Belgian doctors to euthanise healthy 24-year-old woman suffering from depression

[floo]

If assisted dying became legal in this country, I would be prepared to help people die if proper training was offered first.

That says a great deal about you, Floo.

I take that as a compliment, that am willing to help in that way!

[ProfessorDavey]

Belgian doctors have given the green signal to perform euthanasia on a healthy 24-year-old woman, who suffers from serious depression.

Someone suffering from clinical depression is not healthy. Depression is an illness.

Exactly.

BUT - a person with depression may lead a happy and contented life - with the right treatment and support - as opposed to a person with a terminal cancer or motor neuron disease (for example).

I wasn't making a comment on whether I think that assisted suicide is appropriate in this case, merely pointing out that someone with severe depression isn't healthy.

Quite so, I was just pointing out that there is a fundamental difference between an illness that can be treated and one that can't.

It is a bit more complicated than that - I'm sure there are plenty of people with severe depression who would argue that their depression cannot be treated effectively at all and that the illness (even with the very best treatment) is as debilitating as many physical illnesses and conditions that also can be treated (albeit not necessarily cured).

That's rather a 'depressing' view. Many cases can be treated successfully.

But not all - that's the point.

[Udayana]

Seems wrong to allow this as obviously her judgement on her condition cannot be relied on.

[Shaker]

No one should be murdering anyone, especially  if their judgement is impaired.

Murder entails killing somebody against their will, not with it.

Duh.

[ProfessorDavey]

Seems wrong to allow this as obviously her judgement on her condition cannot be relied on.

Yes, I think there is a big issue here of consent and whether someone suffering with severe depression is really able to consent to doctors providing the lethal injection.

[Shaker]

Seems wrong to allow this as obviously her judgement on her condition cannot be relied on.

Yes, I think there is a big issue here of consent and whether someone suffering with severe depression is really able to consent to doctors providing the lethal injection.

In the old lingo depression is for the most part a neurotic rather than a psychotic illness such as schizophrenia and the manic phase of bipolar disorder. While there are instances of psychotic depression, these are extremely rare; overwhelmingly depression is an emotional disorder but not one which entails delusions, hallucinations and other aberrations in reality testing. So on the strength of what I've read thus far I don't see why she wouldn't be considered competent to give informed consent.

[L.A.]

Seems wrong to allow this as obviously her judgement on her condition cannot be relied on.

Yes, I think there is a big issue here of consent and whether someone suffering with severe depression is really able to consent to doctors providing the lethal injection.

If we are ever to have a euthanasia law in this country, I think it is important that the patient controls the process and hence takes responsibility for their death. Technically this need not be difficult these days, an eye movement can trigger an automated syringe pump.

[Hope]

I am not sure why you would think that there would need to be a consistent attitude amongst those suffering these conditions?

Largely because those who are in favour of such legislation tend to generalise the need for it, when it is very much case-specific.  It would be interesting to know to what extent the courts were involved in this Belgian case.

[ProfessorDavey]

Seems wrong to allow this as obviously her judgement on her condition cannot be relied on.

Yes, I think there is a big issue here of consent and whether someone suffering with severe depression is really able to consent to doctors providing the lethal injection.

In the old lingo depression is for the most part a neurotic rather than a psychotic illness such as schizophrenia and the manic phase of bipolar disorder. While there are instances of psychotic depression, these are extremely rare; overwhelmingly depression is an emotional disorder but not one which entails delusions, hallucinations and other aberrations in reality testing. So on the strength of what I've read thus far I don't see why she wouldn't be considered competent to give informed consent.

Not sure that is necessarily the case.

The element of valid consent most likely to be problematic in these case is capacity to consent. This is often defined as the ability of a person to understand the information that is provided, to believe it and recognise its importance, to be able to weigh the options and finally to arrive at a decision which can be conveyed to the doctor etc.

The specific difficulty with severe depression is that it may critically affect the ability of the patient to appreciate the significance of the information to the patient's own situation, particularly concerning the illness itself and the probable consequences of treatment options (in this case including lethal injection).

There is also a requirement in such extreme situations of a 'settled' view - thus not fluctuating in line with bouts of the severest depression.

[ProfessorDavey]

I am not sure why you would think that there would need to be a consistent attitude amongst those suffering these conditions?

