Yet according to the current guidelines and Dying with Dignity's own website, if you help on compassionate grounds and not malicious ones it's unlikely there would be a prosecution.

http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/ass...isted-suicide/

"Where does the policy apply?
The policy covers actions to assist suicide carried out in England and Wales, whether the suicide takes place in England and Wales or in any other country."

So while Dying with Dignity could be prosecuted for providing your details as someone willing to help others, I can't see that you yourself could be prosecuted because your actions wouldn't take place in England or Wales. So perhaps a network could be formed via Dignitas for people who come here. A wholly Swiss based network wouldn't be open to prosecution from what I can see regardless of your nationality.

The law was relaxed in October 2014, but there was a big stink about it and I'm not sure if the law was tightened up again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...igh-Court.html

There has been one successful prosecution for attempted assisted suicide in 2013.

"Latest Assisted Suicide Figures
24 April 2015

Cases of assisted suicide are recorded centrally by CPS Headquarters and are dealt with in the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division in the CPS. Our records show the following:

From 1 April 2009 up to 24 April 2015, there have been 110 cases referred to the CPS by the police that have been recorded as assisted suicide.

Of these 110 cases, 70 were not proceeded with by the CPS. 25 cases were withdrawn by the police.

There are currently 8 ongoing cases. 1 case of assisted attempted suicide was successfully prosecuted in October 2013 and 6 cases were referred onwards for prosecution for homicide or other serious crime.

The figures shown above will be updated every 6 months.

Please note that these figures were previously described as referring to assisted suicide and euthanasia. This was incorrect. These figures relate only to cases of assisted suicide."

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/p...d_suicide.html

This was their reply:

Thanks for getting in touch but we don't help people with this - because it is illegal to here and breaking the law could undermine the campaign for law change.
We would have assisted them in some way (note by putting them in touch with you in Switzerland) and that would be breaking our law.

One high profile case was that of Debbie Purdy, suffering from MS:

Debbie Purdy, who won a landmark ruling to clarify the law on assisted suicide, has died at the age of 51.
The right-to-die campaigner from Bradford had lived with primary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) for almost 20 years.
Purdy, who had been in the city’s Marie Curie hospice for a year and had been refusing food, died on 23 December. Her husband, Omar Puente, confirmed the death of his wife in a statement, describing her as “a much loved wife, sister, aunt and friend”, the BBC reported.
“We would like to thank the Marie Curie hospice in Bradford for the care the staff gave her, which allowed her last year to be as peaceful and dignified as she wished,” he added.
In her final interview with BBC Look North, Purdy said the painful realities of her condition meant her life was “unacceptable”.
She said: “It’s painful and it’s uncomfortable and it’s frightening and it’s not how I want to live. If somebody could find a cure for MS I would be the first person in line. It’s not a matter of wanting to end my life, it’s a matter of not wanting my life to be this.”
In 2009, Purdy won a legal victory in the House of Lords which lawyers described as a turning point for the law on assisted suicide.
She succeeded in arguing that it was a breach of her human rights not to know whether Puente, a Cuban jazz violinist, would be prosecuted if he accompanied her to the Swiss clinic Dignitas if her condition worsened.
The decision went further than expected in Purdy’s favour, lawyers said. Ordering the director of public prosecutions to issue a policy setting out when those in Puente’s position could expect to face prosecution, the court ruled that the current lack of clarity was a violation of the right to a private and family life.
That led Keir Starmer – the then director – to publish guidelines in February 2010 setting out what was taken into consideration when weighing up a prosecution. He said a range of factors should be taken into account, including the motivations of the person assisting and the victim’s ability to reach a clear and informed decision about their suicide.
However, it still remains an offence to encourage or assist a suicide or a suicide attempt in England and Wales.

Yes, but as far as I can see it wouldn't stop you/Dignitas setting up a network of helpers here in Switzerland to assist people once they arrive here. These people are in touch with Dignitas to arrange their visit so it wouldn't be that difficult for Dignitas to arrange for someone here to help them.

The policy is quite clear that it's only actions that take place in England and Wales that could be prosecuted. If those actions take place in Switzerland a UK national couldn't be prosecuted under UK law.

Thanks. Of course Dignitas has official 'helpers/facilitators' - but this is not the same as a friendly person who can welcome someone as a human individual-as said, to just be there, hold hands, hug, whatever.

Not something I could ever do, as I live far to far from Zurich- unless it was a very special 'one off' case- I certainly would do it for any UK friend if ever, of course. If I was nearer, I would defo try to get a small group of English speaking volunteers together.

But if Dignitas were willing I'm sure "unofficial" helpers could be organised too.

