No,just time for Dr death to be regulated.
Starting with de-registering him for his untimely involvement in the WA incident, or an earlier one on the gold coast.
Given we already have excellent and improving palliative care/pain management, that sometimes eases all the pain but kills the patient; meaning, we just don't need this other!
But particularly, how easy it would be for those with enduring power of attorney, and great expectations as inherited wealth, may find themselves with the power to hasten, that happy for them outcome!
As someone who cared for an elderly relative 24/7 for her last ten years, I can tell you; there are times when that power to alter NATURAL outcomes, would have been very tempting.
People who want to top themselves have plenty of options that just don't have to include anyone else!
Turning off their oxygen, not swimming between the flags, or deliberately into a rip; which then takes you too far out for you to return, even were you to change your mind?
Then there's single vehicle accidents, stepping over a Gold coast balcony into thin air etc.
And it's not the fall that hurts, just the sudden stop at the bottom.
And then if you aren't suitably lubricated, and therefore just such an accident, going somewhere to happen!
Rhosty

Two decades in Dahmer's Torture and Rape Dungeon (TM) will change any anti-choicer's mind on euthanasia.

Congratulations Rhrosty, you've just made Al Qaeda look compassionate (again).

As someone who cared for an elderly relative 24/7 for her last ten years,
Rhrosty,
I'd be very interesting in how you managed. Were you working as well or were you a Pensioner ? I'm interested in how you managed expenses as well. I'd be beside myself if faced with such a prospect.

Voluntary Euthanasia has been done to death on OLO, let's have death to all religions who oppose it, then one is sure we will have VE. but as long as you are Euthanising people with bombs in war, medals given, no worries, but definately do not bomb a person wanting to die with Nembutal, prison sentence, no medals here, what a farcical world we live in.

Beside yourself individual?
What?
Are you an identical twin?

How did I manage!
Well that depends on how much you're willing to go without!
During this time, the only new clothes I had were socks and undies.
A night out? What the hell is that?
A holiday, or a break/respite from 24/7 duties?
What the hell is that?
Getting a good night's sleep, not listening to the sound of someones breathing in the next room , just in case it stops!
A good night's sleep! What the hell is that?
As a permanently disabled pensioner, it was a huge struggle on two fronts. Physically and financially. And my privilege for an angel who made her own share of, almost endless sacrifices for all her kids!
And yet, clearly not a job for someone less compassionate than Al Qaeda! Such remarkable insight from A.T.! Again!
As someone who believes in reincarnation, and a time and a place for every individual's passing; I just don't see any value, in trying to circumvent individual karma.
Which if avoided, just means we then are obliged to come back and do the whole thing over, and with an added burden or the Karma earned by taking a life! Our own, and our most valuable gift!
So as you sow, so also shall you reap, if not in this lifetime then the next!
And given that is so, perfect justice!
Rhrosty.

Which is exactly why palliative "care" should be shut down and its staff prosecuted for negligence and torture, Rhrosty.

Rhrosty,
thank you for the philosphical but I'm more interested in how you managed time, work, care & finances ?
I simply couldn't imagine doing what you did on my pay & whilst going to work. I have great difficulty in working out how I could possibly fit 24/7 care & work into 24 hours. You must surely have had some assistance from someone or some scheme.

No individual, No assistance! Albeit a good garden!
Thanks for the almost microscopic myopic inquisition!
I take it that level of budgeting every last cent, is beyond your abilities?
Moreover I was a part time dad, who never ever forgot birthdays, special occasions, or Christmas, and would often lay-by months ahead, but particularly, if there was a sale or some such.
Outings had to limited to a very simple bush B-B-Q and quality time!
I even bought second hand, at those times, I found far too much month left at the end of the money.
It can be done, if you buy extra, when there are bargains that you need. Salt, baking soda and vinegar, are excellent substitutes for much more costly, and less effective chemicals.
Vinegar, is as good as any softener, when added to the wash water! And Fifty fifty, vinegar and salt, will kill almost anything, along with many weeds.
And trampling, even assisted by crutches/sticks, very early on a cold and frosty morning, works well as broad-leaf weed control. And it helps to keep you warm.
My parents survived the Great Depression and a world war, and knew how to make do, go without, or tie it up with baling wire, just to get the show on the road!
Walking where possible saves on a very limited $10.00 a month rationed fuel bill, and I made the old ford last and last, by being a reasonable bush mechanic.
Albeit, I needed to lay down on a walker, to change tyres, and what have you.
I guess if your heart's in it, almost anything is possible! Except paying a $7.00 surcharge from thin air!
Rhrosty.

