Hooray! You can now die with dignity in victoria

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:11 pm

Thankyou to our politicians who debated yesterday and through the night to this morning.

An outcome that has put many peoples hearts and minds at ease.

Daniel Andrews our premier (although i dont always agree with him) has made a few brave decisions....and this was an exelent result. Passed by ten votes. So not a slim margin. (47 to 37).

Its strict legislation but it has passed.

Basically, you must have 6to 12 months to live, in agony that medication will not ileviate. And permission of two chief doctors. We may not all need this but its nice to know its there.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:20 pm

Im just a little proud to be a Victorian right now. Dont get me wrong here....it still has to pass the upper house but although tight itll be a doddle!.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:49 am

In Europe there is Dignitas which, oddly, doesn't offer a lifetime subscription - just annual membership - which rather misses the point. They don't have a freephone number either.

In America they have permissive gun laws which obviate the problem entirely.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:11 am

Usa!usa!usa!usa!

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:21 am

This serious thread went down hill very quickly didn't it ?

It is comforting to know if need be you can check out on your own terms.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:35 am

spot;1513458 wrote: In Europe there is Dignitas which, oddly, doesn't offer a lifetime subscription - just annual membership - which rather misses the point. They don't have a freephone number either.

In America they have permissive gun laws which obviate the problem entirely.

I don't think there is much dignity at all in being shot. Besides, the ones who do get shot are usually not the ones who are wanting an early check-out.

We do have a law in the state of Colorado which allows a body to expire instead of waiting for the final moment, but you have be near death to qualify, and then spend you last days dealing with Lawyers and such. How can you call that dignified?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 11:55 am

LarsMac;1513468 wrote: I don't think there is much dignity at all in being shot. Besides, the ones who do get shot are usually not the ones who are wanting an early check-out.

We do have a law in the state of Colorado which allows a body to expire instead of waiting for the final moment, but you have be near death to qualify, and then spend you last days dealing with Lawyers and such. How can you call that dignified?

Is that like our do not resuscitate orders

BBC - Ethics - Euthanasia: DNR - Do Not Resuscitate

DNR - Do Not Resuscitate

DNRs are Do Not Resuscitate orders. A DNR order on a patient's file means that a doctor is not required to resuscitate a patient if their heart stops and is designed to prevent unnecessary suffering.

The usual circumstances in which it is appropriate not to resuscitate are:

when it will not restart the heart or breathing

when there is no benefit to the patient

when the benefits are outweighed by the burdens

Although DNRs can be regarded as a form of passive euthanasia, they are not controversial unless they are abused, since they are intended to prevent patients suffering pointlessly from the bad effects that resuscitation can cause: broken ribs, other fractures, ruptured spleen, brain damage.

In the case of serious/terminal illness the patient is the one who gets asked what they want to do and their decision supercedes anyone elses opinion.

Why is there any need for lawyers to get involved?

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:26 pm

If I get to that stage I'll have Do Not Converse on a large sign.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:29 pm

We dont know how it will be administered yet.

One stipulation iis youll have to be under palliative care.

Put it this way, just because a doctor says youve got 12 months to live doesnt mean you can top yourself.....we already have sleeping pills and morphine overdose for that.

Its for when your organs are shutting down and pain relief is longer doing any good.

Its not like DNR....my poor mum had that experience of having to find the paper so the amboes didnt resuss dad.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:29 pm

spot;1513458 wrote: In America they have permissive gun laws which obviate the problem entirely.Even without our liberal gun laws it'd still be easy enough - just walk toward a cop with a less than happy face and reach around the back of your waistband. And it's not even that difficult if you're black. The Mexicans have it the worst - they don't get to die at all - they get thrown in detention cells and then deported. Very discriminatory indeed.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:32 pm

spot;1513479 wrote: If I get to that stage I'll have Do Not Converse on a large sign.

Hahaha....so you definitely dont want a conversation at that stage of the game.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:33 pm

spot;1513479 wrote: If I get to that stage I'll have Do Not Converse on a large sign.

I've been considering a tattoo on my chest that reads "DNR - and if you do I'll be seeing you in court!"

