Posted on 06/21/2012 3:42:44 PM PDT by wagglebee
Tony Nicklinson is 58 and paralysed from the neck down after suffering a stroke in 2005. He is seeking legal permission for a doctor actively to end his life.
A Channel 4 Dispatches programme this week, ‘Let our dad die’, put Tony’s case with powerful emotion but it did not tell us that most people with locked-in syndrome do not actually think like this man.
No one can help but be sympathetic to Tony Nicklinson, but cases like his are extremely rare and hard cases make bad law.
The overwhelming majority of people with severe disability - even with ‘locked-in syndrome’ - do not wish to die, but rather want support to live and the longer people have locked-in syndrome then generally the better they learn to cope with it and find meaning, purpose and contentment within the confines of the condition.
‘Locked in, but still lost in music: UK’s bravest DJ’ tells the story of Bram Harrison, 34, who suffered brain damage two weeks before his 21st birthday after falling head-first off his bicycle. He was left with locked-in syndrome and can move only his eyes and eye lids.
So he communicates with his eyes: looking up means yes, down means no, cross-eyed means don’t know. He chooses letters and words by blinking at them on a screen, which his computer translates into the written and spoken word.
This allows him to easily respond to questions from his small army of committed carers about what he wants and how he feels and also to work as a DJ.
Not surprisingly the playlist for his Eye Life radio show takes weeks to put together but he still does it!
Martin Pistorius is a South African man who ended up paralysed and comatose following a throat infection at the age of 12. His awareness began to improve four years later and by the age of 19 had fully returned.
However it was a further five years before a therapist noticed that he was trying to communicate. The penny eventually dropped that he had been aware of everything going on around him for almost ten years whilst everybody had assumed he was unconscious.
Now, ten years later, aged 36, he is married and runs a computer business despite being still in a wheel chair with limited limb movement and using computerised speech.
His autobiography,‘Ghost Boy’ tells the story.
Nikki Kenward was left disabled after a partial recovery from paralysis caused by Gullain Barre syndrome. Her own inspiring personal story is well worth a read. Now she campaigns telling people about the dangers that changing the law to allow assisted suicide or euthanasia would pose to those with serious disability.
Then there is Graham Miles, the pensioner who told how he beat ‘locked in syndrome’ after suffering a massive stroke.
But perhaps the most famous of all is Jean-Dominique Bauby, the French editor of Elle magazine, who suffered a severe stroke, from which he never recovered, and yet wrote the autobiographical ‘Diving Bell and the Butterfly’ which was ‘dictated’ letter by letter and has been made into a major feature film.
Most people with locked-in syndrome are happy, according to the biggest survey of people with the condition.
The desire to die is not primarily about physical symptoms but about the particular person and their ability to adapt to living with a profound disability.
Much as we sympathise with Tony Nicklinson, we should not, as RCGP President Iona Heath argued recently, be seeking technical solutions like euthanasia to what is in reality an existential problem.
That would be a very dangerous precedent indeed.
Reprinted with permission from Dr. Saunders’ blog.
The culture of death ALWAYS uses the most extreme examples possible to push their agenda.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
All due respect, but my decision to live or die is MY decision. It is not for you or anyone else to make that decision. Some group saying I have to continue to suffer when I just want to go is just as bad as the UK system where they admit to killing some 130,000 elderly.
You may argue, cajole, plead, whatever, for me to accept your belief, but you DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to tell me how or when to die.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. We all know that the government should be in charge of our lives, every second of it. Uh, heck, wait a minute...
But seriously, I believe what you’re looking for is something called intellectual consistency, rather than the typical “get the government out of our lives unless we happen to disagree with the decisions that some individuals make in which case you’re damn right the government should be in control so people do what I want them to do” mindset.
Good luck with that.
Where does this supposed "right to die" come from? The right to life DOES NOT included a right to die.
Father Frank Pavone: Freedom to Die?For a Christian, however, is "my life" really "mine"? Is my death really mine? The answer has to be yes and no. It is mine in the sense that it has been given to me and nobody else; it is not mine alone, however, because I am not the source of my own existence, and I am accountable for it to another, namely, God. "You are not your own," St. Paul declares (1 Cor. 6:19). "If we live, we are responsible to the Lord, and when we die we are responsible to the Lord. Both in life and in death we belong to the Lord." ( See Romans 14:18). Not one of us decided the time or manner in which we came into this world. Our life is a sacred gift from God, and only He can give it. It is therefore His right alone to take us out of this world.
We do not possess a "right to die." A right is a moral claim. We do not have a claim on death; rather, death has a claim on us! Some see the "right to die" as parallel to the "right to life." In fact, however, they are opposite. The "right to life" is based on the fact that life is a gift which we do not possess as a piece of property ( which we can purchase or sell or give away or destroy at will ), but rather is an inviolable right. It cannot be taken away by another or by the person him/herself. The "right to die" is based, rather, on the idea of life as a "thing we possess" and may discard when it no longer meets our satisfaction. "Right to die" thinking says there is such a thing as a "life not worth living." For a Christian, however, life is worthy in and of itself, and not because it meets certain criteria that we or others set.
