Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide

[jdobbin]

Nope. They're irrelevant to my point anyways. Living wills are legal, and anyone who wants to go through the process to obtain one, can, regardless of what 'priests for life' or any other group has to say.

The point priests for life make is that the document itself can lead to assisted suicide.

[madmax]

We are soon reaching the time when many baby boomers will become aged and incapacitated. A :lol:large percentage of health costs occur in the final few weeks of life. When the general public assumes these costs, legal euthanasia is an obvious solution. I beleive that in Oregon, the cost of assisted suicide is covered by State medical insurance but certain costs to prolong life are not.

Death Panels

[Riverwind]

That is a very dangerous proposition. and unnecessary, since living wills can provide for pain free deaths following a natural course.

There are a lot of people that have no interest in living 20 years as a zombie with alzhimers. If these people want to exit early that should be their choice. More importantly, they should not be forced to die alone using an unreliable/painful method because the government might charge their loved ones with murder. These kinds of provisions are not covered by living wills.

The only safe guards that are necessary is the requirement that the person dying be the one to "pull the trigger". The government could require that people assisting provide video evidence or an impartial witness that the final choice to die was made by the dying person. The government should not be involved in questioning the motives of the person choosing to die.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Riverwind

[jbg]

The only safe guards that are necessary is the requirement that the person dying be the one to "pull the trigger". The government could require that people assisting provide video evidence or an impartial witness that the final choice to die was made by the dying person. The government should not be involved in questioning the motives of the person choosing to die.

I basically agree.

Also, people who choose to die and in fact die are sometimes resistant to questioning.

[Remiel]

When I was younger, I believe I was leaning in favour of euthanasia, along the usual compassionate lines of thinking for such. But, in my Law class in high school, for one assignment, possibly a mini-debate, I was asked to either research in general or find arguments against euthanasia. What I found was a statistic that suggested that 90% of people who would have chosen assisted suicide were later glad to be alive. That changed my view considerably. Now, unless one could find hard evidence that something to that effect may not be the case, I remain staunchly opposed to assisted suicide, on the grounds that the lives of nine people are more important than ending the suffering of one, given natural conditions, in my opinion.

[Riverwind]

What I found was a statistic that suggested that 90% of people who would have chosen assisted suicide were later glad to be alive.

Most people find a way to come to terms with whatever hardships they face. It should come as no surprise that the majority of people who are denied assisted suicide later come to accept that denial and make the best of their situtation. That, in itself, is not a reason to deny people the opportunity to make the choice.

I also wonder how many people in the survey group died before they could be interviewed again - possibly because they committed suicide without assistance. It is possible that the survey was done in a way that renders it meaningless.

I remain staunchly opposed to assisted suicide, on the grounds that the lives of nine people are more important than ending the suffering of one, given natural conditions, in my opinion.

Again, we are talking about individuals making the choice to end their own lives. In many cases, they will find a way even if denied but they will be forced to do it alone without their loved ones. The state has no business interfering if individuals want to make that choice. We are talking about assisted suicide - euthenasia is a completely different issue.

[Molly]

Law rarely leaves enough wiggle-room... people write it in by pretending that nothing has happened.

People know, even if law can't offer its blessing, that there really is such a thing as a fate worse than death.

[Oleg Bach]

Law rarely leaves enough wiggle-room... people write it in by pretending that nothing has happened.

People know, even if law can't offer its blessing, that there really is such a thing as a fate worse than death.

Welcome to the machine - the grey and sickly soup of utlitarian existance. Advocates of suicide or euthanasia are a creepy bunch - It would be nice to line them all up and take a picture and compare their faces to those that stick to the premise that life is all important - that the individual is not some clock to be stopped when it has laspses in time and falters - and is to expensive to repair - we are either human beings or things - we can not be both. I am sure that all the death culture people compared to the hopeful pro-lifers are very very ugly - people should trust their eyes. If a an advocate looks like hell - then they usually are...there is no debate worth while here - If a person requests more morphine - then they can have it - If the side effect is the suppression of breathing and suffocation - so be it...we think that an induced hospital death is "comfortable" YOU suffocate - and you can not call out..there is no way to get around dying --- as far as death with dignity - there is no such thing - dignity does not exist where death lurks - you shit your pants no matter who diginified you would like to be.

[Remiel]

The state has no business interfering if individuals want to make that choice.

