Comments on: How Not to Respond to the Nicklinson Verdict http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/08/23/how-not-to-respond-to-the-nicklinson-verdict/ Journal of Medical Ethics blog Thu, 18 Apr 2013 03:49:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Iain Brassington http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/08/23/how-not-to-respond-to-the-nicklinson-verdict/#comment-4639 Iain Brassington Thu, 27 Dec 2012 19:57:00 +0000 http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/?p=1952#comment-4639 Because it’s plainly not the case that people who oppose assisted dying have less compassion than al- Qaida. That’s just a wild statement – so wild that it doesn’t even have rhetorical force.
And it’s also plainly not true that doctors who refuse to help patients are torturers – I assume you mean refuse to help them to die; but it’s false either way – unless you subscribe to the notion that a failure to assist is just the same as positively harming. But that’s an absurd statement, too…

]]> By: Ayame Sohma http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/08/23/how-not-to-respond-to-the-nicklinson-verdict/#comment-4638 Ayame Sohma Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:31:00 +0000 http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/?p=1952#comment-4638 How so? A bullet is at least painless. Or to put it another way: the “Care” not Killing Alliance’s position is:

Suicide by cop, YES.
Suicide by starvation, YES.
Suiciide by merciful barbiturate overdose: HELL NO!

]]> By: Iain Brassington http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/08/23/how-not-to-respond-to-the-nicklinson-verdict/#comment-4598 Iain Brassington Thu, 01 Nov 2012 11:15:00 +0000 http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/?p=1952#comment-4598 Hmmm… I suspect you may be overstating the case just a smidge… ;)

]]> By: Keith Tayler http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2012/08/23/how-not-to-respond-to-the-nicklinson-verdict/#comment-4526 Keith Tayler Sat, 25 Aug 2012 14:36:00 +0000 http://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/?p=1952#comment-4526 I agree that the BHA have not understood the legal and political issues. I am also in agreement with your previous blog on the points of judge made law and the need for parliament to change the existing law. However I am not sure parliament is up to the job given the complexity of the task of protecting the vulnerable within our massive health service with its extremely poor record of patient and staff protection. It worries me that the media, especially the BBC, are so pro-AS and have not begun to properly consider the Devil in the detail of an AS bill. As with the second half of your blog, it tends to get distracted by religious extremists. Carvath raises one or two legitimate concerns but they are drowned out by his confrontational style and bible bashing. We should, for example, consider how selfish someone is being when they demand to be killed. All in all this is not a good climate for parliament to debate a bill. Perhaps parliament should legislate for some reforms to health care (implementation of the Dilnot proposal, independent complaints procedure, etc.) before considering an AS bill.

]]>