– People in the last phase of life should be able to choose for themselves

the History of Inger gives us a good picture of how the road from severe disease to death is experienced, says the progress party helsepolitiske spokesperson Åse Bruun-Gundersen after reading the piece to the late Inger Staff-Poulsen in the Newspaper.

Staff-Poulsen used some of his last days to write the piece to bring the topic of active dødshjelp up in public.

– the Attached article is perhaps a little controversial because I’m dead Debate

the progress party is the only party in Parliament that is active dødshjelp, and adopted the following formulation in their prinsipprogram in 2013:

“the Freedom to decide over their own lives, also means that one should be ensured the right to a dignified end of life. Progress will therefore in some situations allow active dødshjelp regulated by the strict law.”

Hope on the debates

until now, the party has however not submitted any concrete proposals in Parliament, but Åse Bruun-Gundersen believes that the time is overmoden to have a debate about this in a serious way. She hopes now that several parties have matured in this question.

– Inger was unfortunately not the end of life she wanted. For the political Right is the right to a dignified death is absolutely essential, ” says Bruun-Gundersen.

– People in the last phase of life should be able to choose for themselves whether they want to go through the smertehelvete or end your life while they are still mentally present and can say goodbye to your family and friends.

Bruun-Gundersen believes active dødshjelp in some cases may appear to be more human.

– To let people die when that the body’s organs gradually stop working, or they starve or thirst to death, may be less humane than active dødshjelp, ” she says.

– large variety QUESTION: the Labour helsepolitiske spokesperson, Ingvild Kjerkol, acknowledge that there are good reasons for and against active dødshjelp. Show more

Ingvild Kjerkol, health and omsorgspolitisk spokesperson in the Labour party, have also read the Staff-Poulsens chronicle.

She believes that powerful stories as this provides an understanding of why the question of active dødshjelp can never get a simple answer.

– the Labour party recognises that there are good reasons both to allow and not to allow the active dødshjelp based on an ethical assessment. The labour party has come to that it is right to keep the border that says that life is inviolable to the end, ” says Kjerkol.

But to hegne about life as a fixed principle, assumes that the state is their responsibilities to create a worthy death. The text touches on, is that for large variations in the soothing treatment that is offered to various places in the country, ” she says.

Kjerkol believe that perhaps the main reason to not open for active dødshjelp, is that it can create situations where people who do not want to be a bother, look at it as a solution to ease the other’s should.

– We can never risk that people feel the obligation to die, we are all equal and valuable as long as we live, ” she says.

Many opportunities

national healthcare spokesperson in the Right, Sveinung Stensland, points out that there is an important distinction between the right to die and the right to be taken the life of.

Patients already have many options to choose from. If one is terminally ill, can you say no to life-prolonging treatment. But this is fundamentally different from active help to die. All people have an inviolable and inherent value in and of itself, with the active dødshjelp rank human life, ” says Stensland.

He pronounces itself on the active dødshjelp on a general basis. It also makes Olaug Bollestad, acting party leader in the Sector.

WILL HELP: Krf is committed to ensuring quality of life for seriously ill patients, ” says acting party leader Olaug Bollestad. Show more

– the Progress is passionate about helping people in life’s last phase. We need to ensure the quality of life for patients and their families, by optimizing the treatment, nursing and care, says Bollestad.

She is also concerned that no one should feel a pressure to die.

– We need to protect each person’s value and do not increase the pressure on sick and dying people who might feel they are a burden. Sick and dying patients have the right to dignity and help to meet their existential needs and experience quality of life, says Bollestad.

Difficult questions

Among the political ungdomspartiene, there are several that have gone in for a assessment of the active dødshjelp, including Young Right and Young Left.

the Young Conservative united in 2018 moved in to allow the active dødshjelp in limited cases. This is a difficult ethical question, and there are different opinions in the Young Right. It reflects the decision that was adopted with 154 against 124 votes, ” says first deputy chair of the Young Right, Daniel Skjevik Aasberg.

– Active dødshjelp means that the right of individual citizens to decide over their own lives be the highest, and that in certain cases it also involves the right to end your life, ” he says.

at the same time believe Aasberg that there are challenges with where the boundary should go, what conditions qualify, and the personal burden that accrues each who are faced with such a choice.

Personally, I have major concerns with opening for active dødshjelp, ” he says.

– Important principle

Also Young Left believe active dødshjelp should be investigated. There was a suggestion about this on the Liberal party united in 2017, but it did not go through.

” We have had many discussions around what kind of model we should have for the active dødshjelp, without that we have to come up with any clear cut answers, but the principle is important for us. One should be able to choose when to end their own lives, ” says the head of the Young Left, Sondre Hansmark.

– This is first and foremost about the liberal principle of self-determination over their own bodies, but it is also about the purely pragmatic: that the serious sick people should have an easier way out of life except to dopes down, ” he says.

IN the AUF, there are shared opinions about the active dødshjelp, and a proposal for euthanasia (the doctor gives the patient a lethal injection) was voted down on their previous profile.

This is a topic there are many opinions about the in AUF. It is a difficult topic to be may well on, but personally I am opponent of introducing the active dødshjelp, ” says the deputy leader of the AUF, Astrid Willa Mr. Hoem.

For me, it’s about that I want that the individuals should not feel themselves as a burden for society and for the people around him, ” she says.

no Matter how good any agreements that are made, there will be many unpleasant disputes. For me, it is also essential that mental health should be recognized and prioritized on an equal footing with physical health. If you agree with this point, it will lead to further issues.

Inger desired active dødshjelp. This is the story of her death in the Newspaper Plus