Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?

Yes, of course they should have that right. We don't allow our sick animals to suffer. If someone is terminal and in immense pain and anguish then they should have the right to request euthanasia.

Yes as long as there is a system in place so it can’t be misused (by doctors to save spaces for instance). The vulnerable patient should be protected.

Yes, but the rights of disabled people must be sacrosanct to ensure they are not pressured or obligated in any way.

Yes, if an extensive psychological assessment identifies capacity to make the decision and raises an issue regarding the person's quality of life

Yes as long as they can pass a test to show they understand the choice, then anybody should be allowed to die if they want to.

I think there should be a balanced approach of psychological intervention and right to choose if diagnosed with a terminal illness to die in a way that person chooses.

No, bureaucracy and mistakes will cause people who should not be allowed assisted suicide to undergo the process.

yes, if they will not survive their illness and have been proven to fully understand the choice

Yes as long as multi[le doctors are happy that there is no chance they will survive and after having a psychological examination to show they fully understand their choice

No, but they can be allowed to travel to a country where it is legal or to refuse further treatment.

Yes, but only if they fully understand the choice they are making and they have a less than 50% chance to survive their illness, or are suffering from extreme pain due to being kept alive

Yes, but only after a period of time. They should be assessed before waiting weeks/months in case they suddenly regret their decision or there is any improvement in their condition. People who are indisputably terminal should have a reduced time period, or it is nullified entirely depending on circumstance. People unable to communicate for themselves should not be considered for this, as they may be pressured by their family.

When at the end of their life and no other outcome is possible, when someone has minths or weeks left then a person should be able to choose when and how they die when possible.

If it was possible to walk alongside these patients to achieve their best lifestyle and strengthen them in so many ways and ultimately have the grace to accept hopefully an intelligent and well-thought out life decision.

Yes as long as it can be proved they’ve not done this under duress and a professional is sure there’s definitely no cure

I feel euthanasia should be legal in UK but only in terminal cases with patients and multiple medical staff recommendation/ agreement that its in patients best interest.

No, it is better for lives to be ended naturally, and give these patients all the health and social care they need, funding them by a substantial amount.

No but if they are terminal Ill and in pain they should be able to take pain relief that may shorten there life.

There should be a list of a few specific illnesses where it’s allowed, and a detailed procedure for ensuring that no one has pressured them into making the decision.

Yes but with a holistic examination to determine if their condition is treatable to at least a point where they have an acceptable quality of life (and if so why is it not being treated and address that) along with the psychological profile, and any pressures that could be leading them to make the decision and instead offer support to those (eg. If they are so poor that they believe death is a better alternative to becoming destitute - there are documented cases of this happening in various regions where assisted suicide is legal)

Difficult but eventually it would be misused by certain individuals and during coved old disabled and the more vulnerable were left to die and the elderly now are seen as disposable even when they have given 52 years of working and paying tax to go to the scrots ie srongers on benefits

Yes, but only if there are strict regulations that ensure that it is in fact that persons own choice

Yes but it should be the most regulated and safeguarded thing there is, and no government body, including job centres, should be allowed to suggest it.

Yes, but decisions like this should be discussed with a doctor when your an in mind adult. You prepare for the future just like organ donations etc...

Yes, but only if they have no prospect of recovery from extreme pain. Where possible, they should pass a psychological examination. If that is not possible, then the family would need to make a decision.

yes if it is the most ethical thing to do due to the terminal illness making them feel tourtured and the person really want that and it should be peaceful painless only with their consent

Yes, but only for terminal illness, blindness, paralysis, MND, chronic incurable pain or in any combination

Yes, but there should be legal safeguards in the legislation to prevent people being pressured into it for fear of being a financial burden.

Yes, but only for those who're terminally ill, blind, paralyzed, in chronic pain or in any combination

Yes, but only after heavy psychological examination to show they fully understand their choice with very strict guidelines.

Yes - if they prove they, and their families fully understand this choice and there is no chance of survival

Yes if terminal and in agonising pain

Yes, but at a particular no point of return of their illness, and only after checking that the individual fully understands the choice

If you have evidence such as video footage to prove that the sick patient has approved on the assistance.

No, because there's evidence that in countries where assisted suicide is legalised, patients feel pressured to relief their families / their communities of the 'burden' by dying.

Yes, and to anyone else who wants it. The right to a humane death should be an equally important human right as the right to life.

Yes but after psychological examination and if there is no change of survival. There should be no coercing

Only if it causes them more harm to be alive then to have a swift assisted suicide would be more humane.

Yes, but only if their quality of life is significantly reduced and the people closest in their lives are made aware

Only after psychological examination and after it is proven their is no chance they will survive their illness

Not legally, but each death should be investigated and if the Coroner is satisfied that no pressure was put on the patient then no charges should be brought.

This raises very complex moral questions that need more consideration and qualifications than is available in a short questionnaire.

