New Zealand has held a referendum on Euthanasia

I would definitely choose this option. I have just watched my mother in law deteriorate physically and mentally while suffering from oesophageal cancer. She died with little dignity and it was heartbreaking for those of us caring for her to see her struggle for her last breath. We would not let animals die in this manner, it is time for this decision to be shared.

Abortion, when it began over 20 years ago now, was very strict when it began. Now you can do it DIY yourself at home! So Euthanasia will be the same, ending up with something like - When you get to pensionable age, and can’t work any longer, instead of a pension you will be euthanasia-ised. You don’t think this could ever happen? It is fact that there are too many people alive now for the planet to sustain. What a perfect solution if there were a law in place to solve this problem. It would not be this generation ( US) that it would be activated upon but our children/ grandchildren etc. Be careful what you wish........or vote for?

kgnw28225

Abortion, when it began over 20 years ago now, was very strict when it began. Now you can do it DIY yourself at home! So Euthanasia will be the same, ending up with something like - When you get to pensionable age, and can’t work any longer, instead of a pension you will be euthanasia-ised. You don’t think this could ever happen? It is fact that there are too many people alive now for the planet to sustain. What a perfect solution if there were a law in place to solve this problem. It would not be this generation ( US) that it would be activated upon but our children/ grandchildren etc. Be careful what you wish........or vote for?

There certainly was diy abortions last century - or rather find a woman in a back street to do it for you leading to death/ infertility/ morbidity. That was for the poor, the well off went to private clinics. The good old days.

I think you’ll find abortion has been around for a tad more than 20 years

I definitely think assisted dying should be possible. I’ve fought cancer of the bowel, then liver, then gallbladder. It’s now in both my lungs, they might be able to slow the rate of growth but cannot cure it. I fully intend to keep going while I have some quality of life, but as my husband died almost 30 years ago don’t intend to carry on when either the pain is really bad or my independence goes. I’ve thought about a trip to Switzerland but actually would much prefer to die at home in my own bed when I feel that time has come. I’ve tried to explain my decision to my family and friends and hopefully it will be some time yet before I make that decision

I wish I could firmly say I have an opinion, but I don’t because I can see for and against the argument. I honestly don’t know how I would vote if it was to be put to the electorate.

I'm so sorry to hear of your health problems Summerstorm, quality of life is the important thing I think as well. I hope you enjoy your life for a long whole to come.

Obviously capacity would be one of the main criteria

Sorry posted too soon. The issue of learning disability/dementia etc should be covered by this..
I agree with another comment up thread about keeping people alive, just because we can doesn't mean we should.
This is such a complex problem but could be resolved.

Yesterday my best friend died. We had been friends for 47 years. She died in a hospice and it took 18 days of unmitigated misery and suffering for her to die. The problem was she was not in pain. So morphine could not legitimately be given to her. I know this hastens death, it did for my husband 4 years ago in the same hospice. My friend suffered from extreme nausea and dry vomiting. Nothing alleviated this. She had been unable to eat for 5 weeks and was skin and bone. Witnessing her dreadful dying process has made me get the forms to join Dignitas so that I can choose when I die because the thought of going thru what my friend went thru horrifies me. You really would not let that happen to an animal yet there seem to be many who object to the right to die being made law. There are many 'reasons', most of which appear to relate to either religious principals or to the difficulties of ensuring the safeguarding of those whose relatives might want to be rid of them, or who themselves might want to die in order not be a burden on their children. I am sure that there are many very bright lawyers in the UK who could frame a good enough law so that those who wish, can end their lives in a timely and dignified manner.

The Liverpool Care Pathway-was badly mis-interpreted.
Demonstration of Capacity is the issue and it will be interesting to see how this age long debate will be resolved

For the first time ever, 50 % of GP s are in favour of end of life meds, where needed. See the Dignity in Dying website for UK info, even better, become a supporter.