Insofar as the state is the representative of the community, I think you are wrong. A community that does not concern itself with those within it who wish to remove themselves from the ranks of the living is not a healthy one at all.

[Riverwind]

Insofar as the state is the representative of the community, I think you are wrong. A community that does not concern itself with those within it who wish to remove themselves from the ranks of the living is not a healthy one at all.

Are you are also opposed to abortion under any circumstances? If not then why is assisted suicide any different?

[Smallc]

Because one is a life and one isn't by most scientific definitions. Regardless, I can only see the use of assisted suicide in very rare situations (such as extreme pain). Other than that....I just can't see it.

[Remiel]

Are you are also opposed to abortion under any circumstances? If not then why is assisted suicide any different?

Well, the actually alive and the potentially alive constitute two vastly different categories.

[Riverwind]

Well, the actually alive and the potentially alive constitute two vastly different categories.

Not according to people who oppose abortion. They feel a fetus is as alive as anyone else.

I take it from your response that you have no problem telling anti-abortion activists that they should keep their morality to themselves and leave it up to the individual to make these kinds of decisions.

I also assume that you don't have any problems with 'assisted abortion' and would not expect a women who wants an abortion to do it herself.

If those statements are is true then how can you justify telling someone who wants to commit suicide with the assistance of another that they are not allowed to?

[Remiel]

If those statements are is true then how can you justify telling someone who wants to commit suicide with the assistance of another that they are not allowed to?

The same way that we do not "allow" anyone to commit suicide. While it may seem absurd to create a law making suicide illegal, given that if you are succesful you are beyond sanction, the fact is that there is nothing contradictory about witholding approval of suicide. You should also think of your own analogy in reverse, Riverwind: If I allow someone to have an assisted abortion, how could I justify not allowing them to do it themselves? Because it would be suicide (pardon the pun)?

I think abortion is imperfect but necessary. I think the prohibition on euthanasia and assisted suicide is also imperfect but necessary.

[Oleg Bach]

The same way that we do not "allow" anyone to commit suicide. While it may seem absurd to create a law making suicide illegal, given that if you are succesful you are beyond sanction, the fact is that there is nothing contradictory about witholding approval of suicide. You should also think of your own analogy in reverse, Riverwind: If I allow someone to have an assisted abortion, how could I justify not allowing them to do it themselves? Because it would be suicide (pardon the pun)?

I think abortion is imperfect but necessary. I think the prohibition on euthanasia and assisted suicide is also imperfect but necessary.

Homocide is illegal "While it may seem asbsurd to create a law making suicide illegal" News break! Self murder is illegal. Walking through the park today I over heard a group of teenagers talking - They were going on about animals and the word "euthanize" kept popping up repeadedly - in the past we never used the word - we would simply put it in cold and real terms such as "kill the dog" we did not have this sweet Orwellianism that caused reality to drift into fantacy. It appears that with the new incrimental conditioning of our youth - gay is now right up there in the respect circle with hetrosexual propogation of our species - even though there is no life product in gayifcation. To "eutrhanize" means to KILL. If a person wants to die naturally then rid yourself of the will to live - you will die just as quickly as being "assisted" People who are healthy and strong love to parrot the glory of uthansia...like those young people in the park -- when their father or mother dies they will tell their friends - "My dad uthanized" Not my dad is dead. People are terrified of death - no one cheats the grave..nor do they spare themselves of the due suffering - Those on morphine who die of the final over doze - suffer in their drug enduced sleep - They just can't articulate the suffering - which brings great comfort to the living...Euthanaisa is for the livng - just like crying at funerals are for the living cowards not the dead.

[Malaclypse the Younger]

The only reasons to keep alive those who are suffering and want to die are sentimentality and selfishness. We wouldn't let a dog suffer incurable, inoperable, painful terminal disease. Why do we insist that those of our own species must suffer miserable, excruciating pain?

[Remiel]

The only reasons to keep alive those who are suffering and want to die are sentimentality and selfishness. We wouldn't let a dog suffer incurable, inoperable, painful terminal disease. Why do we insist that those of our own species must suffer miserable, excruciating pain?

Of late I have begun to question the traditional "wisdom" of putting animals down because of their injuries.

[Riverwind]

Why do we insist that those of our own species must suffer miserable, excruciating pain?