[Deleted for abuse.]

A T. Are you for real?
Palliative care doctors arrested for torture?
Who's torture?
Your's while waiting for your inheritance perhaps?
Eskimos used to strip their, [past their use by date,] oldies, and leave them outside in the cold and snow; to perish!
Are you suggesting we should emulate that level of calloused indifference or patent lack of humanity!
In comparison, an old woman in Scotland, dying from terminal cancer, and with just months to live!
Was given pure addictive heroin, which as a vastly superior palliative care drug, enabled her to live an additional pain free five years, go out, socialize etc!
I mean she made the papers playing golf of all things, and reportedly as happy as Larry, given the additional pain free years.
Think for just a moment, if you can?
Other people's pain and how we react to them, may well be our own test, rather than theirs!?
And indeed, the Scot lived on to see both her daughters married.
I just don't have a problem with her dying as a heroin addict, given it allowed her to live out her natural time, and free from pain; and not spaced out, which is fairly common in other drug therapies.
And I'm in favor of medicinal marijuana, for exactly the same reason!
Luckily for her, you and your very obvious, cruel and calloused indifference, weren't there, with your inflexible attitude/rule book, advocating her forced removal?
Or that she be denied effective real pain relief!
Rhrosty.

Thanks for the almost microscopic myopic inquisition!
Rhrosty,
Well, all I can say to that is that I'm still in the dark as to how anyone other than a rather well off can afford to stay home to provide 24/7 care. Don't get me wrong I'm not against care far from it but you appear to avoid answering or acknowleging that you would have received taxpayer funded assistance. I would think it appropriate to acknowlege such assistance instead of giving the impression you did it it all on your own. That's why I said that I coouldn't imagine to care for someone in my financial circumstances.
I don't mean to criticise if you did receive financial assistance because I'd certainly have to ask for it.

Rhrosty, I would rather freeze to death than dehydrate myself to death in Hospice Stalin.

Even Zyklon B is faster and therefore preferable.

To quote Dying in Dignity: "None of us have the right to tell another how much suffering they can and should bear". We should all have the right to a peaceful and pain-free death at a time of our own choosing. I don't want my dying drawn out by futile medical interventions, and I thoroughly support voluntary euthanasia legislation that reduces suffering and protects patients and doctors. The sooner it is enacted, the sooner involuntary euthanasia can be controlled - it happens now.

I wonder how many here realise that the simple act of advising hospital staff IMMEDIATELY on admission of their wishes will prevent many of the cases of life preservation and extension that they are complaining about, and requiring 'regulation' of euthanasia for?

That is not to argue for or against euthanasia. It is simply to say that if you don't want your life to be saved over and over again by heroic efforts of highly trained and committed medical staff, for mercy sakes say that openly and directly to all when the ambo arrives and when you arrive at the hospital. BEFORE they start administering drugs.

It is too late after the treatment starts and medical staff might be sued by yourself, relatives or the State if they don't do everything they are trained to do.

One can only wonder why this simple act of declaring your desired treatment doesn't receive more publicity, particularly from those who say they are concerned about the terminally ill. Or is it that their politics are getting in the road and there are points to be scored?

Dear Rhrosty,

<<As someone who believes in reincarnation, and a time and a place for every individual's passing; I just don't see any value, in trying to circumvent individual karma. Which if avoided, just means we then are obliged to come back and do the whole thing over, and with an added burden or the Karma earned by taking a life! Our own, and our most valuable gift!>>

As someone who believes the same, I am shocked at your attempt to try enforcing religion on others, using the evil mechanism of state-violence.

Are you not concerned about your own karma for doing so?!

By all means, do try to convince people. By all means, do explain to them peacefully the futility of trying to escape the fruits of one's former actions, but contracting the daemonic power of the state to achieve external results through fear of being locked up? How shameful!

