very judgemental, Celivia, but I'm not a christian (nor anything else actually) so I can say those things.

Its a pity the debate on this thread has been so emotive, and those there has so far been no response from those who oppose euthanasia.

Can I begin by saying that I support the concept of euthanasia for the terminally ill. I saw my mother die of cancer, and the image of her decline is firmly imprinted in my brain. Not one who has seen such would deny the terminally ill the right to bypass the last stages of their illness.

That said, the main problem with legalising euthanasia is being able to establish appropriate boundaries, guidelines and accountability. Its a good concept, but its also a pandora's box. Consider the following questions:

1. How is it determined that someone has the right to assisted suicide? A doctor's opinion, two doctors, the GP and the specialist, two specialists from different hospitals? Would you have to prove that the opinions were independent, and how would you do so?

2. What are the legal implications for the doctor assisting (assuming that it will be medically supervised), if there is a post-death challenge by a family member? Will it increase the load of medical litigation, and further drive doctors out of business.

3. What happens if the person choosing to die is not longer able to communicate their wishes? Does their family get to choose - this opens up further issues of abuse of power and murder.

4. Do we stop with the terminally ill? What about the elderly? Or mentally retarded? What about those that are brain-damaged in accidents? Who makes the decisions for these people? Where is the transparency and accountability?

5. What if we end up with the situation where doctors who want hospital beds or family members that want inheritances start to counsel those who are eligible for euthanasia to take that option, particularly when the person affected might not have otherwise chosen it, or may have gone on for much longer otherwise. Pain is a very powerful motivator, particularly when someone is constantly advocating a way out.

Once you start, where do you draw the line?

Country Gal, you make some good points but most do not stack up.

Everybody in Australia has the “right” to kill themselves, in fact about 3,000 people a year kill themselves, it is no longer a crime to attempt suicide. It is only a crime to assist someone. I think two doctors should have to say that the person is suffering and that there is no chance of medical intervention reversing the situation. All doctors have taken an oath to “do no harm”.

Medical liability all depends on the legislation, if it is properly drafted then these doctors have no issues to face.

Informed consent is the all important issue, if a person cannot communicate their wishes then euthanasia is a non issue, they cannot tell people they wish to die.

You are assuming that people can be talked into killing themselves, but then state that pain is a powerful motivator. Many people live with chronic pain but do not choose to kill themselves, but for some the pain is overwhelming. The issue again is informed consent.

You are putting forward a “thin edge of the wedge” argument but in my view it has no basis, people can kill themselves legally. The issue is do they have to do it alone?

I've supported euthanasia since Dad gave me Welcome to the Monkeyhouse to read when I was a teenager (about a hundred years ago), which is how I learned it existed.

Half an hour ago I got home from visiting Dad in hospital. A fortnight ago he had a tumour taken out of his head which turned out to be a glioblastoma multiforme. Life is not an option any more.

A week later he had his first massive seizure which did not harm in itself (although it scared the daylights out of us lookers on), but he crushed two vertebrae when he fell and is in terrible pain.

He's having radiation and chemo which will prolong his life for a while.

He says dying doesn't bother him and in fact he makes jokes about it, but it does bother him that the only option medicine has is to prolong the most frightening part of his life.

He's terrified of having to live through the extra time and the prospect of more pain and humiliation to come.

None of us want to lose him, but none of us are selfish enough to expect him to live in fear and pain just to please us. There is no honour for any of us in this, least of all Dad.

It's insane.

Chainsmoker is right - it is insane, in addition to which it is wholly immoral that anyone should be required to end their lives in pain, indignity and fear.

Countrygal raised some legitimate questions, and these need to be looked at carefully. The SA Voluntary Euthanasia Society (SAVES) at http://www.saves.asn.au has some very useful fact sheets looking at these issues - I have no doubt other similar state societies do the same. If you are interested in some of the answers to the questions raised by Countrygal this is a very good place to start looking.

It is important not to underestimate suicide - people do not end their own lives lightly. We, like all species, have not survived by throwing in the towel every time things got tough. For most people that drive prevails even through the most terrible trials and pain.

If people decide to end their own lives there must be an ENORMOUS power of motivation behind it. People may not 'go to a birthday party' or some such non-event because relatives are 'applying pressure' but they do not kill themselves over such crumbs.

To end one's own life is the biggest decision anybody can ever make. To stand on that precipice - and consciously commit the act that ends all acts - is gigantic.

To think that trifles play a big part is folly.