France's prime minister has called for a law known as "passive euthanasia" to be revised after a woman who was refused active euthanasia was found dead. Fifty-two year old Chantal Sebire, who suffered a rare and incurable cancer which attacked her nose and sinuses, had been denied euthanasia by a court on Monday.

 

She was found dead in her apartment yesterday. The cause of her death has not yet been determined.

 

Unable to leave her bed to hear Monday's verdict because of pain, she said it was the last straw: "When a person asks for an act of love to be allowed to leave in a dignified and humane way, they are not even allowed to do that because the law intervenes," she said.

 

Chantal Sebire's death has reignited a public debate on euthanasia, which is legal in the Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg and Belgium.

 

Her death comes as Belgium mourns its world-famous philosopher Hugo Claus, who was in the first stages of Alzheimer's disease, and chose death by euthanasia on Wednesday.

 

Under existing law, doctors said Sebire could have fallen into a coma and died, but she was keen to set a legal precedent to allow euthanasia in exceptional cases instead of artificial coma.

 

Opponents of euthanasia, including the Roman Catholic Church, say the sanctity of life overrides all other factors.

 

Other critics fear a right to kill patients could easily be abused.

 

Source: Euronews / http://www.euronews.net/index.php?page=inf...76171&lng=1

 

Personally I am for legal assisted suicide. However I don't think a doctor should be the one to do it. Doctors are trained to do anything possible to keep someone alive, no matter who the person is, what the illness is, or what the circumstances are. It is a fundamental contradiction to have a doctor let someone die.

 

What do you think?

I'm for it.

 

My older sister (who is a nurse), said she wants to give up her job, because she dosn't think it's right giving un-curable cancer patients everyday treatment which puts them through unbelievable pain, and then after a few months of treatment they pass away. It's not gods descision to end someones life, it's up to the person, and if they want to end their own life because they can't carry on the way they are, then they should have the choice.

I'm for it.

 

My older sister (who is a nurse), said she wants to give up her job, because she dosn't think it's right giving un-curable cancer patients everyday treatment which puts them through unbelievable pain, and then after a few months of treatment they pass away. It's not gods descision to end someones life, it's up to the person, and if they want to end their own life because they can't carry on the way they are, then they should have the choice.

 

i agree.

 

when someone has got an incurable disease then there comes a point where the quality of life can never be returned to them. keeping them alive as long as possible in great pain aint a life...its cruel.

No I disagree

 

However dreadful some people's suffering are no one has a right to play god

 

If we simply allow humans to be put down it makes us no better than cats and dogs

 

Plus I can see the system being abused too with families getting rid of relatives to save on care fees, to get hold of their money if they are wealthy and so on

 

While I can see some moral arguments in humans being put to sleep it is to me ethically wrong

No I disagree

 

However dreadful some people's suffering are no one has a right to play god

 

If we simply allow humans to be put down it makes us no better than cats and dogs

 

Plus I can see the system being abused too with families getting rid of relatives to save on care fees, to get hold of their money if they are wealthy and so on

 

While I can see some moral arguments in humans being put to sleep it is to me ethically wrong

 

so we are more compassionate towards cats and dogs... <_<

 

and it would ONLY be done in the latter stages of illness, so your theory on saving on expeses is negligable.

I am absolutely for it. -_- Especially as an atheist, haha. Why put someone through unbelievable pain and suffering only to die weeks later when it can be done peacefully and predictably? The family can all say their goodbyes, etc.

I have an arrangement with my family that if I was to be in a situation where I am in a coma and severely brain damaged after say an accident and unlikely to come out of that coma that I be denied food and water so that I can be left to die but if I was conscious then no matter what the illness or condition was and no matter how traumatic its effects I would go "full term" and die a natural death

 

I watched my father go down from 16st to 7st with cancer that started in his lungs and spread to his stomach and he stated that under no circumstances would he ever be euthanised and I have the same attitude

 

 

I am absolutely for it. -_- Especially as an atheist, haha. Why put someone through unbelievable pain and suffering only to die weeks later when it can be done peacefully and predictably? The family can all say their goodbyes, etc.

 

I don't believe the issue should be about religion, I am as anti religion as you can get but still believe in "natural" life and people being kept alive till they die a natural death, me included

 

I don't think religion should be a factor in the whole thing

so we are more compassionate towards cats and dogs... <_<

 

and it would ONLY be done in the latter stages of illness, so your theory on saving on expeses is negligable.

 

How would who is entitled to it be clarified though ?

 

In Consie's article there was a case of a Belgian philosopher who chose to die and it stated he was in the EARLY stages of alzheimers which is in conflict with what you say about latter stages of illnesses, if such laws were bought in it would more likely be the Belgian model than your advanced stages of terminal illness

 

And also what happens with people who are not of sound mind and cannot make such decisions for themselves rationally ? or people who have had tracheotomies or people who are mentally ill....it would set the wrong sort of precedent if families were allowed to decide the fate of a senior relative and indeed open to massive abuse of the system

 

I am debating the issue too with someone on MSN atm and she said that her grandfather wanted to die because she felt she was a "burden on the rest of the family" because she had Parkinsons Disease, sorry but again not wanting to be a burden on relatives is not enough grounds for me for euthanasia

 

While no one likes seeing a relative suffer there are just too many pitfalls and risks of abuse of the system for this to be workable ethically

Edited March 20, 200817 yr by Vic Vega

No I disagree

 

However dreadful some people's suffering are no one has a right to play god

 

If we simply allow humans to be put down it makes us no better than cats and dogs

 

Plus I can see the system being abused too with families getting rid of relatives to save on care fees, to get hold of their money if they are wealthy and so on

 

While I can see some moral arguments in humans being put to sleep it is to me ethically wrong

It's just just thinking, "Hey I'm going to go and get myself drugged to sleep", it has to be checked over and agreed by doctors who can see a reason for it to happen.

