<Given the
Exit 2007 figures also quoted, of 245 patients, multiply that
by 3 to give you an Australian figure. >

Is that the right way to calculate the figure? Does it include all the foreigners assisted, or only Swiss nationals? And for what reasons did the people kill themselves. It seems very difficult to get any meaningful stats.

<Why do you want to deny these people a choice about their own lives?>

I deny them no such thing, Yabby, but you must realise that you cannot change laws without having unexpected consequences. For example, to have such means readily available could see more suicides. Would that be a good thing? What safeguards would you have to protect against this. After all, not all suicidal people are suicidal all the time, are they?

*Is that the right way to calculate the figure? Does it include all the foreigners assisted, or only Swiss nationals? And for what reasons did the people kill themselves*

Yes Fester, its the right way to calculate the figure, which you
would have to agree with, if you'd read and understood both articles.
The Exit figures apply only to Swiss Citizens or residents. Dignitas
deals with foreigners. IIRC their figures were 197, its quoted in
the stats of the second article.

People killed themselves when they matched the Exist criteria,
as has been quoted, ie terminal disease, lots of suffering etc.
Read both articles, its all there.

*but you must realise that you cannot change laws without having unexpected consequences*

So why should the adoption of the Swiss laws, have unintended
consequences that don't apply to Swiss people, where those laws
have been in place for some time?

*What safeguards would you have to protect against this.*

Applying the same safeguards as Exit Switzerland apply to their
patients.They are listed in the first URL.

<Applying the same safeguards as Exit Switzerland apply to their
patients.They are listed in the first URL.>

Yabby, the url you provided lists five conditions to be met before providing the service. Those conditions are not Swiss law, but the conditions set by an organisation. So we would need different laws to the Swiss, according to the guidelines you chose.

<IIRC their figures were 197>

I cannot find such a figure in either of your links.

I did find this link from The Guardian giving some Dignitas stats,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/feb/25/assisted-suicide-dignitas-statistics

which listed a cumulative 112 assisted suicides over a twelve year period.

I was concerned by the comment of this ex- Dignitas employee

'production line of death concerned only with profits'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dignitas_%28assisted_dying_organisation%29

*which listed a cumulative 112 assisted suicides over a twelve year period*

Not so, Fester. Your very own URL lists 1041 as the cumulative total,
if you move the cursor at the bottom to the right, which adds up
countries and years. Members are totalled too, around 5000.

On my URL, if you look at the top right under "Key Facts",
the 2006 figure is listed as 195, which matches the figure for that
year provided by your URL.

*Article 115 of the Swiss Penal Code dealing with cases of inciting and assisting suicides
stipulates that: “Anyone with a selfish motive who incites a person to commit
suicide or who helps that person to commit suicide, if that suicide is consummated
or attempted, will be punished by a maximum of 5 years reclusion or imprisonment”.*

The above snippet gives the law the power to act. If Dignitas or
anyone else was inciting people to commit suicide to make money,
they would land up in jail.

Yabby

I asked you the number of Swiss nationals provided assisted suicide annually. The figure you stated was 197. Okay, the total for 2006 was 195, of which fifteen were Swiss nationals. Three years later and the figure had more than halved to 89, with the number of Swiss nationals seeking the service falling by nearly 75% to four.

<The above snippet gives the law the power to act.>

Yes, but if Dignitas were like its disgruntled ex-employee claimed, the reality would be that the law is difficult to enforce and open to abuse. And again if this were true, what would Dignitas' stats have been had they acted in accordance with the law?

One more observation on the checklist of Exit International is that it does not include an assessment of the patient's standard of care, specifically a determination that it is optimal. I would have thought such a condition paramount for informed consent.

*I asked you the number of Swiss nationals provided assisted suicide annually. The figure you stated was 197*

Sheesh Fester, I made no such claim, why are you purposefully playing
dumb here?

My figure from memory for Dignitas was 197, when it was 195, nearly
all foreigners. My figures for Exit, which are all Swiss, was 245.
If you really want to be pedantic about the Swiss figures, add
the 245 from Exit with the handful from Dignitas. Exit acts
more as a charity for locals, Dignitas more as a business for foreigners.

*Yes, but if Dignitas were like its disgruntled ex-employee claimed, the reality would be that the law is difficult to enforce and open to abuse.*

Perhaps the Swiss Govt is a better judge of that, then a poster like
yourself, who has read 4 lines on Wickipedia. To me the law is quite
clear. If Dignitas broke it, they could go to jail. Digruntled ex
employees tend to make all sorts of claims. Some don't understand
either, that being a business, Dignitas has to make a profit or it
shuts down. Their charges seem quite reasonable to me. The question
arises, why they should have any clients at all. As Europe adopts
more humane laws country by country, people won't have to travel to
Switzerland anymore, but can die with dignity and peacefully at home,
with loved ones, family etc.

The question that it comes down to is this: If Fester wants to commit
suicide tomorrow, AFAIK that would be quite legal. The same rights
are not shown to the terminally ill, who want a say about their
life. Those sick of pain, sick of the struggle, who want to die with
dignity, surrounded by their families. Our laws are as they are,
purely because of religious dogma. The Christian story goes that
Jesus suffered on the cross for you, so a bit of suffering is no
big deal. I see absolutaly no reason, why the Christian lobby should
be allowed to enforce their dogma on the rest of us.