Largely because those who are in favour of such legislation tend to generalise the need for it, when it is very much case-specific.  It would be interesting to know to what extent the courts were involved in this Belgian case.

I think the reverse is true - in other words that those who oppose such legislation tend to generalise the lack of need (there are other options) even though it is self evident that there are patients who would want euthanasia to be available to them despite already being aware of and able to access other options.

The notion that this should be case by case is of course correct, but that leads to a view that the individual should make their own choice from the widest variety of options. So that those that genuinely want to die (with of course strict control over the conditions which would trigger this option) should be allowed to just as those who do not want this option should be just as able to refuse it and choose an option more suitable for them.

[Shaker]

That just shows you know bugger all about it!

Well then do dazzle us one and all with your expertise.

[Nearly Sane]

I am not sure why you would think that there would need to be a consistent attitude amongst those suffering these conditions?

Largely because those who are in favour of such legislation tend to generalise the need for it, when it is very much case-specific.  It would be interesting to know to what extent the courts were involved in this Belgian case.

This seems arse about face. It is surely progressed on the case of specific cases and the problem is there is a generalised ban.

[Nearly Sane]

Also I still don't see what the point is in expecting everyone to feel the same in the same circumstances - surely the very point that people are making is that they don't?

[L.A.]

If the 24 year old had been my daughter I would be extremely upset.

Mental illness is something that leaves people very vunerable mentally and often the patient doesn't see a way forward at that time, IMO it is the Doctors job to try and protect the vunerable person.

Thousands of people have been vunerable to severe depression and felt they had nothing to live for at that time,  and have gone on to pass through all  that, to find happiness they didn't believe at the time was possible.

I think it is morally wrong to kill someone like that, while their mind is in a vunerable state, in the way someone with mental illness is.

I think a terminal physical illness is arguably different but even then I think you have to be very sure that person really has thought through the implications.

I don't think a mentally ill person can, because mental illness unbalances the mind.

IF there is a case for euthanasia for the mentally ill (for which I'm extremely sceptical), it's very different from that for 'End of life' patients.

[Shaker]

What is or what are the salient difference(s)?

[Shaker]

I wasn't asking you.

[cyberman]

The question remains unanswered - why does this woman need to be killed? she is capable of killing herself.

[L.A.]

What is or what are the salient difference(s)?

As I pointed out earlier, mental illness is treatable. While I fully accept that current treatments are not perfect, they can work for many, so offering such people an easy-option of suicide does not seem like a good idea.

Secondly, (as has been mentioned) those who are physically fit do not need any assistance to kill themselves.

Those who desperately need an option of euthanasia are those who are facing a slow painful/humiliating death but are physically incapable of taking action themselves or travelling to an overseas facility.

[Shaker]

I wasn't asking you.

Your post wasn't addressed to anyone in particular, therefore we can't be expected to know.

It was addressed to Lapsed Atheist, who stated that there are or would be great differences in assisted suicide for those slightly nearer the end of their lives than those who are not. I want to know what they are.

[Shaker]

As I pointed out earlier, mental illness is treatable.

In all cases all of the time, or in only some cases some of the time?

While I fully accept that current treatments are not perfect, they can work for many, so offering such people an easy-option of suicide does not seem like a good idea.

What do you propose to do with the not-many?

Secondly, (as has been mentioned) those who are physically fit do not need any assistance to kill themselves.

Those who desperately need an option of euthanasia are those who are facing a slow painful/humiliating death but are physically incapable of taking action themselves or travelling to an overseas facility.

Perhaps it has a lot to do with the fact that killing people medically (typically via a large dose of barbiturates) is easy, quick, painless, dignified and certain whereas typical suicide methods (depending on specific method) are none of these.

You wish to die. You can either throw yourself beneath a train, with all that that entails for trauma to the driver, the team needed to scrape up the bits, delay and disruption etc., or you can fall asleep in bed and never wake up. Your call.

[cyberman]

Why does this woman need to be killed?

[Shaker]

It's her need, nobody else's.

[cyberman]

It's her need, nobody else's.

I am not asking why she feels she needs to die.

why does she need to be killed?

[Shaker]

She feels that her life is a burden to her and she wishes it to come to an end, which is of course her right entirely.

[cyberman]

She feels that her life is a burden to her and she wishes it to come to an end, which is of course her right entirely.

I am not asking why she feels she needs to die.

Why does she need to be killed?