Bearbrass, I said that David Palmer's figures are bogus and I gave links to independent figures released by the Catholic Church in the Netherlands. The Catholic Church does not support euthanasia. The figures are a fraction of what Palmer tries to let you believe.

Stickman, Celivia, Gusi and I have given several links. Celivia gave a translation of what is required. She did not grab anything from the air.

It is always good to come up with opposing arguments. But not by lying or misleading and hope that nobody can check for themselves. Australia is a multicultural country. There are people who can read Dutch and categorically state, supported with links directly to the source from both supportive and opposing camps what the figures are in the Netherlands.

It is self defeating to look at the Netherlands and the experiences there to mount an argument against Euthanasia. The law has been in place for a few years now.

Old people are not scared, nobody is 'being talked into euthanasia'. People with dementia cannot avail themselves of this as they cannot give consent. Mental illness and depression does not fulfill the criteria of a terminal illness, although there is certainly a body of supporters to review this.

Runner, you are just going to have to accept that although there are many Christians opposed to voluntary euthanasia not all are. Christians are not adverse to a doctor making the decision to up the morphine to the point that death is hastened. It is seen as a 'side effect' of pain relief. That is semantics.

I would like to remind Christians that unbearable pain and suffering before death for mere humans can last days, if not weeks. I would like to remind you that Jesus Christ, God who became man, who died in dreadful suffering for the sins of all mankind took nine hours from the walk up to Golgotha till he gave up the ghost. Nine hours to atone for the sins of ALL mankind. Would He really demand more from a mere mortal for atonement of his own sins?

Very well said, Yvonne.
Opponents of euthanasia should understand that when euthanasia is legal, desperate patients become less reliant on terminal sedation.
And, as you said, whether euthanasia is legal or not, people can still die from an overdose of morphine.
These options don’t disappear when euthanasia is legalised; euthanasia is just one more option to give patients more control.

Also, family or a partner can be under much pressure when their loved one asks for their help to end her/his life. When they agree to this ‘act of love’ they can be prosecuted. Unsanctioned euthanasia will still happen. This won’t need to happen when euthanasia is legal.

BearBrass, welcome- I see that this was your first OLO post.
The lady I wrote about in my first post chose to be euthanised despite being a dedicated Christian who went to church every Sunday and sang in the church choir. I don’t deny that here are Christians who have an open mind about the life issues; as I said in one of my first posts it is mainly the fundamentalists who want to control others.

Stickman, “the legislation would only allow a depressed person to participate if that depression was secondary to whatever incurable and intolerable illness they were suffering from and was NOT the primary reason for their request.”
Exactly, this is my point, too. We are in agreement.
I was not trying to argue that “anyone who is currently depressed should be able to walk into a doctor's office, get the assessment done and off themselves?”

As Yvonne said, I quoted from either the Dutch link or from the Dutch brochure of the euthanasia rules/Act of which the link I provided in my 1st post, if you’re interested. This is an English version.
My point was that approval for euthanasia happens only if the doctor is satisfied that the patient’s suffering is unbearable and that there is no sufficient treatment/pain relief, whether that patient is faced with mood disorders/depression or not.

"Australia, like all Western nations, is undergoing a demographic shift with an increasing proportion of the population being elderly. Will euthanasia become a cost-effective method of medical treatment for the elderly?"

I've come to the debate late and have only skimmed through the reponses but unless I've missed it I haven't seen this point of David's taken up.

I concur with the arguments about being able to die with dignity and not having to suffer needlessly, but I still see the slippery slope argument as a compelling one in this debate.

In years to come, when the health system is even less able to cope than it is now and when an increasing proportion of the population is elderly and without close family support, there is going to be increasing pressure on older people to avoid taking up valuable space in hospitals and nursing homes and not to be a burden on society and their family.

Safeguards will be in place to begin with but as the decades pass and the practice becomes more and more commonplace, the elderly and terminally ill will increasingly feel they should take the euthanasia option and not waste scarce resources by clinging selfishly onto life. The poor and socially isolated will be particularly vulnerable.

