I watched Q&A last night (10th April 2017) and
saw how emotional people got on the subject of
Euthanasia. The Victorian Parliament is to vote
soon on assisted dying laws - for the terminally
ill.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorian-parliament-to-vote-on-assisted-dying-laws-next-year-20161208-gt6t0w.html

How do posters feel about this issue?

I think death is always an emotional issue. In cases where people have power over it even more so. No one wants grandma to suffer excruciating pain but no one wants to choose to let go.
At the end of the day it should never easy.

But also at the end of the day, agency, independence, identity, pursuit of happiness, absolute and total control of our physical selves. All those things we insist upon regarding how we live shouldn't they logically apply to how we die. Where possible, where practical.

I would support voluntary euthanasia, but was staunchly against it when I was a Christian. My justification for being against it was the slippery slope fallacy and the belief that only God could take life (unlike so many Christians, however, I was at least consistent enough to be against the death penalty, too, for the same reason).

A good take down of the arguments against euthanasia can be found at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3185895.

I think we’re a mature- and a civilized-enough society to implement a voluntary euthanasia program without having to worry about Logan’s Run becoming a reality.

I’m glad Victoria is having a vote on this. I look forward to conservative Queensland doing the same in time for my grandchildren (who won’t be born for some time yet) when they’re old and dying. However, we just got rid of our ‘gay panic’ defence, so it's probably a bit soon yet.

AJ,

If you dont mind me asking (Tell me to piss off of you do) why do you no longer practise the Christian faith?

Hi Zeil, I don't want to risk de-railing the discussion, so I'll link you to an old comment of mine where I gave a short-'n'-sweet version of the story:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6715#204352

Sorry AJ,

I didn't consider that when I asked and it wasn't my intention.

I'm also sorry about your loss of faith. It must've been really hard for you. As much as we all like to think ourselves original, on many accounts we do what our parents did. We don't want to but the adage 'you learn what you live and live what you learn' is pretty on the nose. Change is hard, especially where something as fundamental as religion is concerned.
I hope the people in your life were and are supportive.

I totally support assisted dying for terminally ill
patients who are suffering and for whom there is
no cure. Especially if they request the right to die
with dignity. I believe that the medical profession's
primary task in these cases should not be to prolong
life (and suffering) but to relieve suffering. In these
cases people have the right to die with dignity and the
medical profession has a duty to assist in that regard.
I live in Victoria, and I am relieved that the state is
actually looking at laws that will help the terminally
ill with the right to die.

Dear AJ,

Thank You for sharing your religious experiences with us.
It must have been difficult for you. I've got family members
who were educated by the Christian Brothers. That experience
has turned them off religion for life.

My mum is in the dementia wing of a nursing home.
She can still recognize her family visitors,
say our names, and sometimes engage in trivial
conversations, but her mind is partially
destroyed.
She is not aware of her plight and expresses
no suggestion of despair.

The preservation of her life to me and our family
is important. Yes, she has lost some of her functional
and mental independence but we love her most dearly
and there's no way that I would ever agree to having
mum end her life. She has many years of living
to do and there are many things that she can still
enjoy and do. She does take part in the art therapy
and music programs - which she enjoys. She also
surprises us with some of the things that she will
remember at times. She is a vital part of our family
and we are lucky to have her in our lives.

That's perfectly natural Foxy. Dementia is one of those illnesses where some suffers seem perfectly content in themselves and often unaware of anything amiss. My partners grandmother is sadly not one, she's often scared, agitated or angry, sometimes all three at once. The nurses working with her are wonderful but generally she's unclear on even where she is at any given moment so its a constant struggle.
Having said that I think any suggesting assisted suicide would cop an earful from my mother in law.
As I said it's always going to be hard. I don't envy anyone the choice but there should be a choice.
With dementia patients though there's also issues of informed consent, in that they can't give it some would argue. Having said that thought families already make the choice in life support cases and the like but I'm not entirely sure that's the same thing.