Do you not realise that this alliance with state has been the demise of so many religions? Do you not realise that this brought about the dark middle-ages, the bloody crusades and the Spanish inquisition? Do you not realise that this places you in company with political Jihad and the Islamic State? All that in attempt to patronise people over how to deal with their own karma!

Do you not realise that such attitudes incite others, including members of this forum, to hate religion and call for banning religion altogether and persecuting the religious (see Ojnab's response)? Are you willing to take that karma on?

As for the topic itself, I already made it clear time and again that the state has no moral authority to interfere with whatever people do between them voluntarily - nor do churches, nor do doctors.

Yuyustu:
To quote from the scripture you are so found of forcefully expounding; verily verily, I say unto you, to reach unto the kingdom of heaven ye must be born again.
And this coming from a plain speaking man, who understood most of his community were entirely illiterate; and that's why he never spoke in riddles and even went on to explain with example, what he meant! No ifs, buts or maybes!
Almost as if he knew that his words would be turned around, repeatedly revised and edited, until all trace of the original meaning would be lost.
Don't point your finger at the sty in my eye, while ignoring one in your own?
Not all that long ago, a witch doctor could have pointed a bone at a completely healthy tribesperson.
With that person responding by sinking into a deep melancholy! And dying within days.
The truth be known, it was the fact they accepted the literal death sentence, and refused all sustenance/food drink?
And then simply died from inevitable dehydration.
In today's world that bone may be the word cancer.
Particularly for people who approach all life's normal obstacles, with obdurate pessimism!
And or, would sooner give up their life, than their addiction to smoking?
Or end their lonely life, because of unbearable loneliness.
And no, cancer is not fun, but especially when it spreads into your liver, brain and or bones.
And where it gets into the bones, something as simple as coughing can snap a rib.
And believe me, it's not all beer and skittles, having to drive yourself to another town or city, to attend an xray dept, with a broken rib.
I who have survived multiple PE's and the unbelievably unbearable pain that goes with that!
More than anyone posting here, I suspect, including the parsimonious and the pious; understand the problem!
Yes it's easier, just to "put down" the "problem"!
But suppose those words written allegedly, some 2,000 years ago, in a claimed holy book, have an actual foundation in LITERAL truth, and we can't ever escape reaping what we sow? Yawol?
Rhrosty.

And yes, if people are complicit in stilling a human heart, without JUST cause. Should suffer an appropriate penalty.
So sayeth the state and every holy book; Yutustu.

And individual;
If I'd have known that I was eligible for a carer's allowance, I would've applied for it.
Even if that meant the running usual gauntlet of bumbling/medically illiterate bureaucrats; needing to justify their existence by continually bringing into question, your level of disability. You'd think a few of the more intelligent ones would have understood a degenerative condition doesn't improve!
Luckily for me. I had had multiple major spinal surgery, and doctors who looked inside, and gave witness to the fact, it was the worst degenerative injury of its type they had personally seen.
There were things I couldn't do without creating further damage or injury, but when mum fell and needed to be picked up; that's exactly what I'd do! Individual; I plan not to answer any more of your trite tiring inquisition on this area!
If you couldn't or wouldn't, then just accept you are a much lesser/less caring or more selfish man; even if a more able bodied one! Suggest you try this very simple test.
Put a stone in your shoe then walk normally, for a mile; if you can!
And if you can manage just that much; stop repeatedly calling into question the honesty/veracity of others, but particularly the disabled, who might only have their integrity left, to boost their personal self esteem!
My personal integrity is not up for grabs, however it might improve your personal jollies?
I value skepticism for its use in good science, but not where it is used to construct a veritable witch hunt? That has now become both banal and boring, and therefore, will end here!
You'll have a nice day now, y'hear.
Rhrosty.

Rhosty, well said.

In actual fact, having cared for many dying cancer patients, most of them don't make a conscious decision to dehydrate or starve themselves at all.
The body seems to make that decision naturally, because they stop being able to swallow even fluids, and become almost comatose.

We still give them plenty of pain relief, so they are comfortable, but still I would rather not go through this stage myself because it is very hard on the family and friends to watch. It can last a week or two sometimes.

I would like to see voluntary euthanasia legalized.
Then those who choose to linger like this, or have a death where we can't manage the pain, can brave it until the bitter end if they choose, while others can decide not to.

