UKC

Yesterday I saw the news item about this poor gentleman who is suffering fro Motor Neuron Disease and wants the law changed to legalise assisted suicide in cases such as his.

I admit I am open minded about such matters however, being an outdoor type, it brought a tear to my eye when I realised what an active life he had led - walking, ski-ing and climbing. He is 67 and I think it's true to say that many of us of a similar age like to think we've still got a few years to look forward to albeit at a slower pace. This chap, despite his active life, is now stricken by this awful condition. How terrible to have led a fit and active life and then to be struck down becoming, in his own words, a prisoner in his own body.

We all moan occasionally about trivia yet most of us are so lucky not to be so afflicted. Spare a thought for others like Noel.

In reply to mypyrex:

I too really felt for him and the future he faces, which is horrifying; he put his case across with great dignity.

I know the assisted dying argument will always polarise people and opinions (sure it will on UKC) but personally I feel strongly that the choice should ultimately be with the sufferer. How we get to the place where everyone accepts their wishes I don't know.

In reply to Moley:
I don't think there is much polarisation of opinion, I think the majority are in favour of voluntary euthanasia, albeit with checks and balances in place.

The only real opposition comes from those of a god bothering bent who think that their belief trumps other's right to decide for themselves.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6293695.stm

In reply to Big Ger:

It's rare that I find myself agreeing with you, so


... have a 'like'.

In reply to john arran:

My thanks John.

In reply to Big Ger:
That'll be the large majority of MPs who oppose any attempt to introduce legislation?

In reply to baron:

The BMA also voted against assisted dying at last year's conference. The majority of Doctors are also against euthanasia.

In reply to baron:
No one ever accused politicians of being brave.

In reply to Gone for good:
This always confuses me.
I would have thought that, seeing the things that they must see, that doctors would want to put an end to suffering, oath or no oath.

In reply to baron:

I suppose the hippocratic oath compels them to preserve rather than end life.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.

In reply to Gone for good:
Yes, sort of ties their hands. Certainly as far as openly supporting euthanasia.

In reply to Gone for good:


Do they worry about the potential repercussions of being involved in an assisted euthanasia? A relative of the deceased (who is very strongly against these actions) may then mount legal challenges against the doctor involved for taking a life?
Perhaps doctors see it as another burden on their shoulders with possible dire consequences - just a thought.