This is the most sad story of nowdays... Poor woman was suffering from a disease that was found at 200 persons in the past 5 years :( Since I read the first time about her I was hoping she would not suffer that much, but also not die...

It's incredible how a disease can modify your body instantly... She was not seeing anymore and everything was a pain for her (the only sense left was the hearing :cry: ).

It's sad to see that a country that she paid the taxes all her life (as a teacher) let her down in the biggest sufering that a person can have. After all we're 6 billion and 200 persons had this disease in the past 5 years (this means really a small ammount, so somebody should think that this is eally a DISTRUCTIVE pain :arrr: ). It's not about the fact that she was suffering, but she lost all the senses because of this disease, and it's really awful that she died like this :( , without a govern that might sustain her for the pain and disgrace she felt into :cry:

Please do consider this person and her suffering really well... I read a lot about her and I think she might have receive more support from the world if she should have lived a bit more.

God forgive her because I'm really impressed by such a form of disease :cry: xox.

I'm for it.

 

My older sister (who is a nurse), said she wants to give up her job, because she dosn't think it's right giving un-curable cancer patients everyday treatment which puts them through unbelievable pain, and then after a few months of treatment they pass away. It's not gods descision to end someones life, it's up to the person, and if they want to end their own life because they can't carry on the way they are, then they should have the choice.

 

I agree. In Holland its allowed. There are strict regulations ofcourse and guidelines to follow but am glad we have the option.

i agree.

 

when someone has got an incurable disease then there comes a point where the quality of life can never be returned to them. keeping them alive as long as possible in great pain aint a life...its cruel.

 

Exactly my sentiments.

 

If you treated your pets in that manner you'd be prosecuted by the RSPCA.

 

Yet (at least to the letter of the law) the reverse applies.

I also agree people should have the choice of euthanasia. As we supposedly have the right to live we should also have the right to die, with dignity, if that's what we do so choose.

 

If someone has a disease or illness that will lead to them having a very much compromised quality of life, then if they'd rather be out of pain, they should be able to go. True it all needs to be carried out under strict guidelines and should be discussed with the individual, doctors and family to make sure it's for the right reasons but I don't see a reason that it shouldn't be an option.

 

I mean what else is the person going to do, commit suicide because they feel it was their only escape. I believe suicide is very different to euthanasia. Euthanasia seems peaceful and planned and like someone knows and has decided what is going to happen to them and how/when they are going to go. Suicide seems very upsetting, secret and rushed in comparison.

I'm completely for it, if it can be proven that a person is suffering from an incurable disease, and they want to be euthanised...then it should be legal! It's their choice, it's their body!

I'm for it as well. I think. :unsure:

 

I does seem more clear cut when the terminally ill person has advanced cancer or somesuch but they are still mentally sound and able to make the decision that 'enough is enough, I want to die'.

 

People with degenerative brain disorders would need to seek euthanasia in the early stages of the illness though, wouldn't they? If they wait too long they wouldn't be in control of their faculties and would be legally unable to make such a decision. :unsure:

 

I really do think it's a personal choice though I accept there would need to be strict guidelines in place.

If it´s a personal choice, then how can it be taken by someone that is so affected by a disease that can´t even think or express their thoughts about it??? Or maybe a child or extremely old person? I think the culture of death in Europe is extremely brutal and self destructive of it´s civilization. This comes along with recent news about senior dutch citizens running away to Germany cause they fear to be given "euthanasia" without their consent in their home country, where life after youth starts being considered an "ofense"... Once you do not work or produce anything, you start being a weight to society and it´s time to kiss your arse goodbye... A nation who treats its parents and grandparents like that is walking to self destruction.

If it´s a personal choice, then how can it be taken by someone that is so affected by a disease that can´t even think or express their thoughts about it??? Or maybe a child or extremely old person? I think the culture of death in Europe is extremely brutal and self destructive of it´s civilization. This comes along with recent news about senior dutch citizens running away to Germany cause they fear to be given "euthanasia" without their consent in their home country, where life after youth starts being considered an "ofense"... Once you do not work or produce anything, you start being a weight to society and it´s time to kiss your arse goodbye... A nation who treats its parents and grandparents like that is walking to self destruction.

 

you are missing the point....

 

it isnt about widespread, casual euthanasia... its about letting/assisting someone to end their life when they ARE going to die and are in great pain. there comes a point in these cases when there is no way back, death IS coming, all they are doing is living in agony, i see no reason why their life shouldnt be terminated early to prevent hours/days of more pain.

If it´s a personal choice, then how can it be taken by someone that is so affected by a disease that can´t even think or express their thoughts about it??? Or maybe a child or extremely old person? I think the culture of death in Europe is extremely brutal and self destructive of it´s civilization. This comes along with recent news about senior dutch citizens running away to Germany cause they fear to be given "euthanasia" without their consent in their home country, where life after youth starts being considered an "ofense"... Once you do not work or produce anything, you start being a weight to society and it´s time to kiss your arse goodbye... A nation who treats its parents and grandparents like that is walking to self destruction.

Wtf? You make it sound like it's about killing people off for being a 'waste of space'. It's an own choice that helps people die with dignity.