Dear Zeil,

I'm so sorry to hear about your relative.
I'm glad that she has your families support.
Regular visits are so important.
I've come to know the people in mum's wing of the
nursing home. I know them all by name. Each one of
them is different and they are at different stages of
dementia. I talk to all of them. It's amazing how
I always get a warm response. I never ignore anyone.
Mum has been in the nursing home for over a year now,
and these people have become like family to us. We've
also gotten to know their family members as well and
each of us watches out for each other. Quite a few people
have died during the past year, but I guess that's to
be expected in a nursing home. Still the sense of loss
is very great and makes you realise to make the most of
the time that you do have with your loved ones.

Look on the opposite side of that though, I had an Aunt who died of stomach cancer several years ago. From the moment of her diagnosis there was never talk of any life saving procedures, none were possible, all talk was regarding simple how to stall the illness for as long as possible.
Not a problem with that though.
My problem is after 6 invasive surgeries, chemo, and a battery of painful test my Aunt finally began saving up her morphine. My cousin admitted later that she was vaguely aware of this but didn't want to broach the subject with her mother. She didn't want to encourage or discourage her.
When my aunt overdosed my Uncle found the note and her in the later stages or overdose and called the ambulance more as a formally than on any assumption that they could save her life. She was rushed to hospital and put in intensive care and as horrible as it sound her family breathed a guilty sigh of relief and began mentally preparing themselves for what they assumed was the inevitable.
Only my Aunt after two days in intensive care survived the overdose. Her first conscious moment was spent cursing out the doctors and nurses and paramedics who had prolonged her life.
Mercifully an infection finally claimed her 3 weeks later. But it was hellish, the hospital refused to release her as she still posed a suicide risk.
I remember thinking at the time how ludicrous it all seemed.

Dear Zeil,

In the past births and deaths happened when they
happened, often without medical intervention.
If a baby was too premature or defective, or
if a seriously ill person was dying, there was little
the family doctor could do about it other than to
offer comfort. Today most people are born and die in
hospitals under supervision of medical personnel
who sometimes decide to keep them alive long beyond
the point at which they would normally have died.
Patients can be revived as you pointed out others
can be hooked up for days, months, or years to
machines that sustain their lives. Therefore, technologies
that were intended to save people from unnecessary death
today may actually have the effect of depriving them of
a dignified death.

My mother-in-law decided
to stop eating whilst in a nursing home. She had a death
wish - and they tried many times to revive her with all
sorts of methods. She survived for several months and
eventually did die. I also remember thinking at the time
how much better it would have been to have allowed her to
die with dignity. She was over 90 at the time and she'd
had enough. She virtually starved herself to death and
died alone in the early hours of the morning.

I know that physicians are expected to do all they can to
sustain life but if a person is determined that they want
to die should their wishes be respected? That is the moral
(and legal) question. Why could doctors not be content
to respect people's wishes and let them die in peace and
serenity? Why pursue a vigorous therapy that would benefit
no one except their own satisfaction in thwarting death,
regardless of the consequences.

cont'd ...

Here is another link on the subject:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/susie-obrien/we-deserve-right-to-die-with-our-dignity-intact/news-story/db427121c2d94f72ad996db625329947

cont'd ...

Again, apologies for the typo.

Here is the link again:

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/susie-obrien/we-deserve-the-right-to-die-with-our-dignity-intact/news-story/db427121c2d94f72ad996db625329947

Assisted dying laws? I wonder if a time will come, when the word 'voluntary' is removed from the Euthanasia debate altogether? Perhaps through some fiscal imperative, where normal medical initiatives are removed, and an individual's sustenance, care, and medications are compulsorily withdrawn. He'll be notified (in writing of course) no more benefits whatsoever, that has emanated from the public purse, will be made available to him. Should he be unable to survive with public assistance? Thereby his survival remains squarely within the purview, of those who care for his welfare?

If this individual has nobody to provide for him, in any capacity; or he's exceeded a government mandated age; for this purpose; 75, 80 even 85 years, it could well be lower. The government can unilaterally determine, you be humanely 'put to sleep' as it were. Much like we might do for a very sick pet. I'm over 75 myself, and I think it to be worthy of mature discussion. Sometimes our feelings and emotions are necessarily trumped by other, more broader and indispensable issues. As a 'born again' atheist, we've got to start thinking well outside of the box, otherwise we'll consume ourselves with war(s) over-population and even bigger famines etc.