Thanks Susan;
And I sense in you a very decent caring person.
And no, I don't advocate making personal decisions for others still competent to do so, or disallow them to rescind them, even at the last possible minute.
We have the choice of making a living will and asking not to be helped with pain relief or oxygen etc, at the end.
And no, I don't believe we should even try to extend the dying process, at the end, by applying intravenous hydration etc, that simply drags the process out.
Yet there are examples of people on complete support, who have had the help turned off; yet have not only struggled on, but have improved.
Which tells me, that their natural predestined time is not yet, even where a war injury has removed half a brain; yet life still persists.
Or a drowned man, deprived of oxygen for ten normally terminal minutes, is successfully resuscitated and with no perceivable harm? And there's other almost endless similar examples.
It all tells me, we all of us have a DATE WITH DESTINY, WE CAN'T EVER AVOID, NOR BUY a minute more than the allotted time, even if we had all the world's gold!
I don't think anyone should struggle bravely on, but be given appropriate pain relief, some of which is at least ten times more powerful than pure heroin.
But can be very addictive, and vastly more so than any of the usual opiates.
But if someone dies naturally/painlessly, with all their marbles still rattling around; but with an addiction, then where's the harm in that?
As well as reincarnation, I believe in a peaceful passing wherever possible, and would advocate the use of all means possible, and to do as much as humanly possible, to provide exactly that.
Even where it causes the patient to slip into a coma, and be no longer aware of surrounding or weeping rallies.
That's the goal at the end, rather than than "quite deliberate" euthanasia, or the premature stilling of a still beating human heart.
Cheers, Rhrosty.

Rhrosty,
you're twisting words to avoid answering a very simple question. If you did not have any finacial support from anyone as you're trying to tell us, then all I can say is despite your very unfortunate condition you are fortunate in having sufficient resources to support yourself & the person you cared for. I simply couldn't achieve that in my finacial situation. So, despite so much bad luck you were at least lucky in not having to seek support.
Suseonline,
trust you to board the feigned indignation bandwagon.

Individual, trust you to twist Rhosty's words around and try to meddle in something that is not your business.

There's nothing feigned about my comments above, and you should reserve your comments for something your self-professed non-academic brain can understand.

Cheers,
Suse.

Suseonline,
If you & Rhrosty can put your money & not ours i.e. taxpayers, where your mouth is then fine, otherwise stop pretending how independent & or philanthropic you are.
Your hypocrisy is shining like a beacon.

I have seen enough credible evidence, to change my belief in reincarnation, to one that accepts it as literal fact.
And includes a number of eyewitness accounts, of people remembering past lives in deep hypnosis/near death.
And while in said states, provide recoverable credible evidence, that is able to be verified by official historical records, of very local events, known to very few!
And as compelling as that evidence surely is, [read, life after life,] none more so, than the very recent news of a young Australian man, thrust into a coma due to an accident; and awaking much (years?) later speaking fluent mandarin!
Now given he clearly did not learn that language in this lifetime, then it is perfectly reasonable to believe he learnt it in a past one!
Verily verily, [truly truly] I say unto you, to reach unto the kingdom of heaven you must be born again; or, so as you sow, so also shall you reap.
Those of us who believe both reincarnation and karma are true.
Wonder just what kind of lives Hitler and Stalin are living now?
And it's London to a brick, they would be first and foremost in the queue, clamoring for an easy way out?
Can't imagine how the news that there is no easy way out will go down; not for the worst war criminals, or just second hand car salesmen, selling death trap rust buckets to kids, or indeed, the conga line of loan sharks, that make this, i.e., merchants/money changers in the temple/my Father's house, type of behavior possible!
This karmic debt, [reaping what you sow], can't be avoided by prematurely ending this life.
Throw a stone into a pond and it will always create ripples!
This demonstrates the immutable law of cause and effect at work, and indeed, Karma.
Just how differently would we treat each other, or our common home, if we simply accepted what the mounting evidence now reveals?
Rhrosty.