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:46 pm

spot;1513479 wrote: If I get to that stage I'll have Do Not Converse on a large sign.

Boom Boom......you are turning into a laugh a minute poster. (what happened ?)

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:50 pm

Bruv;1513465 wrote: This serious thread went down hill very quickly didn't it ?

It is comforting to know if need be you can check out on your own terms.

What was interesting was who got this over the line....country conservative politicians...those guys say no to everything! They head the no vote for same sex marriage.....which also looks as if its going through in regards to the voluntary postal vote.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:18 pm

gmc;1513477 wrote: Is that like our do not resuscitate orders

BBC - Ethics - Euthanasia: DNR - Do Not Resuscitate

DNR - Do Not Resuscitate

In the case of serious/terminal illness the patient is the one who gets asked what they want to do and their decision supercedes anyone elses opinion.

Why is there any need for lawyers to get involved?

The Problem with DNR is that you must have actually "died" before they become effective.

It is amazing how long a terminally ill person can remain alive against their will.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 2:24 pm

One of the conservative politicians said she didnt vote on account of her personal experience but her mefical experience in which she wittnessed a young man who had cancer screaming in pain only hours before his death. Nobody would wish that on their child. And its just not fair to allow a young person to die like that.lets face it that didnt need to happen. You dont want to be a parent relieved at the death of their child just so theyre not in pain anymore.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 2:41 pm

LarsMac;1513496 wrote: The Problem with DNR is that you must have actually "died" before they become effective.

It is amazing how long a terminally ill person can remain alive against their will.Religious institutions and hospitals can ignore DNR directives too because it goes against their religious beliefs. In the US Catholic organizations have been buying up many of the hospitals.

My kids sometimes ask me how they're going to find me. I tell them it won't be messy, but I'm sure it will be startling no matter how used to the idea I try to get them.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:25 pm

How is it a quick death just because youre shot? What are they using? Elephant guns?

Thats a silly argument! How many have tried to shoot themselves in the head and missed the target.....and thats at point blank range

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:35 pm

magentaflame;1513529 wrote: How is it a quick death just because youre shot? What are they using? Elephant guns?

Thats a silly argument! How many have tried to shoot themselves in the head and missed the target.....and thats at point blank rangeWho knows what is and isn't "quick" when it comes to death. I'd bet that in many cases the brain continues to function after the body quits. Near-death experiences seem to support that idea.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:35 pm

Ahso!;1513518 wrote: Religious institutions and hospitals can ignore DNR directives too because it goes against their religious beliefs. In the US Catholic organizations have been buying up many of the hospitals.

My kids sometimes ask me how they're going to find me. I tell them it won't be messy, but I'm sure it will be startling no matter how used to the idea I try to get them.

My kids think im morbid because i have plans and in bad circumstances a date (which ill never disclose to anyone, dont worry its a long way off and subject to change) ....they have no problem with my funeral ideas though.....except for one comment "what if we cant get the worktime off" there's a sign of the times! And exactly why i have plans.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:42 pm

Ahso!;1513530 wrote: Who knows what is and isn't "quick" when it comes to death. I'd bet that in many cases the brain continues to function after the body quits. Near-death experiences seem to support that idea.

Depends on blood flow to the brain.

During the debating the opposition wanted the name of the dying agent changed to "poison".. something tells me there will be a choice of drug. Legal drugs that just overdose you. (I say that in good faith and trust though)

The thing is though. With this legislation only a minute number of people will need it. Its not for every single person dying of an illness ....youll have to be RIGHT AT THE END .

I remember not understanding when my nana died. I asked if she was in pain...the answer was theyve given her enough not to kill her. I was a young woman then but i just didnt get it. Shes going to be dead in the next twentyfour hours and still they wont help her. That was just too weird for my own brain to comprehend. Of course she was in pain! Exhausted! And not coming back wirh any kind if amazing resurrection. I didnt much like the woman in life but....damn i dont like to see that kind of suffering. When youre hilding someones hand and telling them they dont have to struggle anymore ....i dont know.

She died some hours later.

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:54 am

magentaflame;1513450 wrote: Thankyou to our politicians who debated yesterday and through the night to this morning.

An outcome that has put many peoples hearts and minds at ease.