The issue is not nearly as black and white as many here paint it.

Pegasus

“There is NO CURE for depression you idiot. NONE. Just relief for periods until it bangs you again.”

There is a cure. I’d lived with it all my life until I started down this path toward recovery. http://www.hypoglycemia.asn.au Keep an open mind and have a look. Hopefully it will be as helpful for you as it has been for me.

Hi Bronwyn,
Thanks for addressing a point that hasn’t been discussed yet. It’s very important that the laws and rules are such, that euthanasia is not a replacement of medical treatment.
There is always a slippery slope connected to controversial issues.

David Palmer, for example, said, “did Justice Menhennit, in his 1969 ruling on abortion, realise that his ruling would lead to one abortion to every three live births in Victoria a few decades later? “
First of all, Australia doesn’t keep proper abortion statistics, so David doesn’t know how many abortions are taking place- it’s a wild guess.
Secondly, even if his numbers are correct, the ruling on abortion is not the cause of abortions- lack of sex education and lack of reliable contraception are the cause. The alternative would be illegal abortions or having to travel to a place where abortion is legal. Much like people are traveling to Switserland for euthanasia or purchase of Nebutal, or resort to killing themselves in a far more painful and inhumane way.

There are countries with very liberal abortion laws that have the lowest abortion rates in the world because their perspective is that abortion and prevention of unwanted pregnancies go hand-in-hand.
While offering easily accessable abortion, they pay much attention to proper sex education and contraception to reduce the need for abortions, whereas Australia offers abortion without matching it with extensive sex Ed, and Medicare does not even fund oral contraception/condoms.

Similar responsibilities must go hand-in-hand with euthanasia.
Legalise euthanasia, but couple it to excellent palliative care including aged care so that people have a real choice.
Ideally, when euthanasia is legal, people should make a living will while still mentally able, to make their wishes very clear about euthanasia.

As lack of legal abortion laws lead to illegal abortions, lack of legal euthanasia laws lead to unsanctioned, illegal euthanasia and suicides.
When voluntary euthanasia is legal it needs not to happen illegally.

At this point in time aged care is very expensive and of poor quality. If euthanasia is legallised then there will be an increase in people in aged care requesting euthanasia and the average length of stay in aged care hostels will reduce. Keeping euthanasia illegal will just add to the suffering of people in aged care. In my limited experience of aged care only one grandfather seemed OK but he longed for detailed news of activities of his business and the others made comments about "flu is an old man's best friend".

What is the virtue of living beyond your span of three score and ten in pain, boredom and hunger, yes hunger.

In Victoria the average weight of women entering aged care hostels is 60kg, within 3 months their average weight is 40kgs, which makes it easier for nurses to lift and is the result of the average cost of a meal per patient being 70 cents. The food is often difficult for frail people to unwrap and difficult to chew with ill-fitting dentures. Then there aren't the staff to massage food down the throats of dementia patients who have lost teh swallow reflex.

When you are frail enough to need aged hostel care it doesn't matter how rich you are you are all treated as though you are aged pensioners.

yvonne

'Runner, you are just going to have to accept that although there are many Christians opposed to voluntary euthanasia not all are.'

I do accept this Yvonne. I understand that euthanasia is a complex issue. I have sat with people dying more than once. I don't have a problem with 'voluntary' euthanasia when the person is in a totally right frame of mind to make that decsion.

What concerns me most is the dishonesty of the argument. We saw that with the abortion debate. Thousands now murder their baby because it is legal and socially acceptable. Any doctor who has no conscience and murders the unborn will have no conscience when he/she can legally influence people and then terminate their lives. People who a have lived 60,70, 80 years have had ample opportunity to choose a life with Christ or to live eternity in hell without God. I have no doubt however that we will be opening the gate to many elderly dying against their better judgement. Like abortion an industry will be built around it. Civil celebrants can write their crap about where that person is going after death and all will be happy that they 'died with dignity'