Woman loses assisted suicide case

[capncnut]

Not exactly a cheery subject, I know.




Debbie Purdy, 45, from Bradford, is considering going to a Swiss clinic to end her life, but fears her husband may be charged on his return to the UK.

Ms Purdy was diagnosed with primary progressive MS in March 1995. She can no longer walk and is losing strength in her upper body.

She has suggested that at some point she may travel to Switzerland to take a lethal dose of barbiturates prescribed by doctors at Dignitas.

Ms Purdy wants her husband at her side but fears he may be prosecuted on his return to Britain where aiding or abetting a suicide is a crime punishable by up to 14 years imprisonment...

...During the hearing earlier this month, she argued the lack of clarification was a breach of her human rights but two High Court judges have ruled that her human rights had not been infringed and existing guidelines were adequate.

Click (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7697200.stm) for full article.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one at all but if she goes through with this, should her husband be prosecuted?

[EvilNed]

Definetly not. Every adult human, especially at 45 years of age, is capable of making their own choice. Besides, the fact that you can be charged with assissting suicide, implies that suicide is illegal. Which is just stupid. It's my body, I'll do what I want.

[Neil]

Not exactly a cheery subject, I know.



Click (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7697200.stm) for full article.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one at all but if she goes through with this, should her husband be prosecuted?

By the letter of the law he should be, but in reality, I believe this has not happened in previous cases?

[capncnut]

By the letter of the law he should be, but in reality, I believe this has not happened in previous cases?
I believe there's been a number of people who haven't been prosecuted for assisting a loved one's suicide but I think the woman would like a clear conscience (even though it's not going to matter to her once she is dead). But while most cases are generally cleared, this man's imprisonment is still a possibility.

[bassman]

He'll be brought in by the law. I don't think there's much of a way they can fight that.

Personally, I say let them do it. It's her choice and their life together.

[Chic Freak]

I'm not sure how I feel about this one at all but if she goes through with this, should her husband be prosecuted?

Of course not! I mean, the law should be changed so that he isn't. Suicide itself isn't illegal and all he would be doing is the decent thing of holding her hand.

[Cody]

No. Hes not really assisting either.

[capncnut]

No. Hes not really assisting either.
Well, yeah he is. Who else is gonna push the poor woman's wheelchair to Switzerland?

[Skippy911sc]

Brake out the Soylent Green!

I am a believer in euthanasia. If an adult wishes to end there existence then they should not be stopped or prosecuted for doing so.

[EvilNed]

Well, yeah he is. Who else is gonna push the poor woman's wheelchair to Switzerland?

Well, what if her last wish was to see Switserland, and while she was there she decided to get euthanized?

[darth los]

Of course not! I mean, the law should be changed so that he isn't. Suicide itself isn't illegal and all he would be doing is the decent thing of holding her hand.

In the U.S. suicide is illegal which always makes me laugh because how the hell are you supposed to enforce that? Imo, there is no better example of gov't overeach than this issue. If we are all free men/women and even if we were healthy and in 100% perfect physical shape shouldn't it be our decision?

I think the charging someone else withit is a deterent to stop something that they don't like because there's really no other way to stop someone from doing it if they really wanted to. You might think twice if you knew that the loved one who "assisted" you would go to jail for god only know how many years. Pathetic.

But think about it. The very name, "assisted suicide" means that you aided someone in killing themselves. But the fact remains that they killed THEMSELVES. So if I gave you a gun and you decided to blow your head off am I responsible? Or, if a doctor wrote you a script for vicodin and you decided to down the whole bottle should they go to jail? So why is it that if you help someone obtain the means to kill themselves that you go down as well?

Makes me think twice about that kitchen knife set i was going to get my mother in-law for x-mas....On second thought. :confused: :p



:cool:

[MinionZombie]

Of course not! I mean, the law should be changed so that he isn't. Suicide itself isn't illegal and all he would be doing is the decent thing of holding her hand.
Damn straight Chic.

I think that if someone's life is a misery because of an illness or what have you, then if they want to end it all - rather than limping on in agony, letting their loved ones watch them suffer as a mere shadow of their former selves - then I say let it happen.

At a time when the victims are losing all control over their bodies, you should at least provide them the control to end it all if they so wish - if they don't, fair play to them ... if they do, fair play to them also - and it can happen with the family around to give them a loving send-off.

What's wrong with that?

I'm pro-choice on basically everything, I don't believe in stopping other people choosing just because of your religious beliefs, or hang-ups, or ways of thinking - such a way of thinking just strikes me as ridiculous, especially in a world where opinion is so varied and far-reaching. Also - it's a per-person choice, not some state sanctioned Logan's Run rip-off for crying out loud.

[Tricky]

I think people should be allowed the choice,as long as its properly regulated!i felt angry when that rugby playing lad went to dignitas to die the other week,& i read loads of letters in the papers from people saying it was wrong that he committed suicide & he should have had councilling & medication instead.Sorry but he'd gone from a physically fit outgoing lad to not being able to move anymore than his face,if he didnt want to live like that then why should he?if i ended up crippled like that then no amount of councilling & happy pills would take away the fact that my body was f**ked & i could never again do anything other than roll my eyes about while being incontinent & isolated,i certainly wouldnt want to spend the next 50 years like that!i live a very active life,outdoor sports,exercise,a fairly physical job,clubbing every weekend,walks in the country etc,if all that was taken from me i'd want to die too & would be very angry with anyone who tried to stop me going through with it!

[Bub666]

If she wants to kill herself,she should be allowed to.It's stupid that her husband might get arrested for helping her.

