Win a fitness package worth more than £3,000
A survey of doctors has found that three-quarters of the profession oppose a
change in the euthanasia laws, even for a small number of terminally ill
patients. But backers of the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill -
which would enable adults who are suffering "unbearably" to request an end
to their life - believe that public opinion is in their favour. Should
euthanasia be legalised? Read the <a>article</a> and send us your view using
the form below. Your replies will be posted here <p>
I believe that one of the main reasons that people are anti-euthanasia is that
they are scared. They are scared of their own conscience and how it will eat
away at them. Imagine being in so much pain every day of your life, having
nothing to live for and wanting so much for death which is so close, yet so
far away. But people refuse to put them out of their physical and mental
pain to save their own. As for the families who claim to love the person in
question, they sit around watching them die slowly, but refuse to let go,
clinging on to every moment they have left to delay that terrible grief of
death. I think that euthanasia is right when quality of life is forever
lost. There is no need to set guidelines for "quality of life", as
when someone has lost the will to live and is afraid they will never gain it
again, you can see it. To take away the right to death is to take way the
right to life. Without death there is no new beginning, only a horrible
delayed state of ending. Grace Blakeley, Basingstoke
I for one live in terror of being trapped in a terminal illness, or a state of
total paralysis, barred by law from being relieved of suffering. The right
to die should be as precious and as respected as the right to live. Libby
Murphy, London
I think deciding when to end one's life should be everyone's right. If
religious belief, or lack of, is everyone's right, then no one particular
group should make such a decision. I would not presume to tell anybody what
to do, nor should anyone (religious nuts, politicians, members of the
medical profession) presume to decide for me. Sandra Rodino, Milan
We must accept that everyone is different with different tolerance levels and
thresholds of pain. It would be unfair for me to impose my religious belief
on everyone else, or expect them to bear the same level of suffering as I
perhaps could. I support any legislation that gives the suffering party the
choice and power to do something (albeit with outside help) at a time of
their choosing before the critical stages of their terminal illnesses set
in, but only as a last resort. Jermaine Joseph Khoo, Croydon
I watched a friend die in agony from cancer some years ago. He was left by
himself curtained off in a general ward with little dignity or apparent
care. Access to a hospice is hit and miss and I simply don't believe that
every dying person is given the correct level of specialised care and
attention. Lord Joffe's bill contained elaborate and secure safeguards
against abuse or undue pressure. As for the bishops in the Lords, words fail
me. If ever there was an argument for radical reform, this is it. Why should
they have such an important voice when the Church going is dying on its
feet? Christ on the cross was put out of his agony by a compassionate Roman
soldier with a spear. Can us ordinary mortals not hope for a similar helping
hand if we need it? Charlie Phipps, Hereford
Our task is to live and inspire hope. Ethanasia encourages despondency and
despair. Father Bryan Storey, Tintagel, Cornwall
Life has been lengthened immeasurably alongside medical advancements. But to
generalise that the quality of life has similarly improved is to ignore the
pain experienced by those suffering from a disease that would have naturally
ended life at an earlier age. One cannot abhor any medical leaps forward,
and the pros, so to speak, far outweigh the cons. However, euthanasia is
fundamentally the choice of the individual; religious views are personal and
should never be subjected upon others. Name and address withheld
I have a question. How does the proposed euthanasia bill differ from not
giving a life saving blood transfusion to a Jehovah’s Witness for example?
How and why is that more morally acceptable? Surely that is allowing someone
to die - and in that circumstance, there may be hope of survival and a full
and active life. If that is an individual's wish, then that is what we
endeavour to pursue because it would be at odds with their religious beliefs
to do otherwise. We act as a patient's advocate, sometimes suspending our
own beliefs, but treating them as the individuals that they are and have a
right to be. I find these debates raise more questions than answers. Zoe
Marshall, Sevenoaks
There is nothing more ironic than viewing assisted suicide as compassionate
and progressive. The 'pro-euthanasia' attitude has been present for
thousands of years and raises its ugly head every time a sick or elderly
person proves to be an excessive burden on others. In fact, the progressive
approach would be one of genuine compassion: care, patience and
encouragement to live out their lives and to enjoy the comforts of family
despite their physical ill-being. This is progressive, whereas euthanasia is
morally primitive. Chris Deal, Cambridge
I think legalising euthanasia, no matter what the reason, will be the thin end
of the wedge. Once this door is open, it will only be a matter of time
before its scope is broadened and other reasons for ending a person's life
will be introduced. Robin Henderson, Melksham, Wiltshire
I believe that we should all have the right to choose the time of our own
passing - subject to safeguards to prevent pressure on sick and elderly
people. I am not a religious person: I do not accept that others who do have
some kind of religious belief have the right to impose their views on the
rest of society. Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey
I am a barrister and law lecturer and I am opposed to the assisted dying bill
and to euthanasia. I think it is a bad thing for society and represents a
threat to some of our most vulnerable members. The so-called safeguards
within the Bill could never be adequate to ensure that the decision is
always entirely voluntary and made by a patient with the capacity to consent
in law. Rebecca Hunt, Farnborough
My father died in agony in hospital from metasticised prostate cancer in 1990.
His screams went ignored by doctors, who did little to alleviate his pain,
and caused distress to other dying cancer patients on the ward. Those
demi-gods played with his life then, and I don't trust them to be any
different today. Brian Naylor, Farnham
I`m a nurse with multiple sclerosis. I come from two perspectives, someone who
could suffer themselves and someone who has seen others suffer. Giving
people choice in their own deaths is the only civilised option. Doctors
should not feel threatened by people wishing to end their own suffering. Sharman
Dunn, Brighton
I am in favour of legalised euthanasia. It’s my life and if I had a terminal
illness I would make the decision on my death, not the government or any
religious nuts. Anthony D'Amato, Sarasota
I am in favour of euthanasia in principle but need assurances about the
circumstances under which it will be deemed appropriate. Since when do
doctors have to be involved? It takes no credentials to kill, criminals do
it all the time. There should be licensed euthanasia technicians who will
attend as needed and administer the procedure according to law. This should
be a legal and ethical discussion not a medical one. Anthony Pollock,
Winnersh
I oppose euthanasia on religious grounds; no one has the right to take their
life. "The Lord gives and the Lord takes away". No one else
should. Personally, I want to know that my doctor wants to relieve me of my
suffering not relieve me of my life. Suffering is not a waste of human life
- all suffering is redemptive. John Russell, Henlow
I believe that there will always be some conditions that cannot be
sufficiently helped by medication, and family or carer support. The quality
of a person's remaining life should be considered. As an absolute last
resort there should be some rights for people to choose a pain-free and
peaceful death. Emily Duell, Colchester
I believe that the Royal College of Physicians are motivated largely by
potential legal and religious repercussions. The inability to recognise the
needs of the patient is a serious omission. Good sense and sympathy should
prevail to allow human beings the right to die as they have had the right to
live. Name and address withheld
The question asked in a previous comment is "who has the right to play God".
An active soul is one whereby the person knows his identity and picks up the
responsibility for his actions before God. To murder will cost you your
life, that is God's judgment as stated in the Old Testament To show
compassion and understand can be argued before a loving God, that is a
statement from the soul. Alan Grocock, Huntingdon
We religious countries seem to have a hang up on living into old age at all
costs. Our God should teach us to live a good life whilst we are here,
rather than just prolonging an agony for ourselves and our loved ones. Live
a good life every moment,irrespective of years, and most important, help
each other to move on, to make space for the next, better person. David
Morris, Wirral
To those who say that euthanasia should be legalised, and that they themselves
would choose to die on their own terms were it to be legalised, I say hire
yourself a professional executioner. But don't enlist the medical
profession. Michael Petek, Brighton
None of us have the right to prevent someone’s ability to choose. With most
terminal conditions the sufferer has the physical ability and therefore the
choice to take their own life, regardless of the law and regardless of other
people’s opinions. However, with conditions that remove all physical
movement the choice is lost. This Bill allows those patients, especially, to
regain some power over their free will, as well as giving other terminal
patients who would choose to die access to drugs to end their life in a
better way than the options they currently have without a doctor's help.
This Bill is not saying that at the first mention of wanting to die anyone
will immediately be handed a potion to induce death, rather that with proper
psychiatric help and an extended period before the act is carried out, we
can make sure those requesting death have come to the right decision.
Doctors say they take an oath to do no harm, well letting someone suffer
unnecessarily and against their will is inflicting harm, whether that
suffering is physical pain or mental. This Bill will not devalue the lives
of the disabled, rather it will value the person they are as well as the
opinions they have. Rebecca Collins, London
I imagine that in the 2025 NHS budgetary crisis, I'll get a A4 sheet of paper
that says: "The NHS has determined that the medically appropriate
treatment for your condition is euthanasia. If you would like to investigate
other options, your GP can refer you to a private specialist." Greg
Kochanski, Oxford
I believe no one has the right to play God. Without a doubt, some may argue
that not everyone believes in God and therefore to deny them their choice of
life or death based on Christian principles would be taking away their human
right of choice. However, I feel legalising assisted suicide may encourage
people to give up easily on life. At this point in time when medical
advancement has made it possible to improve quality of life in palliative
care and manage pain to a great extent, euthanasia almost makes a mockery of
this. What will be the measure to define extreme suffering? Where is the
line drawn between relieving someone's pain and giving someone an easy
escape route? I feel that legalising euthanasia will be treading on a very
thin line that will open even further and more complicated debates. Name
withheld, London
We have no power to create life, so why should we have the power to take it
away? David Wilcox, Ohrid, Macedonia
With virtually every professional body representing doctors and nurses firmly
opposed to the Joffe Bill, one wonders who is going to provide the necessary
barbiturates to assist patients who want to commit suicide and who is going
to administer the necessary lethal injection when such self-administration
fails, as it surely will in a number of cases. Perhaps those who cry that we
treat sick dogs better than dying people should be campaigning for vets to
do the assisting for humans as well, as they have much more experience of
helping their patients to die than any UK doctor other than Harold Shipman.
