Suicide Tourism???

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article6894726.ece

Swiss crackdown on ‘suicide tourism’ could spell end of Dignitas clinic
Roger Boyes
10 COMMENTS
RECOMMEND? (5)

(Walter Bieri/Keystone/EPA)
One of the Dignitas apartments is located in this block in Zürich
Switzerland announced plans yesterday to crack down on “suicide tourism”, signalling that it might close the Dignitas clinic that has helped hundreds of terminally ill people to take their lives.

The plans — in the form of two draft Bills that will be offered for public debate — are likely to set off a rush of patients from Britain and elsewhere in Europe since Switzerland has become the main destination for those seeking assisted suicide.

Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, the Justice Minister, said that two options would be presented to parliament. Either clinics such as Dignitas and Exit, which deals chiefly with Swiss patients, will have to accept much stricter regulation or they will be closed down.

The tightening of the rules would require patients to present two medical opinions declaring their disease incurable, that death is expected within months and that they have made their decision of sound mind and fully aware of their options.

RELATED LINKS
Running against tide of modern life
Dignitas plans assisted suicide of healthy woman
Dignitas couple held party to say farewell
These guidelines, said the minister, appeal to common sense. And even in the most controversial clinic, Dignitas, these rules are already broadly adhered to. But critics have accused Dignitas of widening its criteria. Some patients are not terminally ill and at least a few would-be suicides are suffering from clinical depression.

The plan is thus to slow down the process and make it a more considered, and carefully policed, decision.

“It won’t be possible in future for someone to cross the border and commit suicide a few days later with the help of an organisation,” Ms Widmer-Schlumpf said. She did not stipulate how long the waiting period should last because that would be decided on each case individually. But the assisted suicide clinics are financially dependent on large numbers of patients passing relatively quickly through the system. So far Dignitas has benefited from the liberal rules in the canton of Zürich.

If the law goes through — the deliberation period lasts until March and the restrictions could come in soon afterwards — the federal Swiss state will have to take over the policing from regional authorities. Doctors’ recommendations will be controlled and those who prescribe fatal drugs observed more closely. The draft law will also ban any attempt to charge more than basic expenses for assisted suicide.

Ludwig Minelli, the founder of Dignitas, described the proposals as “outdated and patronising”. He has always argued that restricting assisted suicide will not cut the numbers but mean more people end their lives violently.

“By cutting off assisted suicide for chronically or psychologically ill people who are capable of informed choice the Government will promote lonely suicides on train tracks,” he said.

Whether the Swiss Government decides on tighter regulation or a ban, Mr Minelli will feel the squeeze. An outright ban would mean a complete rethink of suicide laws across Europe. The existence of the Swiss clinics has allowed other countries to resist liberalising their own laws. Mr Minelli has talked of setting up in Germany, but the legal obstacles are high there, too.

At the root of the Swiss Government’s initiative is a fear that the cheerful Heidi-and-cowbells image is being tarnished by suicide tourists. About 400 turned to clinics for help in committing suicide in 2007, 132 of them from abroad. Even so, it is a big step for the Swiss authorities, who are reluctant to regulate over the heads of their autonomous cantons.

At least 119 Britons are known to have ended their lives at Dignitas. Up to 800 more are members of the organisation, the first step to dying there at some time in the future.

That is pathetic and disturbing.

I fully support this: The tightening of the rules would require patients to present two medical opinions declaring their disease incurable, that death is expected within months and that they have made their decision of sound mind and fully aware of their options.

Yep pretty much how I feel. I often buck the trend and one way I do this is in feeling that if someone is ill and doesn’t want to suffer then they should have options. In this regards we treat or Furry companions better than our 2 legged ones.

I guess my faith prevents me from supporting this in any way.

I could understand someone wanting to turn the lights out if they were in a lot of pain and were going to die anyways. Who wants to suffer out an extra couple months being eaten alive by something like terminal cancer?

Theres not much difference between this, and a doctor giving someone a big syringe of morphine when they are expectant…

I do support assisted suicide. I have an uncle who slowly died from stomach cancer. His last months on earth was just pain.

I’m with you on this. A friend of ours died of lung cancer last year more than 2-years after the the date range his doctors had told him to expect death. This is 2-years he got to spend with his family and at least 2 birthdays that he got to attend for each of his grand children.

One ofmy late Godfathers was diagnosed with terminal leukemia in the mid 80s. He was told that he had no more than 6-months to live so he took his children out of their school ealy so that they could all go on a cruise. The cruise ship they were sailing in was hit in the dark by a freighter and sank. He and his famiy managed to get into a life raft and was rescued the following morning. He lived another dozen years after that.