Daniel Andrews our premier (although i dont always agree with him) has made a few brave decisions....and this was an exelent result. Passed by ten votes. So not a slim margin. (47 to 37).

Its strict legislation but it has passed.

Basically, you must have 6to 12 months to live, in agony that medication will not ileviate. And permission of two chief doctors. We may not all need this but its nice to know its there.

This is bad because it's a slippery slope where at some point you will have to justify your right to live or they will kill you.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:58 am

xfrodobagginsx;1513567 wrote: This is bad because it's a slippery slope where at some point you will have to justify your right to live or they will kill you.

Your grasp of the written word is appalling.

Post by **spot** » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:23 am

xfrodobagginsx;1513567 wrote: This is bad because it's a slippery slope where at some point you will have to justify your right to live or they will kill you.

A bit like authorized Christians converting Jews at sword-point and then having them burned at the stake for still being Jewish, by the sound of it. Or like authorized Christians torturing women into confessing witchcraft, so they could burn them at the stake too. These being real events with hundreds of thousands dead, as opposed to hypothetical unlikely what-if guesses with no dead at all. Your notion of God smells of an evil well past its use-by date.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:31 pm

If you're a christian suicide is a mortal sin and that is the origin of their moral dilema - which is fine if that is what they want to believe but they have no right to force others to live by their beliefs. They also used to believe suffering in childbirth was a woman's lot and the will of god and refused the use of anaesthetics .

https://www.ft.com/content/1e2ce5d6-aad ... 0077b07658

Doctors disagreed sharply on the risks of anaesthesia. Chloroform could complicate births, advised one obstetrician, Professor Charles Meigs: painful contractions during labour were â€œnatural and physiological forces that the Divinity has ordained us to enjoy or to sufferâ€. When the Queen was again pregnant in 1850 her doctors â€“ Sir James Clark and Charles Locock â€“ consulted the leading London anaesthetist of the time, John Snow, later famous for his work on cholera. But prudence again won out and the Queen was denied chloroform.

In the UK they will dope somebody terminally ill and in pain until they pass peacefully and respect the DNR request of the patient there are circumstamces when that is the best option, I'm sure in the past doctors will have quietly administered a fatal dose of painkiller it should be something between the doctor and the patient - watching someone in pain even while unconscious when you know the end is inevitable is no fun. To watch someone in pain while fully compos mentis and then tell them they have no right to choose to die is something only the sanctimonious can do. Suiffering is not the road to heaven why does anyone give credence to that nonsense.

posted by xfrodobagginsx

This is bad because it's a slippery slope where at some point you will have to justify your right to live or they will kill you.

Why do you think people are out to kill you?

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:30 pm

Bruv;1513569 wrote: Your grasp of the written word is appalling.

Take it in the words of the Wacky Liberal Hero George Bernard Shaw:

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:20 pm

The religious have been justifying who has the right to exist, who is worthy, who is legitimate or illegitimate who is human or who is not as human as they are since religion was invented. Racism is a religious construct to justify subjugating and enslaving entire people because the colour of their skin marked them out as inferior it's an execrise in religious hypocrisy that they prefer to pretend never and doesn't still happen.

George bernard shaw hardly qualifies as a liberal his views on eugenics alone exclude him from that label as would his support of stalin, mussolini and hitler. I take it you are an american as most americans seem to have little idea what qualifies as liberal ideals or thinking.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:32 pm

Or socialism.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:19 pm

magentaflame;1513606 wrote: Or socialism.

Democratic Socialism is a fine idea. However, putting it into practice in the modern world, As Venezuela has learned, is far more difficult than it ought to be.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:44 pm

LarsMac;1513609 wrote: Democratic Socialism is a fine idea. However, putting it into practice in the modern world, As Venezuela has learned, is far more difficult than it ought to be.

It has been said there was a capitalist conspiracy working against the Venezuelans, I am not clever enough to understand how it works.

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Sun Oct 22, 2017 8:00 pm

gmc;1513605 wrote: The religious have been justifying who has the right to exist, who is worthy, who is legitimate or illegitimate who is human or who is not as human as they are since religion was invented. Racism is a religious construct to justify subjugating and enslaving entire people because the colour of their skin marked them out as inferior it's an execrise in religious hypocrisy that they prefer to pretend never and doesn't still happen.

