Paralyzed woman loses first Irish right-to-die case

[FishingRod]

By Sarah O'Connor | Reuters – 1 hr 33 mins ago
DUBLIN (Reuters) - An Irish woman terminally ill with multiple sclerosis lost her battle for the lawful right to die in the first case of its kind to be brought in Ireland, Dublin's High Court said on Thursday.
Marie Fleming, a 59-year-old former university lecturer who is completely paralyzed, made an impassioned plea last month to establish the right of her partner of 18 years to help her die, an act that could currently see him jailed in mainly Roman Catholic Ireland.
A 'right to die' debate has played out through recent high-profile court cases in neighboring Britain, where three people all failed in bids to win legal assistance to die. Assisted suicide is only permitted in four European countries: Belgium; Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland.
Judge Nicholas Kearns said Fleming was the most remarkable witness any member of the court had encountered and acknowledged that her life has been "rendered miserable" after being "ravaged by an insidious disease".
However he said it would be impossible to tailor legislation governing assisted suicide on an individual basis and doing so would be harmful to the public interest in protecting the most vulnerable members of society.
"There are no words to express the difficulty we had in arriving at this decision," Kearns said, reading a summary of the 121-page judgment.
"Yet the fact remains that if this court were to unravel a thread of this law by even the most limited constitutional adjudication in her favor, it would - or at least might - open a Pandora's box which would be impossible to close."
"VERY SADDENED"
Suicide was decriminalized in Ireland in 1993, but the ban on helping someone to commit suicide remains, with a jail sentence of up to 14 years.
Kearns said he felt sure the state, which agreed to pay all legal costs, would exercise its discretion in a humane and sensitive fashion in deciding whether to prosecute if Fleming were to be assisted in taking her own life.
The mother of two adult children had told the court in a composed manner last month how her life had become totally undignified and too painful to bear, and said she had planned every detail, including funeral arrangements.
Her partner hugged and kissed her after the judgment was handed out and, reading a statement on her behalf outside the court, her solicitor said Fleming greatly appreciated the enormous support she had received from members of the public.
"Obviously Marie is very disappointed and saddened at today's outcome, and feels it would be inappropriate at the present time to discuss any specific legal aspects of the case having regard to the likelihood of an appeal," solicitor Bernadette Parte said.
A recent poll found that large majorities of west Europeans favor the legalization of assisted suicide.
As well as in the four European countries, assisted suicide is also legal in the U.S. states of Oregon and Washington.
The issue of amending the Irish constitution has also been highlighted recently following the death of a woman who was refused an abortion of her dying fetus, re-igniting a debate that has divided the country for decades.
(Reporting by Sarah O'Connor; Writing by Padraic Halpin; Editing by Louise Ireland and Jason Webb)

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Natural inalienable rights don't come from governments.

Where does this right come from?

Does it have it be a natural inalienable right in order for it to be allowed?

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by frazod

Have you ever watched a loved one waste away to nothing in a nursing home? It's horrible. My grandmother died in a nursing home, and the last three years she was alive she didn't know anything or anybody. Spent her days babbling to a doll and shitting herself. Smothering her with a pillow would have been a kindness.

I'm convinced that the only reason keeping these lifeless shells alive is the norm is how much money the heathcare industry makes off prolonging their (so called) lives.

That doesn't always happed. I spent several years in my teens helping my dad and other congregants perform Wednesday evening church services at a retirement center. And while wheeling them in was often alarming in their ailments and difficulties, they absolutely came to life at the ceremony. 90 and 100 year olds singing hymns with gusto and passion, often so deaf that have no idea how out of tune they are.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Natural inalienable rights don't come from governments.

Where does this right come from?

For all your want to be a constitutional scholar, it's completely lost because of your lack of common sense. How about pursuit of happiness? If I would be happier dead, I am pursuing happiness.

What I posted earlier was sloppy so I want to say it again more accurately

In no state can you turn the gas on to kill someone. However, in some states it's legal to give the gas to someone and tell them how to use it. I think it's sad that someone call tell a loved one they support their want to kill themselves but will be prosecuted if they hold their hand when they do it.

FTR, I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted or fined for suicide or attempting suicide on themselves which tells me they have that right.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

For all your want to be a constitutional scholar, it's completely lost because of your lack of common sense.

I'm not even thinking of the Constitution yet. I'd say allowing others to take the lives of others is a lack of common sense as it makes all of us unsafe with that attitude, if you think it all the way through.

BTW, it's not about me and what I lack anyway. That's not an argument.

How about pursuit of happiness? If I would be happier dead, I am pursuing happiness.

Well, in the vernacular of that time, that had a certain meaning and it wasn't that.

But how would you know afterwards? Seems to me once you pass on it doesn't matter.
But happiness? Really, it's more like wanting to be out of misery than actually being happy.

What I posted earlier was sloppy so I want to say it again more accurately

In no state can you turn the gas on to kill someone. However, in some states it's legal to give the gas to someone and tell them how to use it. I think it's sad that someone call tell a loved one they support their want to kill themselves but will be prosecuted if they hold their hand when they do it.

Holding ones hand? I don't think that's what I was referring to.

FTR, I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted or fined for suicide or attempting suicide on themselves which tells me they have that right.

Well, this isn't about suicide, is it? It's about others participating in a capital crime which has other repercussions if you think it through all the way.

So where does the right to assist in a suicide come from?

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

So where does the right to assist in a suicide come from?

Ask the people that drafted laws that say you can give someone all the items necessary and an instruction manual.

BTW you never answered my last question in the Alex Jones thread. I hope it's because you didn't see it, rather than because you realized you're so far up your own ass with BoR/Constitution interpretation that you stopped arguing.

