nor by those who love them most
dearly, why could the patient's doctors not be content
to let the patient die in peace and serenity?

I can't fathom why they pursue a vigorous therapy that
would benefit no one except their own satisfaction in
twarting death, regardless of the consequences.

The right to die should be made an election issue,
and we need to keep applying pressure on our MPs
to give us a Referendum on this crucial matter that
sooner or later will affect us all. The laws need to
be changed.