George bernard shaw hardly qualifies as a liberal his views on eugenics alone exclude him from that label as would his support of stalin, mussolini and hitler. I take it you are an american as most americans seem to have little idea what qualifies as liberal ideals or thinking.

He is a liberal hero. He was a Marxist. He was a far left nut.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:09 am

LarsMac;1513609 wrote: Democratic Socialism is a fine idea. However, putting it into practice in the modern world, As Venezuela has learned, is far more difficult than it ought to be.

You do realise that most of the european countries have social democratic parties running them and have had since the end of ww2? - apart from spain that has the fascists in ascendency again.

Far-right protesters give fascist salutes in Madrid as thousands rally over Catalonia crisis | The Independent

Sadly the right is making a comeback in the UK and europe

posted byxfrodobagginsx

He is a liberal hero. He was a Marxist. He was a far left nut.

You rather prove my point, you can't be a liberal and a marxist the two are mutually exclusive. You now have a right wing government in the US backed up by the christian right hell bent it seems on destroying liberal democracy. Enjoy

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:26 am

xfrodobagginsx;1513620 wrote: He is a liberal hero. He was a Marxist. He was a far left nut.

What about communist ? Why leave that one out ?

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:24 pm

Bruv;1513630 wrote: What about communist ? Why leave that one out ?

He was a Communist. So anyway, he is just one example of how far left ideology ends up.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Wed Oct 25, 2017 5:44 am

Americans often aren't aware that liberalism over here isn't what they think of as liberalism over there.

Liberalism over here is about the maximum freedom of the individual compatible with a free and fair society. It looks back to Wilberforce and the Abolition of Slavery for its inspiration. It believes in private property, equality before the law and that people should be able to go as far as their talent will take them regardless of race, colour or creed.

It is therefore completely incompatible with Marxism or any form or communism which does not believe in private property, puts the convenience of the government above the law and people's talents entirely at the disposal of the State.

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:27 am

Clodhopper;1513710 wrote: Americans often aren't aware that liberalism over here isn't what they think of as liberalism over there.

Liberalism over here is about the maximum freedom of the individual compatible with a free and fair society. It looks back to Wilberforce and the Abolition of Slavery for its inspiration. It believes in private property, equality before the law and that people should be able to go as far as their talent will take them regardless of race, colour or creed.

It is therefore completely incompatible with Marxism or any form or communism which does not believe in private property, puts the convenience of the government above the law and people's talents entirely at the disposal of the State.

Maximum freedom for Liberals, as long as your not a Christian, Conservative, Pro Traditional Values, Pro Christian Values...basically as long as you agree with the Liberals. How are those who speak out against radical islam treated?

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:43 am

https://www.google.com/search?q=frodo+b ... 4CKREpaF_M:

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:01 pm

Is English your first language Bilbo ?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:28 am

xfrodobagginsx;1513724 wrote: Maximum freedom for Liberals, as long as your not a Christian, Conservative, Pro Traditional Values, Pro Christian Values...basically as long as you agree with the Liberals. How are those who speak out against radical islam treated?

The religious bleat about how their religious freedom is infringed upon when they are prevented from discriminating against people whose lifestyles they disapprove of and they are stopped from imposing their ridiculous belief system on others and can't grasp that no one is stopping them going to church or living their lives as they choose stop feeling sorry fornyourselves and be grateful you ove in a liberal democracy. In a religious society there is no freedom and no such concept as human rights,

How are those who speak out against radical islam treated?

In saudi arabia they get imprisoned without trial.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/09/15/sau ... s-arrested

In america you can call donald trump a wanker and it's not a criminal offence even if donald thinks no one should take the piss out of the president. That liberal democracy enjoy the last few days of it.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Thu Nov 16, 2017 2:06 pm

The upper house in victoria are into their 33rd hour of debating.

It failed to get through the upper house in NSW.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Tue Nov 28, 2017 12:43 pm

Welll just an update. It past the upper house. You can now die with dignity in the state of Victoria.