Comments on: Choosing a clean break with life is a basic human right

By: Norman Lycan

Norman Lycan — Thu, 07 May 2009 22:53:58 +0000

barry duke,

It's true, what the other contributers said, death by suffocation is easily detected in autopsy. Still, the best method for undetected suicide is potassium chloride. Only detectable if they are specifically looking for it, which of course they would be in the case of a terminal patient. Not because a coroner is suspecting foul play, but, because insurance companies pay for the autopsy on all claims. Well worth their investment. Denying just one claim will pay for hundreds of autopsies. You can't win.

That's why euthanasia needs to be rethought. It needs to be legal.

By: Buffy

Buffy — Thu, 07 May 2009 21:04:33 +0000

I don't understand why the "sanctity of life" crew is so insistent on forcing people to endure long, torturous deaths. It's yet another way they prove what sadists they are.

By: remigius

remigius — Thu, 07 May 2009 18:54:12 +0000

Too true. Also we know that insurance companies want to use genetic information as a way of screening potential policy holders.

What is the betting that they will use attendance at a 'suicide workshop' as a means to preclude payment on a life premium where the actual cause of death is disputed?

By: remigius

remigius — Thu, 07 May 2009 18:45:45 +0000

Yeah. My reaction was…'What a vindictive cunt!'

By: Stonyground

Stonyground — Thu, 07 May 2009 18:31:07 +0000

The insurance issue is one that hadn't occured to me. This is surely another reason for the law to be changed. I think that someone has mentioned this before but you would be prosecuted for cruelty if you failed to have a pet put to sleep and allowed it to die in pain.

By: roger

roger — Thu, 07 May 2009 18:23:23 +0000

oops, right you are… still, did you see that statement at the end by the pro-death guy? we *want* them to feel pain, the nitrogen would be 'too easy' for an execution..

By: remigius

remigius — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:13:47 +0000

Wrong comedian. It was Michael Portillo!

By: remigius

remigius — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:39:15 +0000

If the gas used is helium then concentrations will be present in the blood for a time after death. Helium is very rare naturally. Although it is the second most abundant element in the universe it only constitutes 5 parts per million of our atmosphere. There is no natural reason why helium should be present in the body.

Secondly, such a method would also lead to cerebral hypoxia, cyanosis and the formation of lactic acid in tissue. All of which could be used to establish cause of death.

I think he is hoping that a verdict of natural causes would be accepted as a cause of death without the need for an autopsy. If the deceased is very elderly or sick and there is no obvious signs of trauma then such a suicide may go unnoticed. However insurance companies usually need to establish the cause before a payout.

By: barry_duke

barry_duke — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:27:49 +0000

Interesting point, Remigius. Is Dr Nitschke therefore wrong in saying that this method is completely undetectable?

By: roger

roger — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:10:53 +0000

Did you see the Stephen Fry program on finding a human way to execute people? it seems that nitrogen given without oxygen through a face mask is a quick and painless way to go… if you wanted a comedy death you could go for helium instead.