Rational suicide:

[grandmoon]

Beverley Broadbent was not dying of a terminal illness, nor was she depressed or unhappy. But at 83, she wanted to die.

After living a rich and satisfying life, the Brighton East woman said the ageing process had come to feel like a disease that was robbing her of her physical and mental fitness. In February, she said she had had enough.

''I look well and I walk well so people think I'm fine. But I have so many things wrong with me,'' she said. ''The balance is gone. It's taking so much time for me to keep fit to enjoy myself that there's not enough time to enjoy myself.''

In several interviews with Fairfax Media, Ms Broadbent said she planned to take her own life so she could have a peaceful, dignified death. She said she did not want her health to deteriorate to the point where she had dementia or found herself in a nursing home with no way out.

The environmental activist chose to tell her story because she believed many elderly people wanted to die when they felt their life was complete, but lacked the means to go gently.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/rational-suicide-why-beverley-broadbent-chose-to-die-20130401-2h34...

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/rational-suicide-why-beverley-broadbent-chose-to-die-20130401-2h34...

[freddie*rooster]

I'm sorry Jean, I was unaware of the trauma you experienced, under the circumstances I understand where you are coming from.

I find the situation with Beverley Broadbent very sad. I agree with Catty, I could understand if she had a terminal illness and was in pain, but her list of ailments appeared to be just minor age related issues.

[the_great_she_elephant]

What it ultimately boils down to is: provided the person in question is capable of making a rational decision, then, regardless of our personal philosophy, do you or are or anyone else have the right to dictate to them whether or not they should be permitted to end their life?

[*crikey*mate*]

I find the situation with Beverley Broadbent very sad. I agree with Catty, I could understand if she had a terminal illness and was in pain, but her list of ailments appeared to be just minor age related issues.

But why should people have to endure them if they don't want to?

[*crikey*mate*]

What it ultimately boils down to is: provided the person in question is capable of making a rational decision, then, regardless of our personal philosophy, do you or are or anyone else have the right to dictate to them whether or not they should be permitted to end their life?

Well, as far as I know, the current law takes away any question of having that right, doesn't it?

The law says people can't do it, so it's taken the choice away. I understand why, because to allow it opens the floodgates for all sorts of pre meditated murder or even manslaughter being passsed off as "the victim wanted it"

But IMO - no one should have the right to dictate to someone who is of sound mind and can justify and demonstrate that they have reached their decision in a logical and strategic manner, when they should die.

People say life is precious, and I do agree with that, but it is only precious if it has value to each individual.

[bright.ton42]

You have got to be kidding. If people want to kill themselves over these trivial, yes TRIVIAL, health issues then what does this say about the preciousness of life?

Who says life is precious?  That's a personal philosophy  I think.  I wouldn't care to undergo any of those operations without loved ones nearby,. It can be hard relying on impersonal health

professionals, as good as they are.And none of these conditions are trivial or minor for one who lives totally alone, is old,  and has to struggle with the rehab,.  .  

Not that it's anyone's concern but Beverley did have other health issues,enough to give her good reason to worry about an unpleasant end, but she obviously didn't want to broadcast them. And I agree with the others -  it was her decision,  her right, and let someone walk a mile in her shoes before they judge.  .  

[the_great_she_elephant]

Well, as far as I know, the current law takes away any question of having that right, doesn't it?

The law says people can't do it, so it's taken the choice away. I understand why, because to allow it opens the floodgates for all sorts of pre meditated murder or even manslaughter being passsed off as "the victim wanted it"

But IMO - no one should have the right to dictate to someone who is of sound mind and can justify and demonstrate that they have reached their decision in a logical and strategic manner, when they should die.

People say life is precious, and I do agree with that, but it is only precious if it has value to each individual.

Suicide is NOT illegal. My post made no mention of abiding and abetting.

[*crikey*mate*]

Suicide is NOT illegal. My post made no mention of abiding and abetting.

suicide may be legal, but is assisted suicide - ie supplying the drugs to mum in the nursing home cos she can't get them herself?

 I agreed with you (but I didn't do it in red ink - can't win eh? damned if I do, and damned if I don't) - I also expanded a little - was thinking about Am3's post a little earlier about others supplying the drugs etc. 

But I did use distinctly separate paragraphs to distinguish one thought from the other.

[freddie*rooster]

I didn't say she had to endure anything, I did say I felt sad about her choice in ending her life for the apparent minor age related ailments she listed. I just hope her decision wasn't based on loneliness, or the thought of having no-one to care for her. 😞

[cherry*135]

That should depends entirely on what those who know him best believe would be HIS wishes. One could just as easily argue should he be kept alive simply to give his wife a purpose in life.

He is not being kept alive simply to give his wife a purpose in life. She is his wife of many years, she said she is not going to put him in a home and forget ab out him. She is about 65, her life would be much better? easier? if he was gone. They have adult children and grandchildren.

[grandmoon]

Since when is a 3 1/2 hour op trivial.