Dr Swanton has written an intelligent,carefully reasoned argument which I fully support. I have a lot of respect for Mary Porter and I hope she will take on board Dr Swanton's suggestions. The sooner Euthanasia is regulated in Australia the better for many thousands.
As a newcomer to this forum I feel compelled to say how disappointing it is to find that comments on "Time e for Euthanasia to be regulated" so quickly moved off the topic and degenerated into a slanging match. Surely the author of any article deserves better!

Rhosty , I'm not sure how I feel about reincarnation, but suffice to say I believe the human brain is amazing organ that we have yet to to even scratch the surface of, as far as capacity for memory etc.
As far as Karma goes, who's to say it isn't somebody's karma to request and receive euthanasia as their final means of death?

Jann, welcome to OLO.
I'm sorry you have read some negative off-topic comments on this forum, but it is an opinion forum, and that includes opinions on other contributors posts, for good or bad.

The article is a good one, and I agree with the authors comments on regulating euthanasia. I hope to see it happen in my lifetime.

the human brain is amazing organ that we have yet to to even scratch the surface of, as far as capacity for memory etc.
Suseonline,
Thank you for acknowleging a sensible brain but what about the brain of a Leftie ?

Dear Rhrosty,

We agree that taking one's own life (with or without the help of others) is foolish because nobody can circumvent one's karma.

We do not seem to agree, however, about the right of others to forcibly prevent us from acting foolishly. I say that it is wrong and you seem to say that it is right.

From a civil point of view, the idea as if one may legitimately use coercive force to cause another to act as if they wiser, is called "paternalism" and when carried out by a state, this makes it a "Nanny state". From a religious point of view, this idea is called "fanaticism".

No one who is made to behave out of fear AS IF they are wiser, purer, better or more spiritually-advanced actually becomes wiser, purer, better or more spiritually-advanced as a result of their external, fear-based, behaviour. This, like karma, is also a law of nature which no-one can circumvent. This fanaticism, however, does gain pretty bad karma for its perpetrators, whose consequences they would need to later suffer themselves.

Individual, I believe that left-handed people are every bit as intelligent as those who use their right hands.
Does that help you?

'Morning David,

I agree with your take on the hypocrisy of the euthanasia debate. Suicide bombers should be regulated because they kill other than themselves, whereas those opting out for medical reasons only take themselves out.

We should impose and international fatwa on anyone killing themselves by suicide bombing and threaten them with the death penalty. If they insist on martyrdom we can legitimately chop their heads off in the interest of saving them from the indignity of the criticism faced by the likes of Dr. Nitschke.

On the other hand we can accept that IS has solved this issue already with beheadings, mass murder, crucifixions and all other forms of human extermination. All we have to do is find out who the IS is targeting this week and send our euthanasia candidates to them for the final solution.

Are we really having this debate? Or is reality so hard to accommodate?

as those who use their right hands.
Suseonline,
And I believe most academics are leaning towards the left so they'd be using their left hand as well.

the whole abortion debate was used by the regressives to argue the case for the poor 15 year old girl who was raped. Now we have approx. 100000 per year mainly because of convenience. Killing the elderly will be no different. The emotive odd example is being used to justify killing. Already their will be people lining up for their inheritance. Just like killing the unborn, some pseudo science from the likes of Nitschke and his supporters will ease or sear their conscience although I suspect it is already past that for many of them.

Individual:
It's really is none of your business, but, I owned three houses, one completely; others in partnership with the banks.
I have owned and operated three businesses.
Two very successfully, and one not so much.
I had my industry super, which paid me 85% of a former wage, which was indexed to, and at twice the male average.
All that meant a fairly comfortable life; and indeed, conferred on me the ability to buy a very modest basic house for then, burnt out uninsured homeless parents.
Then came the worst drought in living memory, coupled to the recession we had to have, and an entirely unexpected divorce!
Needless to say all these things combined to strip away personal wealth; as did an expensive eight year court battle, that was only partially successful!
I just don't know where I'd be if I'd lost.
And given I was entitled to a disability pension, and given it was not counted as taxable income; I applied for and accepted that.
But only when when the super ran out!
That disability support is the only support, repeat only support, I ever asked of the taxpayer.
And given when I was one, I paid up to 68 cents in the dollar; I have trouble believing I owe anything to any other current taxpayer.
But even more particularly, when I consider my taxes and those of the rest of my family, parents, grand parents, and indeed, all my Australian forbears.
Who can be traced right back to the second fleet, and who's much higher taxes, bought and paid all our cash cow essential service, a bank, a telco, an airline etc/etc.
All of which were then earning extremely healthy income, and which if retained in public ownership, would have paid for far more generous pensions etc!
I hope this satisfies your seemingly insatiable appetite to demand to know, or rummage around/trespass very offensively in other people's business, and suggest you mind your own dam business in future!
Rhrosty.

