Cookie182
Individui Superiore
In light of the current euthanasia discussion (in which I fully support), who would extend the right to die to those sentenced to life in prison? In particular, those sentenced to several life terms, who have no chance of ever leaving a cell- eg Martin Bryant?
I remember this article from a few years ago-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...artin-bryant-die/story-e6freuzi-1111113723856
Often these prisoners consistently attempt suicide, in vicious and cruel ways, only to be constantly denied their wish after a hospital recovery. Over time, allowing them to live can be said to constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" (many of them are chronically mentally-ill, extreme paranoia, locked away in little more then a concrete box).
Should they be able to consent to a medically-supervised death (in similar fashion to a morphine overdoses for near-death cancer patients)?
I think it is an interesting issue to consider. I'm sure there will be those with vindictive streaks who call for them "to suffer" indefinitely, but if they are to spend the rest of their life in misery (no harm to society here) or die, what does it matter? Only a cold-hearted retributionalist would gain pleasure through amplification of their suffering. Of course, most prisoners in this case committed terrible crimes- but further suffering for them does nothing to alleviate the suffering of their victims. I think this purely becomes an issue of consent.
Notably, I oppose the "death penalty" as no consent in regards to life is made.
Admittedly, if this was legislated, I do see the issue arising of why “lifers” should only be given this opportunity. Death may seem a viable option for any prisoner, based on their subjective experience of prison life. This will then raise the issue of should everyone (prisoner or not) be able to end their life (safely and painlessly) at will…much harder question, especially when we consider those not in any deprived situation (prison, terminally-ill) bar their own depression.
So for simplicity, lets limit the discussion to those in a life-term situation.
I remember this article from a few years ago-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...artin-bryant-die/story-e6freuzi-1111113723856
Often these prisoners consistently attempt suicide, in vicious and cruel ways, only to be constantly denied their wish after a hospital recovery. Over time, allowing them to live can be said to constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" (many of them are chronically mentally-ill, extreme paranoia, locked away in little more then a concrete box).
Should they be able to consent to a medically-supervised death (in similar fashion to a morphine overdoses for near-death cancer patients)?
I think it is an interesting issue to consider. I'm sure there will be those with vindictive streaks who call for them "to suffer" indefinitely, but if they are to spend the rest of their life in misery (no harm to society here) or die, what does it matter? Only a cold-hearted retributionalist would gain pleasure through amplification of their suffering. Of course, most prisoners in this case committed terrible crimes- but further suffering for them does nothing to alleviate the suffering of their victims. I think this purely becomes an issue of consent.
Notably, I oppose the "death penalty" as no consent in regards to life is made.
Admittedly, if this was legislated, I do see the issue arising of why “lifers” should only be given this opportunity. Death may seem a viable option for any prisoner, based on their subjective experience of prison life. This will then raise the issue of should everyone (prisoner or not) be able to end their life (safely and painlessly) at will…much harder question, especially when we consider those not in any deprived situation (prison, terminally-ill) bar their own depression.
So for simplicity, lets limit the discussion to those in a life-term situation.
Last edited:
