The right to Life.......?
Do we have our values a bit cockeyed....?
A guy with Cerebral Ataxia has to go to court to establish his right to treatment.........and to fight Doctors attempts at the end of his life to starve him of nourishment and water.......and this decision is being made on a financial basis. In effect, if your illness is terminal, the Doctors reserve the right to refuse 'treatment' because it costs £1500 per day to maintain a high dependency patient.......but Kamal Bourgass.....a terrorist,and a murderer can be kept in one of our prisons (regardless of cost) for the rest of his life. Seems somewhat unfair to me.......What do you think....? |
Re: The right to Life.......?
yet we wont allow those who want to die the right to die
euthinasia is less cruel than starving somone to death murderers should be executed plain and simple so that the money saved can be spent on law abiding people who need medical help out of curiosity i wonder how much money our govenment has wasted sticking its nose in other coutries affairs rather than protect and treat our own citizens each year we can never find enough money to sort out the NHS yet as soon as some poxy country needs help we spend millions sending our troops to fight for them and millions spent on medicine for people in other countries shouldnt we make sure the uk has sufficiant medical treatment and facilities before giving it away to foreighners in far away countries |
Re: The right to Life.......?
It is a very scary thought that health care should be restricted on any basis......let alone a financial one.
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Quote:
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Everyone has a right to life. We should be allowed to chose our time to die. I must admit I am a great believer in euthenasia when some one is terminally ill &/or suffering in agony and wants to die they should be allowed to without being made to feel like a criminal. I would hate it if my kids had to watch me die slowly just because some do-gooder says it's wrong for me to be put to sleep with my dignity in tact. I can't remember the number of times I have heard the term "you wouldn't let an animal suffer like that" when relating to someone who is dying.
But where a person who is sick wants to live they should be able to do so without being made to feel they are a drain on society. I'm sure if people were given the right to choose there would be enough in the kitty for all. |
Re: The right to Life.......?
OK Debbie. Suppose for a moment you are terminally ill. Your child is also very ill. The Doctor gives you a clinical choice - he can treat you and prolong your life for an extra few weeks, but cannot treat your child, and then your child will then become terminally ill; or he can let you go, and threat your child and your child lives.
Which do you go for? The fact is that thousands of decisions on clinical priorities are made in the NHS every day. There is never enough money to go round to pay for this, and I as a taxpayer object to the wastage involved in maintaining life when all hope is gone. If their families wish to prolong suffering, then let them do so - but with money from their own pocket. |
Re: The right to Life.......?
I take on board what you are saying Tealeaf......but I believe it is a very short step to withdrawing treatment for other terminal illnesses......cancer being one of those.
I know all about the NHS.......having worked in it for more that 30 years. The medical profession equate nourishment and water as 'treatment' for this guy with the cerebral ataxia.......It must be agony to die a lingering death when food and water is withdrawn. I believe that Euthanasia in situations like this, would be a kinder option......although i am not advocating euthanasia per se. |
Re: The right to Life.......?
The other point I was making was that we can fund the care of a murderer in prison......paid for by our taxes.......but cannot fund the care of a terminally ill man......something wrong there surely.
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Quote:
If it is your priority that the taxpayer should spend money on hopeless cases, fine. Personally, |I believe that such cases should have no more than the medication neccessary to give then a dignified and painless end. I cannot see the point of spending additional taxpayer funds when those same amounts could go into stopping people contracting fatal diseases in the first place. |
Re: The right to Life.......?
And I agree with you......a dignified end is not one where you are starved of nourishment and water. We are not talking of expensive medication in this particular case.
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Point being T. Would you say the same thing if you were in that position or would you fight for every minute that you lived
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Quote:
But surely someone who wants to live should be allowed to after all how much does it cost to feed someone. |
Re: The right to Life.......?
Quote:
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
Quote:
|
Re: The right to Life.......?
nobody with a sound mind should be starved to death ..withdrawing food and water is cruel ,that poor woman that they did that to a few weeks ago lasted for about 15 days ..i said then if they realy must be put down ,like a sick animal ,then give them a lethal injection ...oh what a horrible world we live in today ........
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:52. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com