Well, if falling into a coma, and awakening able to speak perfectly fluent mandarin, arguably the most difficult to learn as a second language, is not concrete evidence of an actual past life somewhere in down town China.
What other possible credible explanation is there!?
It is surely, almost irrefutable evidence of both reincarnation/past lives and the prospect of, [so as you sow so also shall you reap,] karma as an actual truth.
And no, I don't force my views on anyone, just present the now entirely irrefutable evidence! [And doing so only creates good karma!]
None of which enables a tooth fairy, a real Santa Claus or favorite fable.
The brain in a truly marvelous instrument indeed, but to suggest it can completely teach itself mandarin, while completely deeply unconscious, stretches credibility past the point of no return.
What comes next for those who think that the possibility of reincarnation or if you will recycled spirit beings is impossible?
A shoot the messenger campaign?
Literally billions of people, some from faiths or philosophizes far older than Christianity, believe in literal reincarnation, as did the early esoteric Christians, before they were "reeducated", by the "political system" their faith eventually became!
I can remember a time where Chinese Medicine was also looked at as pure unadulterated quackery; by those arrogant enough to believe the were the repositories, (suppositories) of all knowledge and wisdom!
Ditto meditation, which some medieval belief systems labeled the work of Satan!
And then only because it allowed the practitioners, to see through the politics/theatre, you will believe or else, that the then middle aged, hugely revised religions had become!
Think about reincarnation and karma for a while; as possibly real, and then see, just how perfectly it explains a world at war with itself, and all the poverty and misery that currently goes with it!
If only to understand, it is the only possible explanation that actually makes sense; and indeed, incorporates perfect justice.
Those now committing unspeakable crimes/euthanase in the name of Allah, have yet to experience his, perfect justice!
Rhrosty.

Rhrosty,
I agree with you that it is none of my business to pry into your business. After this explanation I sympathise with you because I also have lost a lot through no fault of mine.
My reason for hanging on like a pitbull terrier was that I was forming a general opinon of you from your past posts which gave me the impression of you as being one of those who grab every entitlement no matter if needed or not. Your reply makes me feel I formed the wrong opinion, I appologise & I hope things will improve. All the best.

Rhosty, "Well, if falling into a coma, and awakening able to speak perfectly fluent mandarin, arguably the most difficult to learn as a second language, is not concrete evidence of an actual past life somewhere in down town China"

With respect, maybe do some checking of the source/s. For without any doubt there are journalist hacks who wake up every day to report complete B.S.

We must have this debate. We must demand legislation that creates clear guidelines as to how and when people can be assisted in dying.

Palliative care is enormously important. Great strides have been made in this area of care. It should be available to all Australians if appropriate. But, palliative care is not appropriate in all cases at the end of life.

At the moment, what happens in Australia, is completely arbitrary. Totally depends on the doctor who happens to be looking after you.

And Onthebeach, don't know when you were last in a hospital, or a nursing home, but even in country towns, Advanced Health Care directives are strongly encouraged to anybody over the age of 55. They are almost part and parcel of the initial 'interview' when presenting to a hospital: Do you have an Advanced Health Care Directive. These do not prevent the requirement that some patients may have to be assisted to die.

We allow choices in determining how to give birth. We allow choices in how we live our adult lives, to marry or not, to have children or not. Why are we not allowing people to make their own choices in how they wish to die? Their OWN choice. Not the greedy inheritors or trustees or whatever other nonsense 'vested' interest is put up as denying this choice.

Dear Yvonne,

<<We must have this debate. We must demand legislation that creates clear guidelines as to how and when people can be assisted in dying.>>

What's there to debate? If/when two (or more) people agree to assist each other, be it in living or in dying or in whatever else when no third party is hurt, then nobody has a right to deny them that freedom.