Yes, along with psychological and holistic support through this choice and for those around them effected

Yes, but only if there are extremely tight safeguards which will eliminate the effect of external pressures.

They should have the right to refuse artificial life support and a psychological exam to show they fully understand this choice.

Yes, but only if they fully understand the choice and that their quality of life is severely compromised

Yes, but only in cases where they can prove they understand, cannot live without assistance or are too handicapped to live a comfortable life/mentally deficient & always suffering, however in the last case there should be homes available for their care. One should not need to live in pain if they do not wish to.

Yes, It’s more humane that way. But make sure they fully understand their choice.

Yes, but only if they are of sound mind to make this decision independently, or have previously agreed to it in an advance care plan.

Yes but only if there’s no chance they will survive their illness and only after a psychological examination to show they fully understand this choice

Yes, but only if there is no chance there is no chance they will survive their illness and only after a psychological examination to show they full understand this choice

Yes, but governments should not be involved as this could lead to them phasing out low income citizens or people they see as undesirables.

Should be allowed to refuse artificial life support, fully understand their choice or no chance of survival

Yes, but only if they are capable of understanding and giving consent to the choice. It should be theirs and theirs alone - hospitals, medical professionals, and governments should have no direct role or influence in deciding whether a person lives or dies

Yes, but only if there is no chance I will survive the illness and yes, but only after psychological examination to so they fully understand their choice.

I worry about dilution of the sanctity of life, but ultimately I think it's down to the individual and their doctor regardless of my own feelings on the matter.

If it is their choice and they are 100% happy then let them make their decision who are we to prolong someones suffering

More should be done to secure adequate pain control and support in end stage of life. Additionally, more should be done to alleviate mental suffering (which can also result in desire for end of life).

No and increasing palliative care funding via NHS and Hospices will improve quality of life for those with terminal illnesses

I fear pressure from the public purse to end life instead of costing the taxpayer- end of life should be a humane choice.

The government shouldn't have control over your body, but also the government should heavily oppose it.

I 100% agree with this as it solves and tackles many problems whilst making death a lot easier on families

Maybe in the chance they won't servive.

Someone's mortality should fall fully in their own hands, even those of a healthy body but suffering mind.

Yes there should be some testing or a prior agreement out in place which outline in what circumstances they would want to end their life in case they lose capacity etc

Yes, only when they are already close, have no chance to survive, and are suffering more currently. Psychological tests required.

No, and doctors who preform that should be in prison.

No, this can easily be manipulated to promote suicide as a cheaper method of treatment or to remove dissidents.

Yes, only if there is no chance they will survive their illness AND after a psychological examination they fully understand this choice.

Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they fully understand this choice with ability to sign this for future needs should they loose capacity

Yes, as long as their children are under the care of trusted family/friends

Yes, but only if they are in the final stages

Yes, but only if they fully understand the choice, there is no chance they will survive and the illness is causing a serious impact on their quality of life

Also a very complicated issue that I haven't fully decided on my opinion on

If there's no chance they will survive the illness and they've had a psychological assessment

Yes, but only if life cannot be lived in a happy way because of illness.

Genuinely undecided about this issue.

Yes, everyone should be allowed assisted suicide

Yes but with conditions

Put them to sleep and take off the life support

No and they should not be allowed to refuse life support

If the evidence both medically and psychological is overwhelming in indicating there will be no chance of recovery

No, system would be open to abuse.

No, as it fundamentally alters the patient-doctor relationship and has led - in countries who have legalised euthanasia - to elderly being pressured into taking their own lives to reduce strain on health care. It is open to significant medical abuse.

I think this needs to be handled with delicacy as emotions in these situations can be highly erratic. The choice needs to rest with the family.

If in extreme pain

This question will asked to the public via Liquid Democracy

No but they should understand that they can refuse active treatment and receive only palliative care as a free choice.

Yes- assisted suicide and euthanasia aren't decisions for government involvement.

I do not agree with suicide however.. if we are not masters of our own fate, then what else do we have

Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they know what they're choosing - and in the case of mental diseases like dementia, this decision ought to be made by the patient upon diagnosis, in advance of mental deterioration.

if they go off to switzerland, yes.

yes if they are suffering really badly

Yes, but also allow for those who are blind or paralyzed.

I Don’t Like This Question

I feel that a course of psychological screening and an in depth analysis of the patient should be first to determine ones mental stability. Having gone through said process it would then be based on a psychological evaluation as to whether euthanasia should be allowed but yes I believe under the right circumstances and thorough screening that euthanasia should be allowed but only if they are mentally stable to make such decisions or if said decision has be written out for patients who are no longer able to communicate

Yes, if in pain and no chance of reverse

yes, but only after a psychological exam, and if they are in pain that won't get any better

No, but increase training in, and provision of, effective palliative care, pain relief and psychological services