NastyNickers wrote:Lady Murasaki wrote:NastyNickers wrote:Lady Murasaki wrote:
I know it's a lot more, this is an upsetting subject for everyone but there is a knock on effect on legalising assisted dying for those suffering.
Should traumatised teenagers who've suffered abuse get the same treatment because they can't live with the pain? This is what is happening in places it's legalised.
But that's not true, is it? Some countries allow assisted suicide for the mentally ill. The Netherlands, Luxembourg and Belgium, though I think Canada were considering it. And it's not for traumatised, abused teenagers. It's for people who have tried all available therapies and have found no treatment, I think the term used is "unbearable suffering", and the conditions for this are strict.
it's a totally different issue.
Legislation does not have to include assisted dying for mental health issues. 6 states in the US have assisted dying. None include mental health. I think it's Oregon that have had it legal for 2 decades. You can be prescribed Life ending medication if you are terminal, have less than 6 months left to live, and are mentally competent and able to administer the medication yourself. Other states, including Washington and California, have similar legislation.
Columbia also legalised assisted dying for the terminally ill only.
It can be done. The "slippery slope" argument is a sloppy one.
How is it a totally different issue? It's about euthanising people who find living unbearably difficult.
Once you start, how can you stop people making a case for their difficulties?
I'll have to look into the USA states laws before I can comment on that.
Because the only places where it's possible to access assisted dying for meatball health problems is in countries that have specific legislation for that.
The other countries don't include access for mental health. and as a result don't have mentally ill people participating in assisted dying. So your notion that one leads to the other is wrong, it doesn't.
Of course, it leads to conversation about allowing access, as seen in Canada. But shouldn't everyone be allowed to make a case for something they believe in? It doesn't mean we have to legalise it, and it shouldn't mean we keep something else illegal just to avoid that conversation.
Absolutely, I'm all for having the conversation. Is depression a mental health problem?