O Sung Wu,

Isn't that a bit overdramatic?

o sung wu,

It is a common complaint of the elderly that they do not feel wanted and are regarded as (economically) non-productive and a drain on society.

For cynical political reasons both sides of politics but more recently more the Labor and Greens, have used jealousy against seniors, the claimed 'advantaged' Baby Boomers', for wedge politics, divide and conquer, to score shabby points and to cover for lack of government planning.

It is interesting that there is such concentration on euthanasia but almost nothing aimed at changing the prevailing, antiquated view of aging and 'old age'.

I recall that in a public debate Tony Abbott questioned among other things whether the availability of euthanasia might limit the money available for palliative care. It is worth listening to,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpCj4F4aFlw

I am not arguing either way, just saying that:

firstly, there are very deep issues and many of those who argue for euthanasia are not likely to be affected personally ie affecting their own life, by that decision in the foreseeable future; and

secondly, with such nasties as the pressure presently being put of seniors to give up the homes in which they raised their families and the lack of respect (and even open contempt!) of the leftists for the elderly, this is not a good time for change.

leoj,

We are discussing here - assisted dying laws for the
terminally ill who are suffering with no hope of a
cure and the right to die with dignity.

Kindly start your own discussion on old age or anything
else you want to distort, Do not try to divert my discussion.

Okay I have to ask. Not to derail the thread myself. But does Leoj ever get a fact right? Perhaps accidentally?

Dear Zeil,

Not often. And, when he does I get so pleasantly
surprised that I immediately try talking rationally
to him only to be
knocked back down, time after time.

Hi there FOXY...

It sounds like your Mum is being well careed for, both by her residential carers, and by your love and attendance. For some who don't have that choice through economic circumstances, or some other reason, facing their own mortality becomes very much a big issue in their lives. That old hackneyed phrase, 'the young may die, the old must die' resonates loudly in their minds, every time they develop a cough, become out of breathe or whatever?

When you're old there are daily reminders of your approaching end, like that humorous piece by Leo ROSENBERG who claimed "...First you forget names, then you forget faces, then you forget to pull your zipper up, then you forget to pull your zipper down..." a giggle for sure, nevertheless a reminder of being old. Perhaps assisted dying shouldn't be (only) the sole preserve of the sick and dying, how about those oldies who are just sick of life?

I the whole topic of oh first it's those who want to die and then... ignoring the twit who posted it... does anyone remember those arguments about gay marriage. First is the gays and then what people marrying their dogs?!

The IQ2 Debate: 'Should Euthanasia Be Legalized?' that I posted a link to earlier featured distinguished Australian guests, including the then leader of the Greens Bob Brown.

In the excerpt video I posted, the then Australian Shadow Minister for Health and Aging, Tony Abbott, argued against legalizing euthanasia, explaining that government and inheritors may abuse the situation. "Let's not make bad laws based on hard cases," he said.

It is highly relevant to the thread.

Specifically, that economic rationalisation and strapped budgets could put pressure on the frail aged, including of course the highly vulnerable terminally ill to end it all sooner than they might where they enjoyed care and support.

- Whose 'life sentences' are not always measured in days or weeks and who do not necessarily suffer unrelieved, intolerable pain where palliative care is available (and preferably where possible is delivered at home and in the care of their family and friends.

There should not be any need to add but it is apparently required in this thread, that feelings of being unwanted, poor care options including lack of access and cost, do impact through causing depression that adds to suffering and leaves assisted suicide as the only way out. The only door at the end of a very dark tunnel.

While it may not suit some OLO poster/s who for some reason (political partisanship?) aim to censor through limiting and discouraging discussion, end of life options including palliative care are relevant considerations.

I would like to give this more time, but that should be enough for the intelligent, caring and compassionate.

Yes Zeil, it’s known as the ‘slippery slope’: http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope.

The main problem with the slippery slope, in the context of this debate, is that, firstly, it’s easy to galvanise debate by raising the possibility of adverse creep, but much harder to actually provide good evidence that we will ever be at risk of such creep; secondly it assumes that any creep that occurs (if it occurs at all) will be negative.

