"Such a confronting, personalised characterisation of the issue of euthanasia ignores its many complexities.."

Ah, so this is the latest tactic from the opponents of euthanasia: having failed to convince us with religious exhortations or fatuous claims about 'sanctity' and 'dignity' -- as if there was dignity to be had in months or years of pain and incontinence in a hospital bed -- they are now attempting to tell us how 'difficult' the problem is; no doubt it will require many commissions and committees -- all staffed with religious representatives, of course -- debating for years about just why someone in pain and despair who wants help to die should be kept alive at great cost to suffer instead.

Just what part of 'people should be allowed to do what they want with their own lives' don't you understand?

Only humans can make something as simple as dying into an infinitely complex issue. Only humans can dither endlessly while folks in beds die agonizing deaths.

Think of the people with bowel cancer who pass feces through their mouths. Think of those with tumors in the brain who are screaming as their cancer grows and spreads. The cases are many and the suffering is infinite.

Yeah, let's stand around and nod wisely and stroke our beards (if we have them) and make soothing sounds. "It's too hard. We might make a mistake. You just lie there and take it like a man!"

When it comes time for me, I will take care of things myself. It will be messy but what choice do I have? It is my right to decide when my life will end, not some group of strangers each of which has their own agenda.

I should have the right to be given a potion that enables me to leave this Earth in a dignified way AND avoid unnecessary suffering.

"Get out of my life you damned meddlers, you mindless do-gooders, you callous retards, you religious simpletons! Just make your own life choices and leave my choices to me!"

The important issue with euthanasia for me is not so much the people who want to take their own life which is called suicide and happens quite often, but more the issue of people taking the lives of others without their permission under the banner of euthanasia. The old and dementia patients are already vulnerable to this now.

*but more the issue of people taking the lives of others without their permission under the banner of euthanasia.*

I think that that one has already been solved, Nohj. If you take a look at the Swiss legislation, it works very well in practise.
People have the choice of taking their own lives, if they have a terminal disease and if living for them becomes unbearable. But in
the end, they take their own life, nobody takes it for them. That
is all that we are asking for in Australia, but of course the Catholic lobby won't let it happen and of course they have serious
money behind them, as well as serious financial investments in palliative care etc.

So for Aussies there is really only one solution, which thousands are adopting. Smuggle your own Nembutal into Australia, so that if you ever need it, you have a choice, which our religious and our politicians, want to deny us.

Its available from Peru, Mexico, Thailand, China and a number of other countries, for those who bother to inform themselves and care about their own human rights to make choices about their lives.

Those oldies who don't, well they might just have to suffer, nobody can help them, for the risk of a murder charge.

All very sad, that we are so backward in Australia.

Yabby,

That is a very good evaluation but this sentence is possibly stretching it a little. Not much, but a little.

“…the Catholic lobby won't let it happen and of course they have serious money behind them, as well as serious financial investments in palliative care etc.”

The number of people who will avail themselves of a system of Legal Voluntary Euthanasia is miniscule in the overall picture. Other examples around the planet show this to be true. So, it is not so much losing customers, especially as Voluntary Euthanasia happens in most instances only days or weeks before ‘natural’ termination.

The Catholic argument is all about this mysterious, invisible, undetectable thing called a soul. God owns the soul and let no man (or woman) interfere with it. Of course, if they stuck to this, the only argument they have, LVE would be instituted tomorrow. Therefore, smoke screens are forever brought up to confuse the issue.

This article is just another of them. As though Legal Voluntary Euthanasia needs any more discussion! What utter nonsense.

David

Are any of the respondents here doctors?

I raised the issue of euthanasia with an oncologist; oncologists are particularly likely to witness end of life events.

He observed that there were very, very few cases when euthanasia would be 'applicable'- indeed a rarity.

When a patient arrives at the point where there is no chance of a cure, it is customary for palliative care to replace 'treatment'. This means treatment to cure the condition gives way to managing dying in the most sensitive, comfortable and pain-free manner, even when it is known to hasten death.

When this is explained to those who support the idea of euthanasia, most go away satisfied.

Also, a patient at any time can refuse treatment and go directly onto palliative care.

This specialist has also had the misfortune to deal with relatives anxious for him to discontinue treatment of a family member, and put the patient directly onto palliative care - and when the condition did not warrant it. In each of these incidents, family finance was involved.

This was not an isolated incident - and other doctors have experienced this same pressure.