[MinionZombie]

I think people should be allowed the choice,as long as its properly regulated!i felt angry when that rugby playing lad went to dignitas to die the other week,& i read loads of letters in the papers from people saying it was wrong that he committed suicide & he should have had councilling & medication instead.Sorry but he'd gone from a physically fit outgoing lad to not being able to move anymore than his face,if he didnt want to live like that then why should he?if i ended up crippled like that then no amount of councilling & happy pills would take away the fact that my body was f**ked & i could never again do anything other than roll my eyes about while being incontinent & isolated,i certainly wouldnt want to spend the next 50 years like that!i live a very active life,outdoor sports,exercise,a fairly physical job,clubbing every weekend,walks in the country etc,if all that was taken from me i'd want to die too & would be very angry with anyone who tried to stop me going through with it!
Aye I felt the same way - if he wants to end it all, especially when so much he held dear in life has been taken away, then I say let him.

It does need to be regulated, in that it needs to be done in a safe environment, with medical supervision/advice/regulation.

It should not be up to the government to decide whether one-in-a-few-million chooses to live or die, I wouldn't wish a lifetime of suffering on someone.

And having the option there doesn't mean that those who want to carry on living can't do so - if they want to, and they find happiness despite adversity, then good on them - but not everyone has that strength of resolve, and should be allowed to choose an end of dignity if they wish.

I seriously doubt I'd wanna live if I was crippled to such an extent either, especially something like brain damage.

[Yojimbo]

I am a supporter of the idea of death with dignity, and that a person of reasonably sound mind should have the ability to choose for themselves. Nevertheless, I realize that suicide is illegal in the USA.

Hospice or terminally ill patients are often given a bottle of medication (like oral dose or sublingual morphine) and they are told by the doctor or pharmacist that they should take only the recommended dose for pain relief. They are also told that they should not exceed the recommended dose as it may result in death. They are then given the bottle and told to follow the directions and expected to self regulate their doses.

I have been told unofficially that this is done as a means to give the patient a painless method by which to end their life in a dignified fashion at the time of their choosing, should they choose to follow this path. Certainly it is not officially done for this, as these meds are prescribed only for pain relief.

The laws governing doctor assisted suicide as they are here in the United States, a doctor cannot officially sanction suicide, but apparently doctors have been either administering or making available to terminal cases high doses of morphine for this specific purpose for many years. I am certain that this is done purely out of mercy, but one way or another the end result is the same as if you explicitly instructed someone on how to kill themselves, or took a more active role in their suicide.

[EvilNed]

No expert here, but doesn't O'Ding on painkillers first send you into an hour long journey of pain as the organs react to them?

[Yojimbo]

I am no expert myself, and having never had the opportunity to down a significant dose of Morphine, I really do not know if your body would experience pain. But I was once administered Demerol intervenously after surgery - from what I have heard it is very similar to Morphine in effect, but I would have to defer to the resident medical techs and nurses on our boards to confirm - and I must say that I really felt no pain at all, and actually felt extremely high from it.

I would hope that these folks at the last moment of their lives feel no pain at all, but perhaps that it just wishful thinking.

Can one of our members with medical training hone in on this? Some of us -I don't wish this on anyone, but I mention it just to be pragmatic - might have to make this decision someday and a little information on this could be very useful.

[EvilNed]

Now that I think about it, I don't think morphine would hustle your organs too much, considering it'd probably put you into a coma pretty quick.

But other pills, the stuff that teenagers usually OD on, will cause internal damage. Alot of pills do, infact, if you take too much of them. But I can see morphine working.

[Chic Freak]

I'm pretty sure that the traditional vodka + aspirin method is meant to be one of the worst in terms of long and painful deaths.

Voluntary suicide should be available on the NHS I think, so that people can go as quickly and painlessly with as much dignity as possible.

And without meaning to sound harsh, if a mentally competent adult has made an informed decision to end their life without any outside coercion whatsoever, etc, then the quicker they can be put to rest, the quicker the resources that they would have been using can be transferred to someone who actually wants them.

I'm just saying.

[Mike70]

Oregon has the "death with dignity act" and it works like this:


Under the law, a capable adult Oregon resident who has been diagnosed by a physician with a terminal illness that will kill them within six months may request in writing, from his or her physician, a prescription for a lethal dose of medication for the purpose of ending the patient's life. Use of the law is voluntary and the patient must initiate the request. Any physician, pharmacist or healthcare provider opposed on moral grounds does not have to participate.

The request must be confirmed by two witnesses, one of whom cannot be related to the patient, be entitled to any portion of the patient's estate, be the patient's physician, or be employed by a health care facility caring for the patient. After the request is made, another physician must examine the patient's medical records and confirm the diagnosis. The patient must be determined to not suffer from a mental condition impairing judgment. If the request is authorized, the patient must wait at least fifteen days and make a second oral request before the prescription may be written. The patient has a right to rescind the request at any time. Should either physician have concerns about the patient’s ability to make an informed decision, or feel the patient’s request may be motivated by depression or coercion, the patient must be referred for a psychological evaluation.

The law protects doctors from liability for providing a lethal prescription for a terminally ill, competent adult in compliance with the statute restrictions. Participation by physicians, pharmacists, and health care providers is voluntary. The law also specifies a patient's decision to end his or her life shall not "have an effect upon a life, health, or accident insurance or annuity policy."


the legion of doom (aka the fu*kwits in the bush admin) attempted to block this law when they came into power but a supreme court decision came down on the side of oregon.

[Yojimbo]

Mike, I am surprised but pleased that there is a state that has the presence of mind to be this progressive. On the flipside, it doesn't surprise me at all that evangelicals and the George W robots would have been against this.

Suddenly, though, I am reminded of that government-funded "Quietus" suicide kit from "Children of Men"