Unbearable suffering is the outcome of an intensive process that originates in the symptoms of illness and/or ageing. According to patients, hopelessness is an essential element of unbearable suffering. Medical and social elements may cause suffering, but especially when accompanied by psycho-emotional and existential problems suffering will become ‘unbearable’. Personality characteristics and biographical aspects greatly influence the burden of suffering. Unbearable suffering can only be understood in the continuum of the patients' perspectives of the past, the present and expectations of the future.
My name is Geraldine McClelland and I have chosen to die today [7 December]. I am 61 years old and am dying from lung and liver cancer, which metastasised from my breast cancer two years ago. The lung cancer is now causing me serious breathing problems, meaning I am largely confined to my flat. I have chosen to travel abroad to die because I can not have the death I want here in the UK. I would like to be able to choose to take medication to end my life if my suffering becomes unbearable for me, at home, with my family and friends around me. But the law in this country prevents me from doing so. As a result I am travelling abroad to take advantage of Switzerland's compassionate law.
A decision in the Netherlands to approve the euthanasia of a woman with advanced Alzheimer’s disease has raised questions over how far mercy killing can apply to patients with dementia. Under Dutch law doctors performing euthanasia must ensure that the patient has made a voluntary and well considered request. This requirement has generally excluded patients with advanced dementia, as they are no longer considered competent to express their wishes. Now the Euthanasia Assessment Committee, to which doctors must report the cases of patients they have helped to die, has made an exception in the case of one woman, emphasising her long history of requesting euthanasia and the degree of communication still possible at her death. It is seen as the first case of euthanasia of a “heavily demented” patient. The Dutch Right to Die Society, which campaigns for euthanasia, supports the case but points out on its website that the woman was “officially incompetent.”
“The current legal status of assisted dying is inadequate and incoherent...” The Commission on Assisted Dying was set up in September 2010 to consider whether the current legal and policy approach to assisted dying in England and Wales is fit for purpose. In addition to evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the legal status quo, the Commission also set out to explore the question of what a framework for assisted dying might look like, if such a system were to be implemented in the UK, and what approach to assisted dying might be most acceptable to health and social care professionals and to the general public.
A man who was virtually paralysed by a stroke has won the first step in his legal bid to pursue his right-to-die. Known only as Martin, he would require professionals to help as his wife has said she will not assist him. But current guidance suggests they may be prosecuted, where loved ones would not, and Martin's case is this discriminates against him. This High Court judgement means lawyers and doctors can discuss assisted dying with him, but only to prepare his case.
The Commission on Assisted Dying, set up in September 2010 and chaired by former Lord Chancellor Charles Falconer, has issued its monumental report on assisted dying in England and Wales. The Commission was funded by two supporters of assisted suicide, author Terry Pratchett and businessman Bernard Lewis, and despite reassurances that the running and outcome of the Commission were independent, some individuals and groups opposed to the practice regrettably refused to give evidence to the Commission. Still, the range and quantity of the evidence, which included evidence gathered from international research visits, qualitative interviews and focus groups, commissioned papers, and seminars, is impressive and can be read and watched here.
Last week, the European Court of Human Rights decided in the case of Haas v. Switzerland (judgment in French only) that the right to private life is not violated when a state refuses to help a person who wishes to commit suicide by enabling that person to obtain a lethal substance. The applicant in the case, Ernst Haas, had for two decades been suffering from a serious bipolar affective disorder (more commonly known as manic depression). During that time he attempted to commit suicide twice. Later, he tried to obtain a medical prescription for a small amount of sodium pentobarbital, which would have allowed him to end his life without ain or suffering. Not a single psychiatrist, of the around 170 (sic!) he approached, was willing to give him such a prescription. This would have been necessary, under Swiss law, which allowed for assisted suicide if it was not done for selfish motives (in the opposite case, the person assisting could be prosecuted under the criminal code).
The General Medical Council is consulting on our new draft guidance for the Investigation Committee and case examiners (decision-makers) to use when they are considering allegations about a doctor’s fitness to practise that relate to encouraging or assisting suicide.
Judgment has been reserved in a case brought by a severely disabled man with "locked-in syndrome" who has urged a judge not to halt his High Court action to let a doctor end his life. Tony Nicklinson, 57, of Melksham, Wiltshire, wants a doctor to be able to "lawfully" conduct an assisted suicide.
Two senior judges ruled it would be “manifestly unjust” to stop them helping him prepare a legal challenge to the law on assisted suicide – even if doing so could assist his suicide, which would be illegal. Once a keen sportsman, the man – known only as “Martin” for legal reasons – was left almost completely paralysed by a massive stroke three years ago.
In 1994, the Georgia legislature enacted OCGA § 16-5-5 (b), which provides that any person “who publicly advertises, offers, or holds himself or herself out as offering that he or she will intentionally and actively assist another person in the commission of suicide and commits any overt act to further that purpose is guilty of a felony.” Violation of the statute is punishable by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years. OCGA § 16-5-5 (b). The issue in this case is whether §16-5-5 (b) is constitutional under the free speech clauses of the federal and state constitutions.
Guidance for the Investigation Committee and case examiners when considering allegations about a doctor’s involvement in encouraging or assisting suicide. Draft for consultation Start: Feb 6, 2012 End: May 4, 2012 Results Published: Jul 31, 2012
The General Medical Council is launching its first ever guidelines on assisted suicide. The new guidelines will help the GMC decide if doctors should face a disciplinary panel if they are alleged to have encouraged or assisted suicide. A draft version is to be subject to a three month public consultation period. The GMC's chief executive, Niall Dickson said "the main message is that assisting suicide is illegal and doctors should have no part of it". The GMC, which is the regulatory authority for doctors, decided to produce the guidelines after the case of a severely paralysed man, which was highlighted by the BBC last summer. The man, given the pseudonym "Martin", told the PM Programme that he wanted to end his life and was taking legal action to try to get advice and help to do so.
Il est normal qu'en période électorale les sujets de société s'invitent dans les programmes des candidats. Il est en revanche toujours regrettable que, sur ces sujets majeurs qui engagent notre vision des équilibres humains, les propositions mélangent le flou et l'improvisation. Cette situation est clairement dangereuse lorsqu'il s'agit de notre conception de la fin de vie et de la mort. M. Hollande propose que "toute personne majeure [en fin de vie] puisse demander, dans des conditions précises et strictes, à bénéficier d'une assistance médicalisée pour terminer sa fin de vie dans la dignité." Le Parti socialiste a évoqué "un pas vers l'euthanasie", bien que le terme ne soit pas mentionné. L'euthanasie signifie la possibilité ouverte de donner la mort à un malade qui le réclame. Est-ce cela que souhaite M. Hollande . Si c'est le cas, pourquoi, une fois de plus, ne pas le dire clairement ? "Un pas vers l'euthanasie", c'est l'euthanasie.
In this article the ethical debate on euthanasia and assisted suicide is discussed. Arguments for and against physician-assisted dying are given and analyzed. To accept euthanasia in an individual case is one thing; to accept it on a public policy level is quite another. Therefore, the issue of societal control is also addressed. It is concluded that the arguments for physician-assisted dying are most convincing, but the different systems to have this in a country may be defended.
New scheme called 'Life End' will respond to sick people whose own doctors have refused to help them end their lives at home. A controversial system of mobile euthanasia units that will travel around the country to respond to the wishes of sick people who wish to end their lives has been launched in the Netherlands.