It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The coming remodeling of British view on Death

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:08 AM
We all hear that money is an issue on every front, except when it comes to financing the rich and giving more money to the richer. This worldwide practice has a price: that on cutting on services.

Let's take the hospitals. Let's think of old people. Let's think of sick people. Let's think of old sick people.

Now, look at the dates the BBC wants to air their programs showing real deaths. On May 12th, they will air a program talking about the life of a human, and in one of the part, they will show a man dying from cancer.
This summer, it will be someone taking its own life to escape the sickness impairing him.

"I know that there are those who feel that showing a human death on television is wrong, whatever the circumstances. Although I respect this point of view, I think there is a case to be made for filming a peaceful, natural death — a view shared by many who work closely with the dying," Mosley said.

Let's see how nice a cancer patient is, when dying... But it's a peaceful death my as$, yeah! Not with cancer! Morphine slowly kills you, it's a "legal" form of euthanasia as morphine will gradually slow your body functions until you die. NOT the cancer!!!

Critics have questioned the ethics of the BBC showing a death onscreen — albeit a natural death in Inside the Human Body — with this latest controversy arriving just weeks after the public broadcaster was blasted as "a cheerleader" for assisted suicide by opponents of euthanasia. Earlier this month, details emerged about the forthcoming BBC production Terry Pratchett: Choosing to Die. Presented by the bestselling British fantasy author, who revealed he'd been diagnosed with a rare form of Alzheimer's disease in 2007, the documentary about euthanasia will include a scene of Pratchett sitting at the bedside of an ill man who takes his own life via a cocktail of drugs. It is slated to air later this summer.

Why not follow with a debilitating disease ending with a respectful assisted suicide?

Plant the germ, and water!

Next, we will save on prisons, and make money with it by creating DeathRow TV?

I just can't wait to see the reality show where drivers will be given points when hitting particular groups of people, just like in the movie of the 70's.

England, you are about to be proposed to kill your elderly and your handicapped! Don't fall prey to this! It will open the doors to engineered euthanasia with narrower targets, overtime! And then the world will follow...

Link to article

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:18 AM
hey !
running man was a cool movie!!!
so was death race
so was escape from absolom

ok that adam sandler movie sucked and mean machine (which was really the same movie)
and green mile

criminals have the right to star in reality shows too!!!

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:19 AM
reply to post by NowanKenubi

There have been documentaries on UK tv before showing real deaths, acts of euthanasia etc though not from the BBC if I remember correctly. It's important that things like this are shown after the watershed in my opinion so that children do not see it accidentally or without their parents' permission. That being said I don't see an issue with the BBC showing things like this, they are real issues that people need to know about, as long as there is no bias in the documentary and it looks at all opinions fairly I have no issue with it being shown.
As for the motive regarding them showing such documentaries I doubt it is to condition people into accepting death as a result of cost cuts.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:55 AM
reply to post by questcequecest

I'm actually a bit surprised that some sort of "convict" reality tv show hasn't been done yet.

Maybe they're just waiting for the technology to catch up to the movie "Gamer".

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:09 AM
reply to post by NowanKenubi

Mate, wake up. That's not what's happening.

Sounds like you are trying to push your fears of a social healthcare system here, just like what a bunch of uninformed Americans thought would happen to the elderly in the US if they adopted a UK-styled healthcare system many moons ago.

No one is advocating "death" to the elderly or the handicapped here. No one. You have to understand, Europeans and the UK are far more open to sensitive issues than Americans are; death, sex, adult themes, etc. - the sorts that make Americans shout at the top of their lungs when shown on tv about immorality and the like.

This broadcast isn't about trying to convince people that killing the elderly or handicapped is good. It's showing the process one person has undergone to reach the stage where *he*, or sound mind, cannot endure the pain and torment of his illness. Which is, IMO, his right to choose. Not yours or mine or the govt.

Stop trying to stir up fear - we have far worse on telly. It's called "Heartbeat"

edit on 27-4-2011 by noonebutme because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-4-2011 by noonebutme because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:15 AM
reply to post by noonebutme

I gotta give props to you for nailing it on the head.

What you said is exactly the reason why America will never be an open-minded, rational nation of people. As long as organized religion is allowed to control the debate over assisted suicide (and morality and just about everything else),we will never be a truly free nation.

People should have the right to end their lives if there is no true hope for recovery and if their only choice other than death is to remain a vegetable while their selfish family members cling to their side for eternity.

Have the religious folks even stopped to think about this part?

