[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

If someone has lived for nearly a century, will definitely die soon anyway, and wants to do so quickly and painlessly, then in my opinion it shouldn't only be possible for them to do so - it's actually immoral to STOP them if it's what they want. By which I mean the law itself, not the family members, who really have to abide by the law in these situations sadly.

My personal take on it would be that there should be three conditions;

1) The person has an incurable condition with months to live, confirmed by 3 separate unconnected doctors.

2) Their death will be slow / painful if not accelerated.

3) It's what they want - EITHER being of sound mind at the time, or in dementia cases etc. there should be a requirement of having previously made those wishes explicitly clear.


I can see no possible moral argument for disallowing it in those cases. The person is going to die anyway, and natural death is NOT always a case of slipping away peacefully during sleep. It's a horrible ****ing mess of anxiety, blood-gurgling, losing control of bodily functions and gasping in a panic for those final breaths that will never come. No matter how many painkillers you fill someone with.

Yes..I can't imagine a heart attack is a 'good' way to go and it could have been so much easier and less painful.