Alain Delon asks to undergo assisted suicide and writes a farewell message

[marylander1940]

Alain Delon asks to undergo assisted suicide and writes a farewell message | Marca

OP note: I searched Delon and he was briefly mentioned in a short thread, I also don't know if this thread might end up in the politics thread considering the important question it raises. 

 

[mike carey]

So sad that he will pass away. We will all come to that time in our lives. Some will see it coming and will be able to choose their time, like M Delon. Others will have it thrust upon them, ready or not. Grieve his passing, do not resent his choice.

[BuffaloKyle]

I am ok with people requesting it if they have a terminal illness and are suffering. But from reading the article it sounds like he just wants to die. I'm not comfortable with that. A rebuttal will be well he's old and lived his life. So what age then is it ok? 80? 75? 70? 

Edited April 1, 2022 by BuffaloKyle

[foxy]

I’ve always felt we are kinder to our pets than we are to humans. Recently a friend of mine had a much loved dog of 9 years The dog had a terminal illness. After trying various treatments her vet said it was time to let the dog go. The vet made a house call and they put the dog on my friends bed. They made the lighting soft and soothing. Her dog walker was there plus a neighbor who would borrow the dog to play in the park. They all told the dog how much they loved him and stroked his fur as the vet administered a shot and the dog fell asleep and slipped away without any pain surrounded by people who loved him. 
We should all be so fortunate to pass on in such a beautiful way. 
 

[+ nycman]

4 hours ago, BuffaloKyle said:

So what age then is it ok?

In my book, that’s up to the individual to decide. 
Personally, any one over 18, for any reason, is cool with me.
I understand my position is seen as extreme in polite society.
But why do we attempt to extend control over what others choose to do with their bodies?

And I agree. We treat dogs better.

Edited April 1, 2022 by nycman

[+ WilliamM]

4 hours ago, BuffaloKyle said:

I am ok with people requesting it if they have a terminal illness and are suffering. But from reading the article it sounds like he just wants to die. I'm not comfortable with that. A rebuttal will be well he's old and lived his life. So what age then is it ok? 80? 75? 70? 

In a March 19 interview his son Anthony said he would not "execute" his   dad.

Did he change his mind?  And only agree to be there.

[+ SundayZip]

It must take a lot of courage to control the timing and circumstances of your death. For that Alain Delon has my respect. 
 

[Rudynate]

It is not a choice that I could imagine myself making, but it's his life.  Among people who lived through AIDS, it is common to have known someone who had help taking their own life - we're talking men in their 20s and 30s.

[Luv2play]

Here in Canada assisted dying (we don't call it suicide) is legal and now widely accepted at all levels if society. I have had friends opt for it in the last several years since it became legally recognized. 

It is gut wrenching to say goodbye to a friend knowing they will be dead within 48 hours but that is a choice they are entitled to make and I can only accept their decision with grace. 

There but for the grace of God go I.

[jeezifonly]

None of has a choice about how and when we enter the world.

Too many of us have no choice about how we must exist in the world.

Almost everyone has no choice about how and when we depart this world.

A small handful of people look at the big picture from their POV, call bullshit and say “that’s it, I’m done, it’s my choice.”

I applaud their courage and respect their decisions, and I would honor the request of a loved one to go at home, on a blanket, head being stroked, surrounded by family -the same we do for pets. 

The opposition to the idea stems from the (accurate) assessment that once deceased, you are no longer a consumer. Prolonged “life” repeatedly transfers your money to many interests over years. Death only does it once. Not good for the economy. 

Bon voyage, cher Alain. 

[marylander1940]

5 hours ago, SundayZip said:

It must take a lot of courage to control the timing and circumstances of your death. For that Alain Delon has my respect. 
 

Yes, it might take courage but why delaying the inevitable specially when is likely to be costly and painful. 

10 hours ago, BuffaloKyle said:

I am ok with people requesting it if they have a terminal illness and are suffering. But from reading the article it sounds like he just wants to die. I'm not comfortable with that. A rebuttal will be well he's old and lived his life. So what age then is it ok? 80? 75? 70? 

I don't know if I'm comfortable with that but he seems to really want to do it. 