[The_Doctor10]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Yes, my mother—just not in a nursing home. I just don't believe any person has a right to take another life and we only kill in self-defense not because it's convenient or for quality of life reasons. That's the Useless Eaters argument.


Well, I do not support continued medical care prolonging their life beyond the natural process of dying—( aside from food and water if they can take it in). That's another argument.

I just think it's dangerous to advocate actively taking the life or another or getting another to do it—for any reason beyond defense. That's what a right to die is. Not a right for someone else to kill them.

It's gotten so bad in Holland, that some people won't check into hospitals because the doctors decide and they pull the plug. What will it be next? Infanticide because there's something wrong with them. That's the same useless eaters argument again and it's dangerous for the rest of us. Think it through....like when someone may want to off someone but the can use as an excuse that the person wanted them to kill them to put them out of the pain or misery. We don't kill people as if they animals.

Ireland is a Catholic country so they don't believe any person has this right as well.

No, it's the same one. You're fine with denying people life saving (or prolonging) care but god forbid they would like to be hooked up to an iv of morphine and slip into the night....

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

Ask the people that drafted laws that say you can give someone all the items necessary and an instruction manual.

I'll vary the question: Where do rights, any natural inalienable rights, come from?

That should help you answer, since you seem to think, still, they come from govt because you keep mentioning "laws."

BTW you never answered my last question in the Alex Jones thread. I hope it's because you didn't see it, rather than because you realized you're so far up your own ass with BoR/Constitution interpretation that you stopped arguing.

Didn't see it. Sorry, I do have to do other things and can miss some. Or maybe it required a long answer and I needed to go.

However, now you're focusing on the poster, for the second time, which means you can't articulate an answer. Something tells me you are using this to make your refusal to answer mine okay.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by The_Doctor10

No, it's the same one. You're fine with denying people life saving (or prolonging) care but god forbid they would like to be hooked up to an iv of morphine and slip into the night....

No, it is not the same argument. It's a right to refuse medical treatment. It's not a right for someone to intentionally take the life of another—for any reason except self-defense or if they've forfeited that right by taking anothers and have had a trial over it with the state doing the deed.

It has nothing to do with me being fine about anything, though. Killing someone has been a capital offense for a long time and it should remain that way, so the rest of us can be safe. You're fine on cheapening human life, the next phase of the slippery slope since abortion was legalized. It's no wonder we have psychotics killing school children, going to war for nefarious reasons, assassination of American citizens, drone wars on children and labeling that collateral damage, and college professors rationalizing infanticide ( and I believe the current US president okay with the latter too.) This is a philosophy of utilitarianism that views people like cattle or dogs.


Guess who else made the Useless Eaters argument?

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I'll vary the question: Where do rights, any natural inalienable rights, come from?

That should help you answer, since you seem to think, still, they come from govt because you keep mentioning "laws."

I'm not getting into philosophical debate with you on the derivation of inalienable rights.

Again I'll say, file suicide under "pursuit of happiness." If you don't like that, tough.

I keep mentioning laws, because no rights are protected without them.

Feel free to answer my question in the AJ thread when you get the time. It's far simpler than answering a question that has been debated for centuries.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

I'm not getting into philosophical debate with you on the derivation of inalienable rights.

Well, I already knew you didn't know the answer. I just think this is mainly the fault of our education system, because too many think rights come from the Constitution or govts. This point is basic and fundamental to discussing this issue of assisted suicide.

Again I'll say, file suicide under "pursuit of happiness." If you don't like that, tough.

Oh, gonna get pissy and emotional now. You know what that means.

I say tough for you who assist in a suicide and go to prison for murder and bringing about a culture of death.

This is a strawman argument. You're changing the argument. I am arguing what is called "assisted suicide" aka another person, outside of the self, doing the killing. You keep avoiding that. Why?

I keep mentioning laws, because no rights are protected without them.

Yeah, but it's not an answer to the question as to where they come from.

Feel free to answer my question in the AJ thread when you get the time. It's far simpler than answering a question that has been debated for centuries.

Sure. ( I don't even remember the thread to be honest) But the answer to this one, is actually simpler. In fact it can be done in one word if you want.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

This is a strawman argument. You're changing the argument. I am arguing what is called "assisted suicide" aka another person, outside of the self, doing the killing. You keep avoiding that. Why?

I'm not avoiding it. OK. Does someone have a right to assist someone else in achieving happiness? I say yes. I know some may not feel that way, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

In fact it can be done in one word if you want.

Enlighten me.


Still waiting on that AJ thread reply....

[FishingRod]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

No it means you have no problem making your wife and kids murderers.

I find your take on this a little surprising. You typically are against the Government meddling in our personal lives and don’t seem to be a fan of Making people do what is best for them whether they like it or not. In many states it is perfectly legal to kill a person for entering your home uninvited even just to safeguard your TV. I really can’t imagine anything less the governments business than if I were to decide my quality of life (for whatever reason I want) is such that I would prefer to no longer endure it.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

I'm not avoiding it. OK. Does someone have a right to assist someone else in achieving happiness? I say yes. I know some may not feel that way, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I already answered you. Go back and re-read what I posted.

Now I answered you again. Answer mine which you completely and utterly avoided altogether.
What is a right and where does it come from has to be defined first. You prefer loose language.

Enlighten me.

I did. Please read instead of wasting my time with repeating it.

Still waiting on that AJ thread reply....

What one?

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I did. Please read instead of wasting my time with repeating it.

No you didn't enlighten me. You said it can be summed up in one word. What one word is that?

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

No you didn't enlighten me. You said it can be summed up in one word. What one word is that?

I already did. Please read it.