Exactly and agreed. I would organise this if I was near to Zurich- but I am too far. Have offered help to EXIT Romandie for English speakers.

In the wake of the recent terrorist attacks, friends were talking about their own, personal fear of the future. In that context, someone said: "Well, it's a reason to finally join Exit," and went on to explain that, in his opinion, if ANY condition of his life became unbearable, i.e. not only his failing health, chronic illness or a life-balance, but also the fear of being ruled by religious fanatics, or being forced to dress (or prohibited from dressing) in a certain way, or eat certain foods, or if the environment became too polluted or too noisy, or he too poor, or too discriminated against... any of these factors would be sufficient for him to decide, freely, to leave, i.e. to die.
He said: "I was born onto this planet, and at the moment I find it beautiful and people wonderful, but that doesn't mean I have to continue to stay here if conditions become untenable. And since only I can know what is unendurable for me, I'm free to leave when it seems right to me."
Of course, I don't know that Exit itself would accept all those other reasons, besides failing health, chronic illness and life-balance, (and especially if they had a run of applicants on the basis of fear-of-terrorists) but I found it interesting that his explanation of the freedom-to-choose-to-die, and how lightly he treads on Earth, actually COMFORTED others in the room who were feeling vulneralbe and terrified of the potential restrictions brought on through terrorist violence.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...her-own-death/

Sorry, but he needs to think again.

"EXIT will provide end-of-life care only to persons
◾with hopeless prognoses
◾or with unbearable symptoms
◾or with unacceptable disabilities"

Nothing to stop him stocking up on aspirin and overdosing on his own of course, but being told what to wear by religious fanatics won't cut it with Exit as an unbearable symptom. And that's assuming they'd still be allowed to operate under said fanatics - which is unlikely.

"Simon's choice"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...l-moments.html

http://www.srf.ch/sendungen/dok/simo...ohne-rueckkehr

Now on Temps Présent on TSR - a programme on end of life care in SWitzerland, and EXIT as a choice.

Read today:

Assisted suicide for people who are not terminally ill may soon be an option in the Netherlands. Lawmakers in the country are pushing for a law which would let those who feel they have “completed life” take death into their own hands.

https://www.rt.com/news/362587-nethe...-life-suicide/

How do you feel about this?

I think choice is good even without terminal pathology.

I didn't realise that so far in Switzerland, only Vaud and Neuchâtel (and hopefully soon Geneva) give the patient/resident in hospital or EMS/OAP home the right to die there, if they do no longer have a home to return to, or a relative prepared to have them die at their home.

Well, if Hillary wins, I guess that membership will get a huge boost!

Tom

What a suberbly stupid and totally insensitive comment Tom- truly.

We'll see in less than four weeks.

Tom

Yes, I agree.

Some time ago the German-speaking Swiss TV aired a programme about a doctor who had a psychological illness (if I recall correctly he was bipolar / manic-depressive) which had repeatedly led to his building up a life and then bringing it crashing down, himself, causing those around him enormous costs and emotional pain, and then built it all up again, only to go into excesses, and this cycle repeatedly.

He was about 50 or 60, and decided that he didn't want to go through the pain of all that again. He had tried all sorts of therapies and treatments, but nothing really helped.

The documentary showed him saying goodbye to his friends, getting rid of some possessions, generally ordering his affairs, etc., and he set himself a year in which to do that. During that time he was in ongoing contact with Exit, and at at the end of the year he had achieved what he felt was necessary before he died, and ended his life with Exit's help.

I'm not for sudden, dramatic suicides based on the emotions that wrack one in the minutes, hours or days after a shock, especially not if the method of suicide is going to end up traumatising someone else. Yet the sort of considered "life-balance", such as the doctor in that documentary, seems perfectly reasonable to me.

I find it shocking that anyone would have the temerity to want to decide about how much pain (whether physical or emotional) some other person should be made to continue to endure.

I find it evolutionary. It would give a choice, and remove some of the pain of family members who are left behind wondering why.

I would like to have assistance with terminating my life without having to kill myself - can't do it, I am a chicken that way - if and when I please. So I am in favor.

Don't want to do it? Don't sign up, but don't deny others this option.

Yes, that would be even better! What a relief it would be to many very ill (or just very life-weary) persons to be able to say: "Folks, I've thought it through and I've had enough. Please, just give me that injection and let it be over."

Of course, this is where the "contra" arguments begin to warn against euthanasia that is NOT voluntary, fearing, as they do, that the slippery slope will end up with just anyone being allowed to kill anyone and using the defence: "Well, she did SAY she wanted me to kill her."

Although I understand that fear, I think it would be possible to put into place several administrative procedures to make at least fairly sure that within assisted suicide murder is not the norm, just the same as murder is not the norm in society as a whole.