Having watched some terrible and needless suffering within my own close family over the years, I agree with Terry Pratchett on this disturbing topic. The subject has been widely covered in the press of late, this is the latest reference:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...documentary.do

It's a disturbing topic, and needed some brave people to take it on.

I did not watch the program so forgive me if the following was discussed.

I believe one of the main obstacles to assisted dying is the question of money.
The taxman wants every last penny he can squeeze out of you, and where do the Insurance companies stand.

Personally I believe assisted dying should be allowed to release people from suffering.

Pratchett seems to make a good living out of dying! Oh and Alzheimers from which he has gained lots of awards. Sort of contradictory when I see him pontificating on TV. He is supposed to have had it for about 5 years

I don't watch those programmes I find them distasteful and there is a worrying obsession with it in the media.

Having nursed my mother whilst she was dying with cancer I have every sympathy for those who want to die with dignity when they feel that the time is right for them. However, I could not be part of this decision making and therefore could not help another human being end their life.

Rosemary

Pratchett has made a fortune from the discworld novels. He has no need to 'make a good living' as you so charmingly put it.

I met the man on a couple of occasions, and a more decent, polite and non stuck up person, it would be hard to find.

A great believer in it. There are many obstacles in the way of making it legal but, like any other complex situation they can be resolved. If I reached the stage in my "life" whereby I and those around me were suffering I would remove myself from society and no one will ever convince me that I should not have that right. The method is the difficult part particularly to do it painlessly.

Graham

I have not watched the link. I saw a lovely person die in a way I wished they did not have to bear. The pain management plan was not written up with the individual in mind, more like the statistic. I firmly believe we should all be allowed to die with dignity and if we make the decision when, then that also should be allowed. On saying that I doubt I could assist but then again when in the situation who knows whether they may or may not be able to assist. I do know no living being should be allowed to die in agony in this day and age.

I am a passionate believer in voluntary euthanasia being legalised. Even before my own father repeatedly told me whilst he was in hospital before his death that he had enough and wanted to die, I did not believe that anybody should be forced to prolong their life if they themselves have decided that they do not want to go on.

I respect the right of others to hold the opposite view, for religious or other reasons, but not their right to impose their views on me.

I do not understand how things such as the so called Liverpool Care Pathway, which effectively means death by slow starvation and dehydration, can possibly be legal or less distressing for doctors and nurses to have to administer than allowing a simple injection or drinking a barbiturate solution to end someone's life painlessly and allow them to die with dignity.

I loved my Dad very much and still miss him every day, but I would have been glad to have been the one to help him drink barbiturates or administer an injection had I been able to, rather than him having to suffer as he did.

I was told that when my grandfather grew old, he said that he would rather be taken up the field and shot rather than go into a home.

Given the way old people are treated in homes, I think he had the right idea.

I think the idea of being bedridden, possibly in pain, but more significantly bored out of your mind, is a level of cruelty that is quite beyond the pale.

On Matthew Wright this morning they were discussing this, and some little twat came on the phone saying that it was wrong, and that people were properly looked after, and so on. He obviously hadn't seen the reports on the lack of care in old folk's homes.

I know of two countries, Switzerland and Holland, and one state in the US, I think it's Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal and there are bound to be others in the future. There is also a strong movement in Scotland to go down this road.

Various religions seem to stand in the way, they cheerfully advocate killing, but take a silly stance against assisted dying.

I spent several days at the bedside of a close relative, watching pain and suffering, no quality of life, and worst of all, no dignity.

But things are slowly changing in the UK too, assisting suicide is still on the statue books, but there have been few prosecutions of late.

Religions.

My favourite quote was from South Park where the religious were protesting the turning off of a life support machine for a terminal case. They said it was 'playing god' by turning it off.

Duuhhh, surely it's playing god by keeping them alive?

My attitude is that it's my body, and I have the right to take my ball and go home early if I choose.

Number one, religion has no part to play in this because religion is an invention and has nothing to say that non-religious people can't express. Invented morality is a hindrance.

Nobody who supports the right of people who are suffering (in the sufferer's mind too much to bear) to chose their time to die think that the choice should be made by others, it is the potential dead person who decides.

Clearly it is difficult to legislate to allow assisted death before the body gives up, ignoring the religious and superstitous rubbish involved in discussion about such legislation, but many humans dependent on others, without the ability to exercise their last desire, are frustrated by the blaming morality of those who don't understand.

Sadly, life is always made more difficult by people with a religious/moral agenda.

What I hate is the argument that it's God's will that someone should suffer. Fine, if that's what 'they' want to believe, let them, so long as 'they' don't impose it on others.

What I don't get is why 'they' don't therefore reject all forms of medical intervention, be it surgery, blood tranfusion or just taking paracetemol. If God wants you to suffer, then suffer! Why the inconsistency?

Voluntary euthanasia or assisted dying...call it what you will, should be enshrined in our basic human rights!
As a non-religious person myself I don't think the do gooders of this world have any say in whether a person should be allowed to die.
What makes these people think that their views should override those of someone in unbearable pain who just wanting release?

I have watched several members of my family die slowly in great pain, not one of these people given the choice wouldn't have opted for a more dignified way out.
When my father-in-law was dying he had a wonderful doctor who eased his end, something that our entire family were very grateful for, of course as things stand he was putting himself at risk of prosecution....but it shouldn't be that way!

I can only hope that the law soon reflects the wishes of people like myself and my husband! We have made a pact that should one of us end up in that position the other would assist in a dignified exit, no bible basher will ever change our minds on that!