I am in NZ unfortunately this is a badly written law with not enough safeguards against coercion. The New Zealand Medical Association is against it they regard it as ‘ unethical and harmful to individuals especially vulnerable people and society’. Where does it leave the Hippocratic oath which says to do no harm.
There are poorly defined areas which means there will be court cases to decide what the law means. Does this mean that lives will be taken in the meantime? As Sodapop says it is a complex issue and I wonder if we really know what we have voted for.
I don’t like the idea of people suffering unnecessarily But life is a gift to be valued.

Crueser48

I would never agree with euthanasia as it would bring LOGANS RUN to reality besides it’s ungodly.

You truly need to inform yourself better. First of all as Nananeets says, this is not about euthanasia- AT ALL- but about assisted dying when terminally ill.

In Switzerland, you have to be a paid up member of a Society, for instance EXIT, as I am. Then you need to apply for assistance, with a medical dossier and making your case. You are then interviewed by a trained person to assess the situation and your particular reasons and case. This is done on your own, and the person is trained to eek out any hesitation, and also any form of coercion from relatives, etc. Once they are convinced that this is what the person really wants, and that the person does suffer from intolerable medical conditions and pain, they pick a date. On that day, and again on their own to ensure no outside cohersion or influence - the person is interviewed again to ensure this is absolutely what they want, that they are clear that there is NO way back, and that no-one is putting pressure on them in any way whatsoever. The person also has to be clearly compos mentis, and fully able to make the decision. (so Alzheimers or Dementia are excluded, apart from the early stages).

Then, in their own home, with or without family or friend/s- in their bed, favourite armchair, garden even if it is not overlooked- with favourite music, or 100% conditions of their own choice- the person has to take the potion unaided and die painlessly and quickly. It is all video recorded. The medical team, be their nurses, GP, specialits, etc, are NOT in any way involved- the treating team and the assisting team totally separate. As soon as the person has died, the Police is informed and they are given the video recording so they can check all was done absolutely legally.

So Logan's Run - NO.

dolphindaisy

People often argue that we wouldn't let a dog suffer the way some humans suffer, but I always think a lot of dogs have been put down because they are inconvenient, that's why I'm unsure about euthanasia being made legal. However I do know that if myself or anyone I love was terminally ill and in terrible pain I would hope for a "cocktail" from a sympathetic doctor. I therefore think the regulations in NZ are something I would probably vote for.

I don't think many vets would put a dog to sleep just becausee it was inconvenient. I've had several dogs, only one of which died at home of a heart attack. The others had cancer or some other illness that they were being treated for and the time came to help them to die. One of mine suddenly perked up on his way into the vet that I had a third degree explaining why I was asking for this. The vet had been treating him anyway and knew that he was seriously ill.

Rather more sadly one of my dogs was put to sleep on Saturday aged 6. He had bitten me on several occasions but the last time the bite was bad enough to require stitches. I telephoned the vet to make an appointment but I had to wait for 2 weeks, in case he had rabies (I'm in France). In these circumstances the vets are required to make 3 visits to see the dog but the vet decided not to come to us as I had raised the problem with him before and he trusted me. When we arrived I said I was in too minds but he said that in these circumstances he would advise that the dog be put to sleep and he was.

So, no I would not agree that dogs are euthanized for convenience.

My mother had Alzheimers for a number of years. People with cancer and other illnesses without associated dementia could make up their own minds when they on longer wanted to live but could authorities rely on a letter of wishes that may have been written several years before the dementia sufferers became very ill?

NanaNeets

I have terminal bladder cancer and I have helped “Dying in Dignity” with their campaigns... its not euthanasia, its assisted dying!! Its not for everyone which is fine but we should have a choice when living with a terminal disease... my life, my choice! I have worked takin fb care of those who are dying with cancer and some deaths are not pain free and peaceful. Imagine how it would feel if every time you moved or someone touched you, you scream out in pain... you get to the point where you sleep a lot and rely on drugs to help the pain, it doesn’t take it all away... I never want to be in that situation, And why be sedated?? You aren’t goi not to wake up and jump out of bed, why can’t we choose?

