- Ron Tizzard
- October 17, 2012 - 10:55
Perhaps the most personal and publically accepted (by the letter of the law) is one's' legally attested Last Will and Testament. It is my opinion that somebody with such a will in place, deemed sane, in the final days of his or her life, suffering physical pain, with no chance of recovery i.e. terminal... there should be a formula whereby that person may hasten an end his/her life, enjoying his/her community's (relatives and friends) assent and support in one's final hours. Communally applied laws exist, and must exist to govern commonly accepted (legal) modes of behaviours amongst people living together, to mutually support on a manner of life together. When, in the final analysis, one's personal life and physical well-being is threatened, levels of unconsciousnesss, limited and finally deemed to be terminal...towards the end, in the throes of unmanageable pain and sensibility there should be a legal means for life to be mercifully assisted to end by a physician....by withdrawing useless medical treatments, and let nature take its course thereafter, applying perhaps, with medical consultation, any required pain relieving medication. Personally, I had a brother who died in such a position..finally in a hospital bed, nothing else to be done medically, in (moans)and out of consciousness, unaware of surrrounds, labouring to breath, grimising in great pain even with sedation. After a discussion with physicians, and knowing any further medication would certainly hasten his death (mercifully)...with family around, the physician and I locked eyes across my broyther's bed side, I nodded to the physician to apply the pain-releiving medication; my bother passed in peace a short will later. I knew my brother, and in the given situation I know I made the right decision. Personally, I trust medical opinions...and agree that useless, prolonged treatments should be discussed earlier with patients and their families regarding the application of medication in the the final days regarding any associated pain relief which may be required..while it may hasten an unintended death process. Good article...a necessary read from my perspective. Thank you Pam.
- George P
- October 14, 2012 - 15:00
In the name and cause of human dignity, social acceptance of euthanasia must be accepted as a right of passage. Surely, adequate safegusrds can be put in place to prevent abuse and to legitimize the process. We euthanize animals that are certified incurable so that they will not suffer. Do humans not deserve that same consideration? Physicians could determine when extreme suffering can and should be bypassed and should legally be able to initiate an assisted demise. Religious beliefs have no part in such determinations. So let's get on with appropriate legislation and accept the thinking of the 21st century.
- Colin Burke
- October 14, 2012 - 10:22
There may indeed be nothing wrong with legalizing assisted suicide for people who want it and deem it morally licit. But legalizing it in a country where many are convinced it is murder and therefore penalizing those people if they should interfere with it on the ground that it was murder, might well dampen their zeal to prevent other murders which they deem only equally wrong and which the legalizers of medically assisted dying might some day desperately need them to prevent. That is to say, Ms. Frampton might not really welcome the prospect of an able-bodied man's merely passing by if she were being mugged and muttering to himself, "Oh, that's only Pam, who has already asked for that kind of help anyway" because he believed murder is murder according to "abstract, eternal and objective standards" unaffected by people's feelings. But such a man in such a case would only be simply logical.