The answer is surely no, but I can see a lot of sense in the argument for a quick, painful death over a lingering painful one. But surely the issue is pain. Occasionally we do hear of people suffering a painless death and that is surely the aim most of us have, whether it is quick or not is to my mind irrelevant, but at best a matter for personal preference. My line is long lived with 85 to 95+ year old's common although I cannot vouch for manner of death (my father died of a stroke at 86). However my medical history is long and torturous after serious disease at the age of 6. My life span has variously been predicted as 30, then 40, then 60, but I'm still here.
Apart from a recent accident which has laid me low I have learned that I have a serious problem
that could prove terminal at any moment (perhaps before I finish this post
). There are two alternatives: Wait and see, or have a very risky operation. We are currently wrestling with the problem. One might prove painful, the other I would know nothing about it, but with an opportunity to live on. I have a choice, is that worse or better?
Mike.X
PS. I am really wrestling whether to post this mawkish diatribe, but feel it may be relevant to the subject under discussion. Oh hell - press the button!