I think slippery slope arguments underestimate people in general, too. My wife’s grandmother died a few days ago. This woman was horrid. Some of the things she did were so bad that one could quite easily forgive her children and grandchildren for having nothing to do with her, even as she lay dying in hospital. If anyone deserved to be pressured into speeding things up a bit with euthanasia, it was her. Yet there was no sign at all that any of them would have done that, had it been an option. They were all still devastated over what they were about to lose (and probably what they never had, too), and spent her last days trying to be the family they could never seem to be when she was healthy.

Like I said earlier, I think we’re a mature enough society to handle euthanasia with the care and respect that it would require. I’m not so sure about medical insurers, but we can legislate for them, even if the libertarians don’t like it.

No one ever seems to argue against cuts to welfare by claiming that it will lead to its eventual abolition. We’re a mature enough society to be able to tinker with welfare payments without fearing that a political party would be crazy enough to eventually want welfare abolished altogether, forcing people out onto the streets. Why can’t we grant the same when it comes to euthanasia?

Dear O Sung Wu,

You ask, "How about those oldies who are just sick of life?"

That is something that needs to be looked at.

I believe in death with dignity and some medical
conditions such as severe depression or no longer the
will to live can cause such painful and prolonged suffering
that the capability of the medical profession to alleviate
this suffering by means of palliative care is surpassed.

However, many people have a well founded fear of the
possible abuse
of physician assisted deaths in cases such as you describe.

The main victims of such possible abuse as described in
quite a few articles on the web tell us that they could well
be the most vulnerable members of society. The poor, the
disabled, and the like. Those who cannot pay for prolonged
accommodation in health care facilities and intensive care
units. So we need to tread carefully in this legislation
to ensure safe guards are put in place to protect these
vulnerable people.

I have made it quite clear to my family that when my time
comes that I do not want to have my life prolonged by
machines.

I like what Desmond Tutu wrote on his 85th
Birthday in an article in the Washington Post:

"I am prepared for my death and have made it clear that
I do not wish to be kept alive at all costs. I hope I am
treated with compassion and allowed to pass onto the next
phase of life's journey in the manner of my choice."

Intractable suffering robs the victims of most of their
dignity. Medical science and practice is currently capable
of the prolongation of human life. It can often result in
unnecessary and pointless suffering - and this is an
issue that needs to be addressed in our society. The
legislation that the state of Victoria is about to pass
for the terminally ill, is a step in the right direction.

This is what I would call a step in the right direction,

BJ Miller: 'What really matters at the end of life'

http://www.ted.com/talks/bj_miller_what_really_matters_at_the_end_of_life#t-741167

The politicians need to be told.

Dear FOXY...There's no doubt, you get right to the heart of the matter, in the most intelligent and eloquent way. Thank you.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Thank You for your kind words.

I don't know the answers to so many questions regarding
the 'right to die' issue, but it is a debate that we
need to have to decide the kind of society we
want in this country.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

I wrote an article entitled “Justice – A matter of Life and Death” that was published in the Australian Quarterly magazine’s Jul-Sept 2014 edition.

The Australian Greens picked it up and submitted it in their "Medical Services (Dying with Dignity) Bill 2014" to the Federal Parliament. You will find it on submissions page 7, N° 133 on the following link :

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/Dying_with_Dignity/Submissions

I think this answers your question … plus a little more.

.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

Thank You for the link.

It's brilliant, and covers all the pros and cons and
as you pointed out - so much more.

Well worth a read and much appreciated.

It gives me much to think about and weigh up.

It looks like this discussion has now run its course.
I'd like to Thank everyone who contributed to it
and before I go and start my preparations for Easter
(I'm having the family over for Easter lunch on Sunday)
I want to wish you all a relaxing, enjoyable, and a
happy week-end.

.

Dear Foxy,

.

My best wishes to you and yours too, Foxy, for a relaxing and enjoyable Easter, with a special thought for your mum.

.

Dear Banjo Paterson,

Thank You so much.

We'll all be spending part of Easter Sunday with mum at her nursing
home. (Grandchildren, great grand children and us).
I'll be bringing a small plate of special food for her (to give
her a bit of variety) and put a smile on her face. Unfortunately
she's no longer able to travel - so we can't bring her over to
our home. Instead we'll be coming to hers. The other residents
also look forward to our visits, especially when the little ones
come over. There's lots of games to play. Smiles all round.