Failing that, perhaps the philosophers and lawyers so keen on legalising it
should also be authorised to do it. Why does it need a doctor at all?
Healers should not be those who assist their patients' self-destruction. Trevor
Stammers, Epsom
There are a great many things to consider before any legal change is made in
this field. I do think that a lot of people would be put out of their misery
knowing that if things got to hard to bear, then they had an escape route.
For the families of these people, it may be a relief to know that while
their loved one is no longer around, they are not suffering as they did
before. But, caution must be taken if the legalisation of euthanasia takes
place. Who's to say that someone kills another and claims euthanasia? If the
person wishes to be peacefully killed, I believe that their case should be
reviewed by a board, who check that this is a genuine claim. Otherwise, all
this new law would do is legalise murder. Anna Grant-Casey, Bicester
Euthanasia is the humane thing to do for the hopelessly sick, as long as there
is no monetary gain for the relatives or doctors and confirmed by
non-involved parties. I am speaking from the perspective of having a twin
brother and a father die a slow death when there was no cure but pain and
time. God bless them. Name and address withheld
Euthanasia is assisted suicide. If suicide is legal, then why not Euthanasia.
As a safe-guard, people could declare in their Will the conditions under
which they should be assisted. Vinay Mehra, Purley, Surrey
I am in favour of legalised euthanasia. I looked after my father when he had
motor neurone disease and I am quite clear in my mind that if if I endured a
similar clinical condition to the one that he had, that I would like the
choice and the assistance to be euthanised. I think the thing to remember is
that people are different. Whilst my father wanted to live until his very
last day, I do not share the same views as my father. I think that
euthanasia is a good and compassionate thing when it is clearly indicated
from the person, that this is indeed their wish. I feel sad when I think
about the trauma involved in terminally ill patients making their way to
Switzerland to have euthanasia when it would give them and their loved ones
so much comfort to be able to do it here. Rose Wong, Liverpool
The right to die is implicit in the right to live. If a person's quality of
life is such that they wish to terminate their life, then surely they should
be allowed to do so with dignity. Maria Warden, London
I believe there is a strong case for allowing individuals with serious
incurable illnesses to choose their time to die. The medical profession may
claim that they can provide excellent palliative care and maintain a quality
of life, but their idea of quality may be different to the patient's view.
There just need to be safeguards that people are not pressurised into taking
this route to avoid using potential inheritances on care costs. Richard
DeHavillande, Aylesbury
While I understand that some doctors may feel that to help someone to die is
against their moral ethics, I feel that if someone is suffering and there is
no possibility of help or of them surviving their troubles with any quality
of life, it should be possible for that person to end their life. At the
moment, such a person may attempt this without medical help and, being
untrained, can suffer even more because of the attempt. If the doctors who
voted against euthanasia don't want to help, why not set up clinics where
psychologists and pain control experts can make a medical assessment of the
person and, if they feel that euthanasia is acceptable, assist in a
dignified end to the life. There is also the legal aspect of 'suicide',
which has not been discussed to date. Will the person be deemed to have
committed suicide and so lose pension and insurance rights for the next of
kin? Personally I feel that an individual who is deemed to be of sound mind
should have the right to end their life. Marie Butler, Plymouth
Yes, I am in favour of legalising Euthanasia. I am only 33 years old, in good
health and planning to live until I am 100. However, if could sign a legal
document instructing both my family and doctors of my wish to die with
dignity then I would do it today. This would absolve all medical staff of
blame and family members from guilt. I want my family and friends to
remember me for how I lived, not how I died. Also, I do not want the last
experiences of my life being that of a decrepit old man withering away in
some dark corner of an old peoples home. The choice you make about your
passing should be as important as how you choose to live your life. Grahame
Bishop, Leicestershire
Why should Doctors play God? I cannot help a friend take their life (should
health dictate), nor can I ask a friend of mine to assist with the end of my
life should my health become so beyond repair that I lose all sense of
dignity. Yet the medical profession/Government can dictate who gets what
medicine, care, operations, etc. Who decides that a person in one county has
more of a right to live than someone in another county? Who has the right to
play God? The problem we have is that if you challenge the medical
profession/Government with this equation, you can be sure of one thing; you
wont get an answer. Joanna Millward, London
Please complete the form below and your contribution will be considered for
publication. Please restrict your response to 250 words. It may be necessary
to edit your comments. Please include your name, town/county/state of
residence and e-mail.
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£Excellent+ executive benefits
Torres and Partners
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
Alstom Power
Europe
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
Special Offers now available
At the new sophisticated
Encore Las Vegas Resort!
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.