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:23 AM
I think the debate on assisted suicide is one worth having. I have very mixed views on the subject. Part of me believes that one has the right to choose their own death if they are suffering with a terminal illness. on the flip side my fear is that some people wont actually want to die and will do so out of feeling a burden on the family. As someone with a terminal disease, i do fear my dying days and hope that when the time comes I will be made comfortable enough and that the process wont take too long. However, if it drags on and my life becomes so unsufferable that I cant even enjoy the simplest things then I may ask someone to help me on my way. There's no point in suffering for sufferings sake.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:33 AM
reply to post by NowanKenubi

I am having trouble keeping up with you going from a dignified death to people charging around getting points for whopping someone to death with their car, what is going to happen in prisons and what the future holds for world deaths.

I have always believed in euthanasia as a human right. Having sat with a beloved relative as a child whilst they died a painful death frightened me. When our pet, a cat was ill, we took him to the vet and he was put down with us holding him and passed away peacefully. My relative died screaming. That was not and never will be OK with me.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:33 AM
reply to post by The Sword

Cheers, fella.

Yeh, I recall much of the fearmongering that was happening by some of the US population when their healthcare debates were in full force. I was quite surprised at some of the media broadcasts and how they had people suggesting the socialised medicine approach was akin to death camps! I mean, good god.

Of course not all Americans were of the same mind - only a few. But it only takes a few to stir up enough fear to affect the masses when people aren't informed correctly.

And without getting into a pointless US v UK debate, one of the (many) reasons I love my UK, and Europe, is our more tolerant approach to what the US deems "not for tv" topics.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:36 AM
reply to post by Lynda101

That was a moving post, Lynda101. I too have had a very similar experience; the long drawn out death of a human relative compared to having a pet put down.

I loved my grandfather and I loved my dog. When both were terminally ill, my grandfather had to suffer a long painful death, yet my dog, who could no longer eat, was allowed to go to sleep and never wake up.

It makes you wonder: in which instance are we valuing life more?

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:50 AM
Question: If you had a terminal, debilitating, painful illness. Wouldn't you request the right to die? So fas as I can tell, forcing someone to endure further suffering when THEY want to die is beyond cruel.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:55 AM

Originally posted by ATSecretAgent
Question: If you had a terminal, debilitating, painful illness. Wouldn't you request the right to die? So fas as I can tell, forcing someone to endure further suffering when THEY want to die is beyond cruel.

It's an interesting point, Many will put down an animal if it is suffering, yet when it comes to humans it becomes a different story, where trying to keep the person alive as long as possible despite the suffering is the goal.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:01 AM
reply to post by ATSecretAgent

And that's the question that few people can agree on.

Personally, I believe in the right to die when someone is suffering and all current medical therapies fail. If the person in question wants to die, then it's their right. And without sounding callous, what bigger honour could one perform than to aid someone in their request to end their life in such a circumstance?

But the debate comes from the complications and the endless layers of legalese and ramifications from the act. What if the person was NOT of sound mind? What if they were delusional and made a rash decision? What if the diagnosis was wrong? What if tomorrow they found a cure?

I don't think, in current society, we will ever have a complete solution or answer. But, harking back to my previous posts, I think much of Europe/UK are on the right track and are far more open to the idea and far more willing to discuss it than the US.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:09 AM
reply to post by notsofunnyguy

yeah gamer was cool!
in australia 'they' meaning 'those idiots' are making or already made a show called conviction kitchen

DRUG traffickers, robbers, safe crackers and fraudsters are among a dozen ex-criminals hitting TV screens later this month in Channel 7's ambitious bid to hold on to viewers after the Australian Open.

it makes me sick imagine eating food made by these sorts of people!
this world is finished , lets move onto the next one

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:40 AM
i saw my mother suffer for over 1 year with a terminal illness. the drugs were useless. my father and i looked after her to the end. she insisted she wanted to die at home and we fulfilled her wish against others who wanted to pack her off to a unit. it was an unusual time as other relatives became very negative and hostile whilst this was in the latter stages. some relatives even had the gall to claim to others that they were visiting and assisting. it has been 11 years now and the hostility on their part still remains. initally i was furious when word got back and the bs built up. i decided to adopt the same attitude i approached looking after my mother. i simply ignored the crap and carried on with what i thought was right. after the funeral the fun and games began with phone calls into the early hours with drunk relatives on the other end spewing words from polluted minds. after several warnings, i simply turned the attack round and singled them out for a piece of mine. after reminding them of their fractured reality and pressing home their blatant guilty concience, they were speechless.
the emptiness can be deep and wide and i suggest anyone in a similar situation to hold the line and desist from activities that can inebriate the senses to escape the harshness of the situation. i feel the circumstances were unique but suspect there could be a pattern.
the whole point of this situation to me was to learn to let go and do it in the best possible way. this i feel we both did regardless of the negative aspects bearing down upon us especially after the fact.
to the op.
i would not hesitate in assisting an individual to make the transition if i am convinced their decision is rational. i feel this decision should be made by the individual and the state should avoid involving itself in any form of decision making towards the individual. they however should be appraised of the circumstances prior to the individual committing to a course of action so as to satisfy itself that the third party merely facilitates the best outcome. one last note to bear in mind. i personally have been privy to other levels and i am satisfied that death is not the end within the beautiful equation. the energy, it seems carries onward.
regards fakedirt.