I am so so sorry to hear. As a dual national British/Swiss currently living in Switzerland, I have also joined Dignity in Dying and supporting the cause from here. Wishng you the very best. You should have the choice, just as I would have here. x

When my FIL reached 90 he said that there should be a booth where you could put in some money and get a pill in return. At that point he was in reasonable health but had decided that he no longer wanted to live.

biba70 - that is how it should be in UK.

River walk I agree with you, This bill like any other bill passed, ie Abortion twenty years ago now. The strictest of rules applied, after all a life was at stake? Three doctors to sign a consent form, operation performed in hospital. Now 20 years later, you can abort the foetus yourself, diy in your own home. Euthanasia for our children and grandchildren will be done instead of their state pension! Too many people on the planet now, how fortunate it would be to have a law in place to solve the problem.

NanaNeets and Summerstorm
One problem I heard, about the situation in the Netherlands, and Netters from there can put me right, was that the provision of palliative care was diminished when Assisted Dying became available. That meant your choice was chose to suffer or chose die. If we are going down that route then the provision of palliative care must be protected.

I would vote for Voluntary Euthanasia. I have sat with both a good friend and also a husband, both of whom died of Cancer. I remained with them until the point of passing, and I would not want to do it again. There have been many other Cancer deaths in my family, Aunts, Uncles, Cousins etc. and also ones where Dementia was suffered prior to death. Yes, there definitely must be strong guidelines to protect vulnerable people, who may have difficulty in making a decision for themselves - and I think in these cases - no-one should be able to decide for them. I would want this option for myself. I'm not afraid of dying - but watching someone you care for suffer (knowing you can do nothing to help), is not something I would wish on on my worst enemy!

Maremia

NanaNeets and Summerstorm
One problem I heard, about the situation in the Netherlands, and Netters from there can put me right, was that the provision of palliative care was diminished when Assisted Dying became available. That meant your choice was chose to suffer or chose die. If we are going down that route then the provision of palliative care must be protected.

Certainly NOT the case in Switzerland, where amazing paliative care is available. Shameful that paliative care in the UK relies on charities (like the brilliant LOROS i Leicestershire).

Biba what happens in Switzerland is what one would hope for and expect, own home, garden, bed, armchair with family friends of not, but it’s my understanding having watched programmes on those who travel to Switzerland with dignitas that there are no clinics as such; they use empty flats until neighbours realise what is going on, when they have to Move elsewhere. Not very dignified.
Because of distance the choice for foreigners has be made earlier than people may need, due to fear that they may be too unwell to undertake a long journey if they wait, which is very sad.
My mum suffered for 10 years, I know what she would have preferred to do but the choice wasn’t there for her.
I hope it’s there for me.

Maybe this is the time to think about having powers of attorney in place. I am a single person and have given powers of attorney to my sister and brother-in-law and they know that I do not want to kept alive and/or resuscitated after a heart attack or stroke.

I am very much in favor of dying with dignity after witnessing my father and five siblings die slowly from cancer. In every case, it was quite horrible for all concerned. Referring to the U.S., there are only 9 states (including DC) that have death with dignity acts in force. As I don't live in or near one of those, I'd also be flying to Switzerland since that would be easier accomplished that establishing residency in another state.

As mentioned up-thread, Oregon has a law that, as I understand it, could serve as a model. From Oregon.gov it reads, in part:

"The Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) is a permissive law that allows terminally ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of a lethal dose of medication, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose." And, "It is up to qualified patients and licensed physicians to implement the DWDA on an individual basis. No one is compelled to participate."

Of course it is much more detailed than what is stated here but seems to address the issues that some are raising as a concern against passing the laws. As was pointed out here by another poster, the laws would need to be iron-clad to protect the most vulnerable and would only ever be followed when the patient is able to fully consent. I can see where it could be considered a slippery slope if not clearly spelled out.

At the moment Mil is in a nursing home, Bedbound, incontinent both ways, can't swollow has a feeding tube and no visitors are allowed.
We have been told that we will be able to go in when they think it's time.
Complained to the home, health authority and our MP.
I know that she would vote for euthanaisia