[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.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes, got a call last night that he had died. My answer without thinking was 'good' which has made me feel awful all over again tbh.

I do wonder how long this would have gone on for if he hadn't taken it into his own hands as much as he could...as it was the refusal of medication that seems to have got him in the end as it was a heart attack. Which was his plan.

Obviously wouldn't have gone on for years, but could have been another month or so.

No reason for you to feel awful because you are pleased he is out of his pain and suffering Vicky.
My mother in law was in a similar situation and we were all very sad to lose her but relieved that she wasn't suffering any more.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes, got a call last night that he had died. My answer without thinking was 'good' which has made me feel awful all over again tbh.

I do wonder how long this would have gone on for if he hadn't taken it into his own hands as much as he could...as it was the refusal of medication that seems to have got him in the end as it was a heart attack. Which was his plan.

Obviously wouldn't have gone on for years, but could have been another month or so.

Don't feel bad love at 95 he had a good innings as they say, thinking of you

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

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.

To be honest it's one of the better "natural" ways to go, it is at least quick with little time spent suffering, so I would take comfort in that. So few people get the ideal death of slipping away in their sleep, and most very elderly people who die of "old age" or with cancer usually end up with pneumonia / respiratory failure as their cause of death, which is a drawn out process and truly awful for anyone to have to go through and horrendous for family to have to see, too.

Sorry for your loss, Vicky. At least he got to go before his condition became more painful, which it sounds like is what he wanted.