>>You may argue, cajole, plead, whatever, for me to accept your belief, but you DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to tell me how or when to die.<<
Prepare for:
“How long until the right to die becomes the obligation to die?”
Slippery slope arguments don’t have much meaning to me and are a logical fallacy.
I agree that the decision to end one’s life (or prolong it in the face of adversity) is the most personal decision one can make and The State (and worse, busybodies) have no business sticking its (their) nose in it.
It is between me and my God.
What you DO NOT have the right to do is compel the greater society to be complicit and to help procure your death.
What I never understood about the pro euthanasia position is that no one prevents you from killing yourself. Buy a gun, jump off a bridge, step in front of an on coming train, buy some rat poison, stock up on pain killers. Just don't make your doctor provide you with the means to your own destruction and don't expect the rest of society to accept and cheer your cowardice.
Man up already!
The acceptance of Abortion on demand, euthanasia leads directly to the forced killing of those found ‘lacking’ or ‘undeserving’ of life by the greater society.
Your argument is simply that if one is a Catholic one must adhere to different rules regarding life. And it is a LOT more complex than a snippet from a single non-authoratative opinion.
That is a great theological argument for Christians, but is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
>>What you DO NOT have the right to do is compel the greater society to be complicit and to help procure your death.<<
Well, that isn’t really being discussed here. I didn’t see rstrahan (nor have I) ask society or anyone else to assist in personal demise. Should doctors whose conscience is clear in providing assistance for such an act (not subsidized by insurance or Medicare) decide to do so, there should be no impediments, either.
And as of this moment, attempted suicide is illegal in most jurisdictions (FWIU).
That is a great theological argument for Christians, but is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
Yes, I'm well aware that you are a longtime devotee of the euthanasia/assisted suicide movement, but can you really explain where these "rights" come from? Do you think your opinions and desires are "rights"?
Where do YOU think YOUR right to life comes from? If it does not come from God, then the only logical alternative is the government.
Again, where does YOUR "right to death" come from? Do you think that your ABILITY to end your own life is somehow a "right"?
>>Yes, I’m well aware that you are a longtime devotee of the euthanasia/assisted suicide movement<<
Knowingly misstating my position is not only disingenuous but is quite immoral. I have always said that a person’s decision to live or die is between the person and his/her God. That is not euthanasia.
>>Yes, I’m well aware that you are a longtime devotee of the euthanasia/assisted suicide movement, but can you really explain where these “rights” come from? Do you think your opinions and desires are “rights”?<<
The 9th and 10th Amendments.
>>Where do YOU think YOUR right to life comes from? If it does not come from God, then the only logical alternative is the government.<<
I have always said the decision is between the individual and his/her God. Not the Catholic interpretation of God’s will. Not any particular interpretation of God’s will. Not Waglebee’s interpretation of God’s will. Between the individual and his/her interpretation of God’s will.
>>Again, where does YOUR “right to death” come from? Do you think that your ABILITY to end your own life is somehow a “right”?<<
Again the 9th and 10th Amendments. Read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It will do you good. (while you are at it go back and read my posts on this subject so you don’t purposely misinterpret me again).
I believe in the right to die, I suppose. If I have the right to self-defense, then it must go the other way, too. Suicide is a sin, not a crime.
What’s wrong with the “right to die” movement is that they pull other people into it. We switch from upside-down self-defense, now, to the right of association and voluntary contract. But the state has the prerogative to outlaw certain sorts of contract according to police powers, and euthanasia falls within that ambit. It’s not suicide if someone kills you.
Life is precious, no matter the circumstance. My sister-in-law had three bouts of brain cancer before their was nothing else the doctors could do. The day before she died, she was unable to speak or move. My wife and I brought our two children, then 11 and 8, to her bedside to say our farewells. At first, the kids were hesitant to go but they realized that their aunt would appreciate them seeing her. They never thought that they would be shown just how much and that they would never forget the expression of thanks that beamed from her eyes as she saw them. All she had left was her eyes, and the heartfelt appreciation she could express through them. My kids are both grown now and they have never forgotten that visit.
“You may argue, cajole, plead, whatever, for me to accept your belief, but you DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to tell me how or when to die”
They would be telling you how or when you can’t die, but I see the point. I wouldn’t want anyone to stop you from visiting your local bridges and tall buildings. What I do have the right to tell you, being part of the body politic, is that you don’t get other people to help you. That’s as far as I go.
That is about sin, not crime. The two are different. I have autonomy over myself as reagrds the state, if not God.
Where do YOU think YOUR right to life comes from? If it does not come from God, then the only logical alternative is the government.
Again, where does YOUR "right to death" come from? Do you think that your ABILITY to end your own life is somehow a "right"?
************************************
Interesting questions. At the very least, no one has the "right" to expect or demand that someone else be a party in their death. Not only is it morally wrong, it places the other person in, not only legal jeopardy, but may also result in depression, despair and overwhelming guilt. No one has the "right" to do that to another human being.
****************************
Then why do you keep talking about it?
” The 9th and 10th Amendments”
No, the rights do not derive therefrom. They merely remind the government that certain undefined rights do exist and are reserved.
>>Then why do you keep talking about it?<<
Because there are those who would try to take that from me. And you. And every individual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.