 

[Guest]

I don't have a problem with someone wanting to take his life, even in the absence of terminal illness. It's quite another to ask someone else to assist in this task, however. In jurisdictions where physician-assisted suicide is legal, there is usually a requirement for at least 2 physicians to certify that the patient has a terminal illness before the patient can request such physician assistance. (And, with all respect to @Luv2play, let's at least have enough self-honesty to call this what it is: physician-assisted suicide) When this was passed in California some 4 years or so ago, I, along with most physicians I worked with, made a decision not to participate. There were 3 or 4 physicians in our county who would accept such patients should such requests come. In my over 3 decades working as a physician, there was never a time when I felt like saying to a patient "There's nothing more I can do for you. Have you considered suicide?". Interestingly enough, statistics show that most of the time patients ask for and receive lethal doses of medication, the patients don't use them. They just want a sense of control.

This is not to say that I haven't offered to patients medications which could increase their risk of death, after providing the patients and/or their family with informed consent. However, the intention was always to relieve pain or suffering, not to off the patient. For example, some patients with advanced dementia are up all night screaming in terror. Antipsychotics can relieve this symptom, but they do tend to hasten mortality. Unless the patient had advanced directives which addressed this, I would ask the person with the DPA (durable power of attorney for healthcare) or other decision maker (most commonly spouse or child) "There are medications which can help <patient's name> with his or her symptoms, but life expectancy tends to be shorter for elderly on those medications. Is <patient's name> the type of person who would want therapy to relieve symptoms, or did he/she value length of life over symptom relief?" 

So I have a major problem with both (1) a person with a non-terminal illness asking someone else to assist with his suicide as well as (2) the legality/moral propriety of offering such assistance if asked. No one needs someone else to end his life (unless he's severely disabled such as quadriplegia or blindness), and it is neither legal nor proper in my view. If anyone were to ask for such help from myself, I would view this as a call for help, and simply explore the issue further with the person. From what I can gather, Alain Delon isn't even in any kind of severe or uncontrollable physical pain.

 

Edited April 2, 2022 by Unicorn

[robberbaron4u]

In the course of the last decade I have served as the primary caregiver for my mother, my maiden aunt, my bachelor uncle and both of my business partners. My junior business partner deceased after a long, valient struggle with MS; the other, whose sport was polo, following a series of debilitating strokes; my maiden aunt made 100 years of age; my bachelor uncle 98 years of age; my mother deceased, after five years as a hopeless invalid, at the age of 99 last year. None of them ever made complaint of their situation but each called "it" on their own time, and, although very difficult for me,  I deferred to their desire, death with a full measure of comfort and dignity, in each circumstance. To have continued them, if you will, in pain and suffering would have been an inhumane act on my part by my thought, and, I am hopeful that some considerate soul will show me the same kindness when the time comes for me to "go home" with due speed.

 

 

 

[Luv2play]

12 hours ago, Unicorn said:

I don't have a problem with someone wanting to take his life, even in the absence of terminal illness. It's quite another to ask someone else to assist in this task, however. In jurisdictions where physician-assisted suicide is legal, there is usually a requirement for at least 2 physicians to certify that the patient has a terminal illness before the patient can request such physician assistance. (And, with all respect to @Luv2play, let's at least have enough self-honesty to call this what it is: physician-assisted suicide) When this was passed in California some 4 years or so ago, I, along with most physicians I worked with, made a decision not to participate. There were 3 or 4 physicians in our county who would accept such patients should such requests come. In my over 3 decades working as a physician, there was never a time when I felt like saying to a patient "There's nothing more I can do for you. Have you considered suicide?". Interestingly enough, statistics show that most of the time patients ask for and receive lethal doses of medication, the patients don't use them. They just want a sense of control.

This is not to say that I haven't offered to patients medications which could increase their risk of death, after providing the patients and/or their family with informed consent. However, the intention was always to relieve pain or suffering, not to off the patient. For example, some patients with advanced dementia are up all night screaming in terror. Antipsychotics can relieve this symptom, but they do tend to hasten mortality. Unless the patient had advanced directives which addressed this, I would ask the person with the DPA (durable power of attorney for healthcare) or other decision maker (most commonly spouse or child) "There are medications which can help <patient's name> with his or her symptoms, but life expectancy tends to be shorter for elderly on those medications. Is <patient's name> the type of person who would want therapy to relieve symptoms, or did he/she value length or life over symptom relief?" 