<<At the moment, what happens in Australia, is completely arbitrary. Totally depends on the doctor who happens to be looking after you.>>

What happens at the moment in Australia, is that medical doctors are given powers over others which nobody ought to have, notwithstanding the the issue in question is not even a medical one.

<<We allow choices in determining how to give birth.>>

Pretty limited as well.

<<We allow choices in how we live our adult lives,>>

Limited too!

<<Why are we not allowing people to make their own choices in how they wish to die?>>

"We"??
I am not disallowing you anything, so please do not include me in this general accusation. The one's who do not allow you to live as you choose and die as you choose, are the rogue gang of the state and its government - and the reason they do so is because they like power, they just like to control you and me and they have the guns to do so, those bastards.

Not sure what your point is Yuyutsu. This debate is about legalizing and regulating voluntary euthanasia. Not about whether YOU allow anything or not. It is about being criminally liable. You know, as in going to jail when found to be assisting somebody to die. If you think it should be a free for all and doesn't involve you, then don't comment and ignore the thread.

At the moment it is doctors who are making the decisions. And that is crazy. What happens on a daily basis in hospitals right now is completely arbitrary. Legislation has now been a fact in a number of countries with success. It is past time for Australia to do the same.

Dear Yvonne,

I AM writing straight on the topic, which is "Time for euthanasia to be regulated": my view is clearly that it should not.

<<This debate is about legalizing and regulating voluntary euthanasia.>>

Legalising (more accurately, decriminalising) - YES.
Regulating - NO.

<<Not about whether YOU allow anything or not.>>

Sorry, this was in response to you writing: "Why are WE not allowing people to make their own choices in how they wish to die?"
- This 'we' includes myself, yet I have not disallowed you anything.

<<At the moment it is doctors who are making the decisions. And that is crazy.>>

Exactly! Government is colluding with doctors, giving them extraordinary powers. My life and my death should not be in the hands of doctors (unless of course I freely choose myself to give them such powers over my body, which I never did).

Sorry Yuyutsu for misreading what you meant. I'm not altogether sure where legalizing euthanasia differs from regulating, because surely with legalizing come guidelines, therefore rules, will be articulated as to who can avail themselves on being medically assisted to die.

As it is currently, committing suicide, singly or with someone else is no longer a criminal act and requires no regulation.

I do separate the two. I do not equate voluntary euthanasia with suicide. Semantically they may be the same thing, but suicide is closely linked to depression. I know this is not always the case, but 'suicide prevention' is all about tackling depression.

Euthanasia, medically assisted death, is not about being depressed, whereas in the common parlance, suicide is.

Dear Yvonne,

<<I'm not altogether sure where legalizing euthanasia differs from regulating>>

'Legalising' is a bit of a misnomer: I rather use the term 'decriminalising'.

Helping another to kill themselves, for whatever reason, is currently illegal in Australia because someone made a law to that effect. I believe that this law should be undone, hence it's not about the state/government making it legal, but rather about stopping to make it illegal.

Regulation OTOH, means placing legal restrictions on what and how we do things, which is different altogether.

<<therefore rules, will be articulated as to who can avail themselves on being medically assisted to die.>>

I am saying that one should not have to explain in the first place WHY they want to die (and be assisted in that), therefore there should be no special case for "medical" reasons: whenever person A asks person B, who could be anyone, to assist them in dying, no legislation should deem person B a criminal for killing person A according to their own request (I still consider it an immoral sin, but that's a religious issue which has nothing to do with this discussion: the state, a secular institution, has no divine authority to try guarding our morality).

<<As it is currently, committing suicide, singly or with someone else is no longer a criminal act and requires no regulation.>>

Committing suicide singly is no longer a criminal act in Australia, but unfortunately, assisting another still is.

<<but suicide is closely linked to depression.>>

Suicide can be for numerous reasons, too many to list: depression is only one of them. There should be no legal difference whether one wants to die because they are depressed; because they want to join their cat in heaven; or because they no longer want to suffer the pains of a terminal illness.

Please don't get me wrong: I don't support suicide for selfish reasons (that excludes for-example Tibetan monks torching themselves to alert the world of Chinese oppression or donating one's heart while alive to save another's life) - it just shouldn't be any of the state's business.