Quote: Jane P @ July 8 2009, 2:00 PM BSTNo easy answers on this one are there?
Nope. And if one is in the terrible position of being the patient, or a close relative of the patient, the landscape changes even more. 
Government Voting on Euthanasia Page 2
Quote: Jane P @ July 8 2009, 1:13 PM BSTYes that's silly, unless you're paying in which case I'd like to volunteer.
Ok, fair enough. But what I was getting at was - How do you know you want to leave this world, when you haven't seen all of it?
Quote: sexy girl @ July 8 2009, 2:06 PM BSTOk, fair enough. But what I was getting at was - How do you know you want to leave this world, when you haven't seen all of it?
It's a great idea in theory, but how are you going to pay for round the world trips for all the terminally ill people etc in Britain?
Quote: chipolata @ July 8 2009, 2:08 PM BSTIt's a great idea in theory, but how are you going to pay for round the world trips for all the terminally ill people etc in Britain?
Well, that I don't know. 
But we have spent billions on building an Olympic stadium which, in the grand scheme of things, isn't remotely important. So surely the Government could find the money from somewhere?
Quote: sexy girl @ July 8 2009, 2:06 PM BSTOk, fair enough. But what I was getting at was - How do you know you want to leave this world, when you haven't seen all of it?
I've seen Basingstoke, that was enough for me to make up my mind.
Quote: sexy girl @ July 8 2009, 2:11 PM BSTSo surely the Government could find the money from somewhere?
They could borrow it!
If everyone in this country donated a pound it would add up to...well, it would be enough to cover it. That's 4 sure.
Quote: sexy girl @ July 8 2009, 2:17 PM BSTIf everyone in this country donated a pound it would add up to...well, it would be enough to cover it. That's 4 sure.
It could be kind of like a "tax" system for stuff we all agree needs money spent on it!
Quote: Tim Walker @ July 8 2009, 2:20 PM BSTIt could be kind of like a "tax" system for stuff we all agree needs money spent on it!
I'm not crazy about my taxes being spent on jamborees for the terminally ill.
Quote: Tim Walker @ July 8 2009, 2:20 PM BSTIt could be kind of like a "tax" system for stuff we all agree needs money spent on it!
The thing is, there are some really clever people on this thread. But all they are doing is saying things that have been said for years.
We need people to come up with new ideas.
Quote: Tim Walker @ July 8 2009, 1:28 PM BSTBut whatever the median extended survival periods, everyone begins as an n=1 study. Some may have much-prolonged remission with treatment. One might say when you're over 70, then 1-2 extra years is cost-inefficient. But what about 1-2 years if you're under 30? 6 months to 1 year longer allows many people to fulfil ambitions, see their kids get married, repair old wounds, put their house in order etc. Not reasons to spend extra resources in themselves. However, the individual circumstances have to be taken into account to some degree. This is a very difficult area, with outcomes not just based on the drug efficacy in question, but also the pathology of the disease, the co-morbidity of the patient and is rightly a headache. Plus, the only way any drugs eventually become cheaper, safer and more available is by thei use in clinical practice. Drugs companies are not faultless, of course, but they really do have to invest billions in research of new chemotherapies. This money has to be recouped somehow. (And remember, drug patents run out relatively quickly, which is why you have cheap aspirin, paracetamol, ibuprofen, plus cheap generic versions of very successful and safe specialist medicines which originally cost millions to develop.)
I'm not on a downer on expensive treatments in general. The NHS spends lots of drugs and supports research and so it should.
But there's a limited pot out there. And palliative care, mental health services, physiotherapy etc are all Cinderella services that get cut again and again. Preserving a few lives whilst allowing many others to die of mental health issues, never work again through treatable injuries is a lousy economy.
Quote: sexy girl @ July 8 2009, 2:24 PM BSTWe need people to come up with new ideas.
How about a pallative care unit built in the grounds of a theme park, where all the terminally-ill people could live together, supporting each other, whilst being able to go on the rides for free?
Monkey doctors?
The way most residential mental health units have become scarier and more dangerous than prisons is a national disgrace.
Quote: Tim Walker @ July 8 2009, 2:27 PM BSTHow about a pallative care unit built in the grounds of a theme park, where all the terminally-ill people could live together, supporting each other, whilst being able to go on the rides for free?
Monkey doctors?
How about more than one palliative specialist per 250,000 head of population?
Quote: Tim Walker @ July 8 2009, 2:27 PM BSTHow about a pallative care unit built in the grounds of a theme park, where all the terminally-ill people could live together, supporting each other, whilst being able to go on the rides for free?
In theory a great idea. And this is more along the lines of what people should be thinking.
I've always thought the Government should build a McDonalds in Ethiopia. Where all the starving people can eat 4 free. It could be built using the money raised by the likes of Comic Relief etc.
Quote: sootyj @ July 8 2009, 2:29 PM BSTHow about more than one palliative specialist per 250,000 head of population?
Not a very popular speciality to go into for doctors. Besides, most of the true palliative specialists are nurses, of which we could do with a few more. Macmillan nurses are brilliant, with a great training and ethos of care. Palliative care is more of a nursing situation than a clinical treatment one.
True but if it was handled better then much of the euthenasia debate would be moot. And as for mental health services, the number of lives I've seen spoiled just by lack of resources.
That said atleast the NHS is finally investing seriously in practical therapy services.