So I have a major problem with both (1) a person with a non-terminal illness asking someone else to assist with his suicide as well as (2) the legality/moral propriety of offering such assistance if asked. No one needs someone else to end his life (unless he's severely disabled such as quadriplegia or blindness), and it is neither legal nor proper in my view. If anyone were to ask for such help from myself, I would view this as a call for help, and simply explore the issue further with the person. From what I can gather, Alain Delon isn't even in any kind of severe or uncontrollable physical pain.

 

I'm afraid our Unicorn got it wrong about medically assistance in dying legislation in Canada. It allows for a physician to perform euthanasia, which is different from assisted suicide where the physician just supplies the prescription for the lethal drugs. Words matter especially when it comes to legislation.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Luv2play said:

I'm afraid our Unicorn got it wrong about medically assistance in dying legislation in Canada. It allows for a physician to perform euthanasia, which is different from assisted suicide where the physician just supplies the prescription for the lethal drugs. Words matter especially when it comes to legislation.

Well, I know that in California or Oregon, the physician typically prescribes lethal combinations of medications, and the patient takes them. I never did such a thing myself, but I'm guessing this would be some combination of barbiturates such as secobarbital, opiates such as fentanyl, benzodiazepines such as triazolam, probably downed with a Long Island Iced Tea for extra assurances. What do physicians do in Canada? Start an IV and inject a vial of fast-acting insulin? That's even creepier in my view, and I can't imagine doing such a thing. 

[Guest]

Update--I did look this up on Wikipedia, and it looks as though doctors actively administer the meds via IV (which I find highly creepy).

"Laws on assisted suicide

Suicide was decriminalized in Canada in 1972. Physician-assisted suicide has been legal in the Province of Quebec, where it is referred to as "medical aid in dying", since June 5, 2014. It became legal in the entire country in June 2016 after the criminal prohibition was struck down. Subsequently, new legislation was passed in Parliament pursuant to a 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision.

Before it had been amended in 2016, the Criminal Code of Canada stated in section 241(b) that "Every one who ... (b) aids or abets a person to commit suicide, whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offense and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years"

On June 15, 2012, in a case filed by Gloria Taylor, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled that provisions in the Criminal Code prohibiting doctor-assisted suicide were unconstitutional as they apply to severely disabled patients capable of giving consent. The court ruled that the Criminal Code provisions "infringe s. 7 [and s. 15 ] of the Charter, and are of no force and effect to the extent that they prohibit physician-assisted suicide by a medical practitioner in the context of a physician-patient relationship". Moreover, the court found that the relevant sections were legislatively overbroad, had a disproportionate effect on people with disabilities, and was "grossly disproportionate to the objectives it is meant to accomplish."

The landmark decision on this topic was provided by the Supreme Court of Canada on February 6, 2015, in the Carter v. Canada (Attorney General) case. The unanimous judgment overturned the legal ban on doctor-assisted suicide. However, the court allowed the Government of Canada 12 months to enact the necessary legislation (such as revising the Criminal Code) to make doctor-assisted suicide legal across the country...

The Canadian Medical Association describes MAID as "one of the most complex and ethically challenging issues facing Canadian physicians". A 2015 survey indicated that 29% of Canadian doctors surveyed would consider providing MAID while 63% would refuse. The extent of conscientious objection to providing MAID continues to be debated on issues such as whether objecting physicians must refer patients to a doctor who is willing to provide MAID and whether institutions have a right to refuse to provide MAID services...."

In any case, it looks as though the vast majority of Canadian doctors agree with me.

Edited April 2, 2022 by Unicorn

[Luv2play]

11 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

Well, I know that in California or Oregon, the physician typically prescribes lethal combinations of medications, and the patient takes them. I never did such a thing myself, but I'm guessing this would be some combination of barbiturates such as secobarbital, opiates such as fentanyl, benzodiazepines such as triazolam, probably downed with a Long Island Iced Tea for extra assurances. What do physicians do in Canada? Start an IV and inject a vial of fast-acting insulin? That's even creepier in my view, and I can't imagine doing such a thing. 

