Good to have the option?

https://english.elpais.com/society/2...-practice.html

There are concerns euthanasia could be abused, e.g. the scandal surrounding unauthorised DNR at care homes in England.

On balance, I feel it is good to have the option. Not everyone can afford to go to a clinic in Switzerland.

Disability groups and charities are often the most vociferous opponents of voluntary euthanasia, as they feel it will lead to a climate in society which will value the right to die more than the right to live.

Which in the long run might be proved correct. After all, doctors nowadays are encouraged to recommend abortion in the case of an amniocentesis test that proves the foetus has Down's syndrome.
By this means, Iceland has gone a long way to eliminating Down's syndrome. Who next?

And euthanasia isn't even legal in the UK.

Do you have a link for this story please?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...omes-finds-cqc

Thanks, that's great

At the risk of diverting the thread...

Wherever I worked in the NHS, best practice was followed i.e. DNRs only put in place only after talking with patient and family. Of course if someone comes in, is unconcious and relatives cannot be contacted in time then the consultant will sign a DNR.

Resusitation is rarely successful: as the article says "Healthcare professionals emphasise that resuscitation is both invasive and traumatic with only a 15-20% survival rate when performed in hospitals and a 5-10% success rate when performed outside hospitals." The success rate falls as you get older and I was told it was only viable for those under about 60 (I say "about" because my memory is poor). The article also quotes a GP as saying "I realise there is less than one per cent chance of resuscitation being successful. For this reason I have signed a do not resuscitate order in their nursing notes.” (The journalist has used the word 'algorithm' to make it seem more sinister than it is.)

Presumably the homes would normally wait until a patient is very sick before broaching the subject of a DNR, and with the coming of Covid-19 they had to take this decision quickly. I think it would be better to get everyone signed up when they are admitted but there's so much rubbish spoken about DNRs it would be impossible.

Sorry for the diversion - as I hope you can see this has nothing to do with euthanasia.

Well said Lagoo. To all intent and purposes CPR does not work and indeed it has nothing to do with euthanasia.

I think its a positive move forward for Spain and hope the UK follows. Assisted death occurs everyday in UK hospitals, very often its not the cancer your riddled with that kills you, its the morphine given to control the pain that shuts you down.

How true that's what killed my mother 22 years ago in the UK - so it has been going on for years and in Spain too.

The difference between now and then is that before approved euthanasia/assisted suicide, the primary purpose by a doctor was to cure and/or reduce pain and discomfort. Sometimes this can lead to death but only as secondary concomitance. Under euthanasia, a doctor would be intervening to end another's life as prime purpose, which goes against the Hippocratic oath.

Euthanasis is the slippery slope. How long before decisions are made about who is "Lebensunwert" ?

Life unworthy of life - Wikipedia

Yes Joppa to be honest I think you have encapsulated the whole debate.

Dare I say we have what actually goes on versus the (what do I say) theoretical arguments/debate

Scot you need to work on a cancer ward, a palliative care ward, work with patients who's lives have all but ended through disease or injury before coming out with a stupid statement like that; I've worked all three and know what I'm talking about.

Maybe you do know best, I can only comment from my own experience. My father died of cancer after fluids were withdrawn. One of my friends had a stroke another two have had heart attacks. All three have gone on to enjoy life thanks to being resuscitated.