edit on 27-4-2011 by fakedirt because: en

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:01 AM
Thanks everyone! I'm not trying to instill "fear", but a reflection. We have the same thing happening here.

But what do you say about cures, or solutions to alleviate some effects that are held back because of... costs?

I know people confined to wheelchairs and a life of misery simply because it has been decide it costs too much to have them as full functioning members of society... How much is war? How much costs corruption?

Don't tell me those are normal things of society, please. It is easier to let these things go that way than to fight for truth and justice for those needing it.

Who's to say I don't have something of the like? People I know who suffer from a chronic, debilitating sickness have some moments of discouragement, but you know what? They mostly want to live. Same thing for cancer patients...

As for going from a nice case of death to a harder one was to ask where will the limit be put. Once you open Pandora's Box, it is difficult to close...

Also, don't play the "Americans are close-minded" line... I may live on the American continent, it doesn't make me a US citizen for that. America is a big place, didn't you know?

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 07:17 AM
reply to post by NowanKenubi

tis a difficult subject indeed. i knew personally several people suffering from cancer who were happy to die asap and it was several months later they passed on. i also knew a couple of buddies who despite being in agony with terminal lung and throat cancers, insisted on squeezing as much out of life as possible. the individual must have the ultimate say. regarding supposed cures and rationing of life prolonging drugs, it is a lottery from my perspective unless one has the wealth to purchase the items themselves. if individuals educate themselves on the pros and cons of the subject and meditate on the matter, i feel the choices could be more palatable.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:33 PM
reply to post by fakedirt

My dad is currently fighting lung cancer. After a few weeks of chemo, he was told by his doc that he made a mistake and didn't give him the good chemo and had only a few weeks left to live. So my dad tried to get on a research protocol program to receive last hope treatments.
When the hospital where he was treated learned of this, they called him and said: " Why are you doing that? It is written in you medical file you refused treatment and wanted to die!!! Can you believe it?

It is a case of assassination attempt, in my opinion.

So the hospital convinced my dad to receive new treatments with them, and change the f+++++g doctor. He agreed, and the new treatment was literally killing him. They reverted to the chemo treatment he had received first. All of this with a couple of weeks in between.

You know what? Lung cancer isn't curable, but my dad now has clean lungs...
God was on his side, but how many die like that?

And if cures and treatments were offered to people, I'm sure there would be less talk about assisted suicide. What would you choose if you were told; "The cure, or the assisted suicide?"...

The money lacks because of the frauds and corruption we now see at all levels...

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:08 PM
reply to post by fakedirt

Something that should IMO enter the debate and never does is the aspect of assistance both required and given. We assist the pregnant mother in so many ways, don't we? Prenatal care is for the good of the baby, in order to help insure a healthy life.

And how many babies are assisted to enter into this world? If babies were not assisted to take that first breath by someone's removing the mucus plug, how many of them would survive? And if babies were not helped to leave the birth canal, well, past history is full of records of both mother and infant mortality. So if humanity assists in an entire lifespan, why can we not assist when that life reaches its end?

I watched my brother wither from 220 lbs to 65, all because his wife and children would not let him die. Their selfishness made him suffer for two years more than he should have. We never argued about it, because I could not even broach the subject with them. Every time he told me he really wanted to die, one of them would cut him off in mid-sentence. It was as though he no longer could think for himself. They were in full control of him. To me that is really disrespecting the person.

They don't know how it has made me distant from them.

posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:25 PM
Hey isn't this new prog hosted by the brilliant, but sadly stricken Terry Pratchett?. If Terry's down with it in his current state then so am I.
Besides, it wasn't so long ago that people respected death, were faced with it everyday. Now we all run around thinking it wont happen to us, like it's some myth and we are all enlightened super heroes waiting for the mothership to beam us up. Meh.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in