I've never asked about the details. A dear friend of mine had terminal cancer  at the age of 84 several years ago. She was a very wealthy woman and always did everything with great style. 

Even her departure was classy. Three nights before her chosen time, she attended a final night of theatre, although she was obviously struggling.  When I held her hands to say goodbye, all she said was my name and "its the end of the road".

The director of the theatre presented her with a bouquet of flowers and she received a standing ovation from the audience. She and her family had supported the theatre since its inception. She had always lived her life on her own terms. And that's the way she died.

[Luv2play]

12 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

Update--I did look this up on Wikipedia, and it looks as though doctors actively administer the meds via IV (which I find highly creepy).

"Laws on assisted suicide

Suicide was decriminalized in Canada in 1972. Physician-assisted suicide has been legal in the Province of Quebec, where it is referred to as "medical aid in dying", since June 5, 2014. It became legal in the entire country in June 2016 after the criminal prohibition was struck down. Subsequently, new legislation was passed in Parliament pursuant to a 2015 Supreme Court of Canada decision.

Before it had been amended in 2016, the Criminal Code of Canada stated in section 241(b) that "Every one who ... (b) aids or abets a person to commit suicide, whether suicide ensues or not, is guilty of an indictable offense and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years"

On June 15, 2012, in a case filed by Gloria Taylor, the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled that provisions in the Criminal Code prohibiting doctor-assisted suicide were unconstitutional as they apply to severely disabled patients capable of giving consent. The court ruled that the Criminal Code provisions "infringe s. 7 [and s. 15 ] of the Charter, and are of no force and effect to the extent that they prohibit physician-assisted suicide by a medical practitioner in the context of a physician-patient relationship". Moreover, the court found that the relevant sections were legislatively overbroad, had a disproportionate effect on people with disabilities, and was "grossly disproportionate to the objectives it is meant to accomplish."

The landmark decision on this topic was provided by the Supreme Court of Canada on February 6, 2015, in the Carter v. Canada (Attorney General) case. The unanimous judgment overturned the legal ban on doctor-assisted suicide. However, the court allowed the Government of Canada 12 months to enact the necessary legislation (such as revising the Criminal Code) to make doctor-assisted suicide legal across the country...

The Canadian Medical Association describes MAID as "one of the most complex and ethically challenging issues facing Canadian physicians". A 2015 survey indicated that 29% of Canadian doctors surveyed would consider providing MAID while 63% would refuse. The extent of conscientious objection to providing MAID continues to be debated on issues such as whether objecting physicians must refer patients to a doctor who is willing to provide MAID and whether institutions have a right to refuse to provide MAID services...."

In any case, it looks as though the vast majority of Canadian doctors agree with me.

That 2015 survey was taken just around the time the law changed. Today there is much more acceptance of MAID and I believe many more physicians are now available to administer it. I haven't seen recent figures though.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Luv2play said:

...The director of the theatre presented her with a bouquet of flowers and she received a standing ovation from the audience....

Why do I have a strong suspicion that (1) the audience wasn't told she was about to commit suicide, and (2) the theater stood to inherit a large sum upon her death? Of course, charitable organizations almost always lavish praise over their wealthy benefactors. It's not surprising that the organization was happy about her hastening her own demise. I don't see that as a valid endorsement of physician-assisted dying, as you call it. If anything, it makes the whole thing a whole lot creepier, because they're essentially goading her on for financial gain. Have you ever seen the movie Soylent Green?

 

[foxy]

Thinking back to my post about my friend’s dog who was given an injection by her vet I wonder what it was? Her dog just fell asleep and died painlessly in about 5 minutes. If it works for dogs I assume it would work for humans also. I guess in certain cases it could be done without the aid of a physician.

And on another note. Many people might accept euthanasia if a person had an incurable disease and was in terrible physical pain. 
But what about mental anguish? Severe depression, I believe, is in many ways the most terrible disease. One could argue that with therapy and possibly the right combination of antidepressants depression can be alleviated if not cured. Yet I’ve known a number of people who after many years of therapy and various antidepressants are still suffering. 
I suppose one can also argue that a severely depressed person is not capable of making such a serious decision to end their life. 
So who gets to decide? Personally I’d rather it was my decision.

