next »

[bill door]

Please read all this article-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18464254

and feel free to comment. You may wish to contrast the considered judgement of Mr Justice Peter Jackson against the response of Gynn Davies, politician.

[Jude]

I will start off by saying this....  when our pets are in pain and there is no hope,   instead of letting them suffer we give them the ultimate gift of love and help them die peacefully.     This is more than we are allowed to do for our human loved ones in the same situation,   who really just want to be allowed to die and end their suffering.   However I wouldn't advocate this as a means of assisted suicide only because the person has depression etc. and can be helped to lead a good life with some medication and treatment.

Without any details regarding why the patient wishes to end her life,  it is hard to form a real opinion on this.      The judge did say,   "I would not overrule her wishes if further treatment was futile, but it is not."     But what is her reason for wishing to commit suicide?     Is she terminally ill,   does she have an untreatable physical condition that causes her to live in great pain and can never have any quality of life?     Or does she just not wish to live anymore?       I guess I'd have to understand a bit more about her.

[flushed]

[Dr Sketch]

"E is a special person, whose life is of value. She does not see it that way now, but she may in future."

That right there is my whole argument. There is a large difference to me in helping someone who is terminally ill to end suffering, and letting someone who is depressed kill themselves.

[ravenna752]

As a nurse I believe that individuals have the right to terminate their own life.
BUT if they get to me alive I am going to work like hell to save it.   Suicide is a
permanent solution to a temporary problem. 

An individual who starves themselves is well aware of the possible results of this action.   I am against the forced feeding of this type of patient.   I was taught that the patient has the right to refuse any treatment.   I will try to explain it and the reasons for the treatment, but ultimately the patient has to make the decision.  I was also taught that to force a treatment on a person is assault.  Does this rule change if the person is judged to be not "in their right mind"?  The problem there is who makes the decision that the patient is not capable of making the decision.   Who gets appointed to make decisions for this patient?  I feel terrible when I am around a situation like this because my training makes me want to zip in there with the feeding tube, but ultimately I have to respect the patient's right of choice. 

It is extremely hard for trained medical folk to watch people make decisions that will lead to their death.  But ethically I feel very strongly that patients should be able to make their own decisions.  If a patient makes a decision to refuse surgery for a cancerous tumor does the medical profession try to force this surgery?  Of course not, but it will ultimately make a difference in how long the patient lives.  I see the patient refusing the feeding tube in the same light.  The patient is making a decision on not using artifical means to extend their life.  Of course this decision will make a difference in how long they live.  Just as I would not expect a team to grab the cancer patient and take them to surgery, I don't expect a team to force the tube feeding on the anorexic.  Making this type of decision is not proof in and of itself that a patient is not capable of making their own decisions. 

I'm stepping off of the soapbox now.........