IMHO, just because two so-called experts tells you that you will die in x-weeks, months or years; it doesn’t mean that you will. Just about every prognosis physicians provide is based entirely on an educated guess. The human body is a very complex and miraculous “instrument”. You never know when it sudenly decides to beat some disease into submission.

I have met andd know of way too many individuals who beat the odds despite what the educated experts told them. This includesone of my SGTs who was told two years ago that he was going to loose his leg after he got hit by an IED. H returned back on jump status just last month. JM2CW.

The idea that the government has a place at all in something like this is offensive and disturbing.

If things are so bad (especially medically) that a person no longer even wants to live, NOBODY and certainly not the government has a place in that decision. I can’t imagine what it must be like for things to be that bad that checking out is better. About the only thing that can make it worse is coming along and making such a decision even harder. In a very real sense, it is absolutely the worst thing that can be done to a person.

How anyone can claim to support individual liberty and freedom and still believe they have a right in this kind of decision for others is beyond me. It is akin to supporting freedom of religion and then thinking you have the right to decide what others believe.

Did he WANT to die and was kept alive against his will? Because if not, that isn’t what we are talking about here. Nobody is advocating we go around and kill people against their will because they are sick and terminal, that is murder.

We are talking about people who have it so bad, they can’t take any more. I could never think of forcing my decision on such a person, especially a friend or family member. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, I certainly won’t want it wished on me one day.

A couple years ago there was a scare that I had cancer. When everything first started happening I remember my first thought was that I would never let myself live in constant pain with no hope. If I am going to die it will be on my terms.

You said it. YOUR faith, not everyone’s!

I guess some people could go ahead and take the easy way out. Personally, I’d rather not be a coward, and fight/claw/scrape to the end. It’s almost sad how little value some people place in life.

Do you really think the decision to check out rather than fight a painfull terminal illness is an easy one? Seems to me either choice sucks.

And calling them cowards, saying they have little value for life - easy for you to say. Try walking in their shoes.

Ever have a friend want to do something stupid because he was in a bad situation and you told him not to do it, even though you knew you would probably be thinking about the same thing if you were in his position?

Yeah, so anyway, I am going to be that guy that says, no, suicide is not the answer. Without walking in their shoes, thank God.

Easy to say when one isn’t really REALLY sick. Just simply dragging on while being barely able to function, and in constant excruciating pain?

That’s a hard choice. :frowning:

I don’t think those stories really refut the issue at hand. If people want to die because their condition is hopeless and horrible then they should be allowed to the gov’t shouldn’t stand in their way. Their FAITH can stand in their way but that should be a personal issue not a legislative one.

But to add to your intereting medical “6 months to live” anecdotes I once knew a fellow who was told by his Dr.s that he had 6 months to a year to live tops- they told him he should put his affairs in order- he sold all his belongings his house quit his job and had a hell of a lot of fun with the $. Last I knew he was still alive some 20 years after he was given the death sentence by the Dr. of course his life was a wreck because he had spent his life savings etc.

The problem that I see with it, particularly in a case like Britain where they have NHS, is that it’s a short slide from “you can kill yourself if you want to” to “we encourage you to kill yourself if you are not viable as defined by us” to “Say goodbye to Grandpa, the NHS will be picking him up to take him to the Transition Center in two days. Grandpa is not likely to live longer than two years, and the NHS has ruled that this makes him a drain on available resources.”

I’m not saying suicide is never an answer, but it should be between you and your pistol…it should NEVER be encouraged or supported by the government.

I think you should have the choice to check out in a civil and controlled manner should you so choose. 3 of my 4 Grandparents were “put down” so to speak with increased morphine while bedridden in a hospital and in a miserable state of suffering and decline. What would be the difference if they were allowed that same passage in the familiar, (read family), surroundings of their own home? Leaving it between you and your pistol doesn’t do any favors for the family or friends that have to discover that you made that choice.

Suicide tourism sounds pretty grim, but it is happening out there anyway to some extent. I work in Grand Canyon and we have suicides there about every year. This year a guy drove his car over the edge at a busy part of the South Rim right in plain view of a bunch of other tourists. Last year a guy jumped out of a commercial tour helicopter to end it to the horror of the pilot and other passengers onboard. Both of these episodes required dangerous and expensive recovery efforts by park and private search and rescue teams. Maybe there is a better way.

You’ve obviously never watched somebody you love die a difficult death. And it is because we place such a high value on human life that we wouldn’t wish that on somebody we actually care about.

I do hope you come to learn why one day.