Edited April 2, 2022 by foxy

[Luv2play]

3 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Why do I have a strong suspicion that (1) the audience wasn't told she was about to commit suicide, and (2) the theater stood to inherit a large sum upon her death? Of course, charitable organizations almost always lavish praise over their wealthy benefactors. It's not surprising that the organization was happy about her hastening her own demise. I don't see that as a valid endorsement of physician-assisted dying, as you call it. If anything, it makes the whole thing a whole lot creepier, because they're essentially goading her on for financial gain. Have you ever seen the movie Soylent Green?

 

What a twisted mind could produce such comments. Surprisingly coming from a physician. Oh well. Won't bother responding further. 

 

 

 

 

[+ WilliamM]

4 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Why do I have a strong suspicion that (1) the audience wasn't told she was about to commit suicide, and (2) the theater stood to inherit a large sum upon her death? Of course, charitable organizations almost always lavish praise over their wealthy benefactors. It's not surprising that the organization was happy about her hastening her own demise. I don't see that as a valid endorsement of physician-assisted dying, as you call it. If anything, it makes the whole thing a whole lot creepier, because they're essentially goading her on for financial gain. Have you ever seen the movie Soylent Green?

 

Why's creepy about it?

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, WilliamM said:

Why's creepy about it?

Ugh, yuck! You honestly don't feel it's not only creepy but in extraordinarily bad taste for a charitable organization who's a major beneficiary in a person's will or trust to be "celebrating" that person's upcoming suicide? I find this practice loathsome, and feel this should probably be illegal. When there are laws allowing for physician-assisted suicide, the laws almost always state that anyone who stands to financially benefit from the person's death cannot be involved in the process, and they also specify that the person can bow out at the last minute if the person wishes. A kind of ceremony like this (with a "standing ovation") puts pressure on the soon-to-be decedent to carry through the process, and I find it morally reprehensible. How would you feel if your mother had announced that she intended to commit suicide, and you heard that a beneficiary charitable organization was holding a ceremony for her to applaud her decision? I definitely know how I would feel. 

My mother had advanced dementia in her final years, and there were many buzzards flying around her as her dementia progressed. Even as she didn't know day from night, charitable organizations, who never cared about her previously, were eager to tell her what a wonderful person she was. Had my mother told me she was considering suicide, I'd have a long talk with her, and probably try to see if there were other alternatives to her decision. If she had been dead-set on her decision, I suppose I would have to have accepted it, but I certainly wouldn't be applauding it--I'd be crying and hugging her, telling her how much I'd miss her. 

[+ nycman]

8 hours ago, Unicorn said:

it looks as though doctors actively administer the meds via IV (which I find highly creepy)

And which I find highly humane. 

Thankfully there is room enough in today’s world for both opinions.

Again, in my opinion…..we treat dogs better.

[+ WilliamM]

2 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Ugh, yuck! You honestly don't feel it's not only creepy but in extraordinarily bad taste for a charitable organization who's a major beneficiary in a person's will or trust to be "celebrating" that person's upcoming suicide? I find this practice loathsome, and feel this should probably be illegal. When there are laws allowing for physician-assisted suicide, the laws almost always state that anyone who stands to financially benefit from the person's death cannot be involved in the process, and they also specify that the person can bow out at the last minute if the person wishes. A kind of ceremony like this (with a "standing ovation") puts pressure on the soon-to-be decedent to carry through the process, and I find it morally reprehensible. How would you feel if your mother had announced that she intended to commit suicide, and you heard that a beneficiary charitable organization was holding a ceremony for her to applaud her decision? I definitely know how I would feel. 

My mother had advanced dementia in her final years, and there were many buzzards flying around her as her dementia progressed. Even as she didn't know day from night, charitable organizations, who never cared about her previously, were eager to tell her what a wonderful person she was. Had my mother told me she was considering suicide, I'd have a long talk with her, and probably try to see if there were other alternatives to her decision. If she had been dead-set on her decision, I suppose I would have to have accepted it, but I certainly wouldn't be applauding it--I'd be crying and hugging her, telling her how much I'd miss her. 

My mom was honest with me in saying she lived too long as she approached her late 80s. She died at almost 92. So if she considered assisted suicide, I would honor her choice.

My  mom greatly missed her seven older  brothers and sisters.