Personally I believe that they should be able to choose. They are the ones who will be most affected, and in some cases if there are those around them who want them to live their [the terminally ill person's] opinion could be forgotton.
However, after reading your first comment, I agree.

I said that they should have the right to die.

My reasons behind this being, if you have a progressive, aggressive, or incurable disease you would rather leave your family with the image of you still able to do things on your own, instead of deteriorate to end up unmobilized, in a coma, etc.

[Now that I came to think about this, it was harder to explain then I thought. -_-;]

I believe we should die as we wish

My best friends dad literally just passed not a week ago over two years with fighting from cancer and although I voted to having an assissted suicide if you are mentally stable and have support from family and friends, I think you should never give up hope that you could get better. Never stop fighting. Just like my friends dad did, he was put admitted into a hospice a week before he passed and even then he didn't stop fighting, and he fought longer than the docters ever thought he would.

I know death is a hard thing to deal with and these past weeks have been hard for me, so I can't imagine what my friend and her family is going through, but, logically, death happens to all of us and the only thing you can do accept that but fight to live another day. And if you know the fight is a lost cause and you want to cease the pain that not only you are in but your family? Then I don't see why you can't have that option available to you if your mentally stable to make that decision.

Ok, your death my cause your family pain, but what about your family having to see YOU in pain every single day, having to watch you get worse and worse and knowing there is nothing they can do...at least, once you pass, your at peace and they can finally get on with their lives remembering the good memories of you rather than the ones of you in pain and misery.

Before my friends dad passed, she confided in me that the worse thing wasn't knowing that her dad was dying and that within the week he would no longer be with her but, the fact that she had to visit him everyday, just watching him get weaker and weaker.

So yeah, if someone has an uncurable disease that they are surely going to die from should they be allowed to end their own life? Of course they should, with the right support from friends, family and docs, there shouldnt be a problem.

Long...but true, argument thereeee

PC

This bout the woman who's been on the telly all week?

I do believe that you can't look at a broad topic like this... there's always going to be different circumstances... it really depends on what's best... some people might want to die but still have a chance to live and some people might be suffering so much and death's inevitable. Sometimes a member of the family may not be able to let go of the person, sometimes they're just trying to get it over with already... So there really is no answer you can just bubble in unless you view the world in black and white...

I don't know how it works it the UK, or maybe it's the same everywhere, but I think that anyone has the right to their own life. That supposes, of course, that the individual is not responsible for or depended on by anyone.

For example: a father with 3 kids and an unemployed wife.

The only reason that I can see that it is even "illegal" for anyone to commit suicide, is that, once you're gone, the government can no longer tax you.

As long as you don't make a huge deal about it, or make a big mess, why else would it be illegal to take one of the few things that genuinely BELONGS to you and only you?

They have a right to choose to die or not, but a hearing is a good idea, just to check that they are of sound mind and this is what they want themselves and they haven't been influenced by others. Obviously, if they have cancer and don't want to go through all that suffering and hardship then let them choose. It's their life, surely not letting them is a breach of their rights?

ahh, I had to debate this subject last easter and b the end of our time [actually we all went over time] we had no winning team, I was pro assisted suicide, we argued that if the person was deemed mentally stable [or as mentally stable as you can be when faced with this decision] and if the chances of survival [if something is medically wrong with you] are below a certain percent then there should be nothing to stop someone deciding to end their own life. Why si it that someone who is ill at home can make that decision and not be stopped but the moment there is a doctor around its not allowed? You cant make laws against it because that would be interfering too much in personal decisions. There were loads of other points we argued but i forget now >,.,<

I think that if people have a mental or medical exam before being allowed to chose if they can die or not would be alright, because we could then find out what kind of things they are thinking, and if it would be worth letting them suffer for longer, then ending their life, or letting them choose when they want to go.

Personally, I am interested about how they die, with that dignitos thing.
What do they do? :/