Actually with the right pain managment regime death does not have to be phsycially painful so that is not the real problem with the ban on assisted suicide. The real problem is the emotional and psychological pain caused by forcing someone to live who has no desire to live.

A question that I think is worth asking anyone who supports the ban on assisted suicide is if they would support the ban if:

1) They had serious degenerative condition that would turn them into a vegetable that could live for years if feed and cared for.

2) The only way to pay for that feeding and care required that their children take out huge loans that would forever destroy any hope they had of owning a home.

I realize that we have all grown accustomed to the system where cost is no object and that leads to some people taking absolutist positions. However, those days are coming to an end and we need to give people the freedom to make these kinds of choices instead of imposing it on them.

Keep in mind that I am only talking of assisted suicide by mentally compentent adults - euthenasia is a completely different scenario with different moral issues.

Edited August 24, 2009 by Riverwind

[Malaclypse the Younger]

Of late I have begun to question the traditional "wisdom" of putting animals down because of their injuries.

It's a lot more humane than insisting they live with injuries that will never heal, or that will heal in a manner that would only be even more painful. There is a very good reason why you shoot a horse with a broken leg, and it is because it will never be able to stand again.

[Malaclypse the Younger]

Actually with the right pain managment regime death does not have to be phsycially painful so that is not the real problem with the ban on assisted suicide.

That's not what I was talking about. Death does not have to be painful, but living with an incurable, terminal disease can be very, increasingly painful.

The real problem is the emotional and psychological pain caused by forcing someone to live who has no desire to live.

You'll get no argument from me on this. We already agree.

A question that I think is worth asking anyone who supports the ban on assisted suicide is if they would support the ban if:

1) They had serious degenerative condition that would turn them into a vegetable that could live for years if feed and cared for.

Some would. Don't ask me why, because I have no idea. But some people have chosen to be an empty shell kept alive by machines if their brain dies.

2) The only way to pay for that feeding and care required that their children take out huge loans that would forever destroy any hope they had of owning a home.

I don't have a hard time believing that some people would do this willingly anyway. I'm so glad that my grandfather's will had a Do Not Resuscitate, or my aunt might still be trying to "fix" him.

I realize that we have all grown accustomed to the system where cost is no object and that leads to some people taking absolutist positions. However, those days are coming to an end and we need to give people the freedom to make these kinds of choices instead of imposing it on them.

I think it starts with educating children about suffering, dying, and death at an early age, instead of treating them like a taboo subject. Our society needs to learn about reducing suffering and not fearing death.

Keep in mind that I am only talking of assisted suicide by mentally compentent adults - euthenasia is a completely different scenario with different moral issues.

I think both should be legal. With the proper legal protections, of course. It needs to be a deliberative process.

[Mr.Canada]

This may surprise some people here but "I don't know". There are compelling arguments from both sides and I really don't know which is correct.

[Malaclypse the Younger]

This may surprise some people here but "I don't know". There are compelling arguments from both sides and I really don't know which is correct.

Which would you rather have happen to you? Killing yourself and ending the pain of terminal disease, or living a life of horrible, incurable pain?

I don't think it's that hard to figure out.

[Oleg Bach]

Which would you rather have happen to you? Killing yourself and ending the pain of terminal disease, or living a life of horrible, incurable pain?

I don't think it's that hard to figure out.

As I mentioned euthanasia benefits the living who do not have the maturity or depth of spirit and strength or endure watching the dying - Morphine over doze is not a solution - You may seem "comfortable" but you are still in pain - unable to communicate it...as mentioned previously euthanasia and it's proponents are very similar to people who cry at funerals - they cry for themselves out of fear. Homicide is illegal - self murder is also against the law...Those that put that law in place were a lot wiser in these regards than most people today. As for "hard to figure out" - birth is natural and tramatic - as is death ...no one gets out of this life alive or with out being trounced by nature...there is no easy way out!

[Remiel]

It's a lot more humane than insisting they live with injuries that will never heal, or that will heal in a manner that would only be even more painful. There is a very good reason why you shoot a horse with a broken leg, and it is because it will never be able to stand again.

Yet somehow this "very good reason" has nothing to do with whether the horse wants to be shot.

[Remiel]

Which would you rather have happen to you? Killing yourself and ending the pain of terminal disease, or living a life of horrible, incurable pain?

I don't think it's that hard to figure out.

Sigmund Freud chose excruciating lucidity over a painless haze. Such questions are not so straightforward as you would imagine.