Tony Nicklinson

Did you read about the Protocol used by Exit in Switzerland - to ensure NO coercion or pressure, or doubt? And the fact trained volunteers help on the preparation and day of 'release' and NOT doctors. Everything is recorded, with GP, with solicitor - and the whole procedure filmed and filed, just in case.

With such procedures in place, how can this lead to a 'slippery slope'?

Why on earth would a doctor feel guilty about fulfilling a patient's wish to end an intolerable life? I believe that, pre-Shipman, lethal does of morphine were often administered to ease suffering. I would agree that no doctor should be obliged to take part against their wishes.
And what is the objection to stem-cell research, which may prove the best hope for many diseases in the future?
The slippery slope argument is often applied but I see no reason to believe that safeguards could not be put into place.
I do hope that the religious lobby does not try to impose its own views on everyone else.

* jeni * I can understand why he would want to end his life,but am uncomfortable with assisted suicide...am still thinking this through...I would hate to be the judge who has to make that decision...if he says yes would he feel guilt also

I also cannot imagine how difficult his life is and completely understand his wish to bring his and his familys' suffering to an end. But the biggest part of me is so frightened by the slippery slope that we all know we will be on. How long before others are asking to do the same; how long before it becomes an accepted form of 'treatment'. How long before the element of 'choice' is taken away. The next generation may not feel that they face the same ethical difficulties and the goalposts will be moved. We only have to look at test-tube babies and embryonic and stemcell research and the way the parameters have moved in that field.

What about the doctors sense of guilt?

Can understand why he wants a doctor to end his life.
He may be trying to protect his family from the feelings of guilt they would be surely left with even though they support his decision.
I watched a clip of him last night on the news my heart went out to him,sobbing in frustration unable to communicate.

I cannot even imagine what his life is like, but totally understand his wish to end it.

Sounds ok!

If they do help themselves, they will be prosecuted.
However, I totally agree this should not be done by their own Doctor, but by a volunteer Doctor who agrees morally with the principle. Even better - the Swiss system where volunteers who have been trained in counselling and supporting in such situations, will call at the home and discuss their needs + ensure that there is no coercion or doubt or any kind.

When the volunteer is totally satisfied that this is the case, they will make an appointment to come back again in a few days time, and again interview the person on their own to ensure the above - and if it is clear and certain- will prepare the lethal drug dose, which will be switched on by the person, NOT the volunteer. All sorts of mechanical and electronic devices are available to ensure that even a severely handicapped person can do this. Some of the volunteers are doctors, most are not.

Nobody is stopping his family doing it. But he wants a doctor! Why should a doctor be in the situation where he/she is forced by the human rights act to go against their beliefs?
Im not saying I agree or disagree, I just see both sides!

Heart and soul go to him and his family. So hope he wins his case, but I am not hopeful. Wish I could open my home to him.

As I understand it he doesn't want to end his life immediately. He just wants the right to end it when he chooses and for the person who helps him to be free from a prosecution for murder. Not an unreasonable wish in my opinion and if he is successful then it would mean a change in the law for others in a similar situation.

My only caveat would be that there are safeguards in place to ensure it is truly the wish of the person and that it was only used in rare cases and not just because someone was feeling depressed and suicidal. In those cases they should receive some help to overcome the depression.

In the case of Tony Nicklinson, he is obviously an intelligent person who has made his wishes clear to everyone. I think his family are very brave to support him in that decision.

I am with you print he is capable of making a rational decision. If he was less disabled he could choose for himself when the time was right to end his life or not.

He has made a choice and that, under the circumstances, should be respected.

There will be other situations where I might think differently. I have lost friends to suicide because of depression /mental illness but when they were well they had enjoyable and useful lives.

Do we have the right to make an innocent person live an interable life? Life, I know is a precious gift, and we should not take lightly the decision to deliberately end it, but neither should we condemn someone to what appears to be a living hell. Sympathy and compassions are surely needed here, along with respect for a persons dignity.

Or perhaps I should say that I would choose not to be "kept alive".

In his shoes, I would choose to be allowed to die too.