physician assisted suicide

[Guest American Woman]

If doctors were allowed to assist openly, there wouldn't be a problem.

I don't think being a doctor qualifies one in and of itself; I think one should be required to have training in that area, which would also mean extensive psychological training, and be required to act on said training, not one's personal beliefs as in this case -

One of his [Kevorkian's] patients was not terminal, he was a quadriplegic. Kevorkian took this case out of empathy, knowing that facing the same situation it is what he would want for himself.

link

So what if the Kevorkians et al wouldn't want the same thing for themself if faced with some other non-terminal situation? Is that what the decision to assist would be based on?

Furthermore, just because one who is not terminally ill wants to die at point A in their life, it doesn't mean that they will feel the same way at point B. So is it ethical to help someone who is 'simply' suicidal die?

Edited October 6, 2012 by American Woman

[Guest]

I don't think being a doctor qualifies one in and of itself; I think one should be required to have training in that area, which would also mean extensive psychological training, and be required to act on said training, not one's personal beliefs as in this case -

One of his [Kevorkian's] patients was not terminal, he was a quadriplegic. Kevorkian took this case out of empathy, knowing that facing the same situation it is what he would want for himself.

link

So what if the Kevorkians et al wouldn't want the same thing for themself if faced with some other non-terminal situation? Is that what the decision to assist would be based on?

Furthermore, just because one who is not terminally ill wants to die at point A in their life, it doesn't mean that they will feel the same way at point B. So is it ethical to help someone who is 'simply' suicidal die?

I believe it is. Should a woman be denied an abortion because she might decide later that she should have kept the kid?

I hope Dr K. didn't make that decision himself. The quadriplegic did ask for the service? If so, why not assist? It's what (s)he wanted.

[Guest American Woman]

I believe it is. Should a woman be denied an abortion because she might decide later that she should have kept the kid?

Not the same thing at all; the right to abortion is ultimately about the woman's choice, and many women who have an abortion at one time in their life decide to have a child at another point in their life. If there are regrets regarding that particular pregnancy, she must live with and deal with said regrets. Helping a suicidal person kill themself is final. I would think that many people who are glad that they are alive have had serious thoughts of suicide at some point in their lifetime, and if they had had an easy out at the time - ie: someone else to painlessly do it for them, may have chosen it.

I hope Dr K. didn't make that decision himself. The quadriplegic did ask for the service? If so, why not assist? It's what (s)he wanted.

Did you read about why he helped? And the question I raised? It was what he would have wanted. Yet many paraplegics go on to live really great lives. So that's what such decisions should be based on - what the person assisting would want? Or should anyone who is suicidal simply be assisted at that moment in time? Would you want that service available for your loved ones? I think it's a scary thought, as life has it's ups and downs.

On the other hand, helping a terminally ill person painlessly achieve what their illness is eventually going to do anyway is a different issue.

Edited October 6, 2012 by American Woman

[wyly]

Like if there is no life-threatening illness, but the person is mentally depressed and wants to end their life.

why not, I recall a man who survived a car crash that killed his wife and kids he was in the hospital treated for injuries and depression and decide he couldn't bear to live without his family...he took a flyer out the fifth floor window of his hospital...physical pain is mentally intolerable why can't mental anguish be considered the same, if I lost my entire family I would likely do the same, I have no desire to live on without my family...

two of my grandparents died of what I assume were morphine overdoses, one requested it and was administered by an MD, the other the same MD did on his judgement...my father insisted on DNR...

[Guest]

Not the same thing at all; the right to abortion is ultimately about the woman's choice, and many women who have an abortion at one time in their life decide to have a child at another point in their life. If there are regrets regarding that particular pregnancy, she must live with and deal with said regrets. Helping a suicidal person kill themself is final. I would think that many people who are glad that they are alive have had serious thoughts of suicide at some point in their lifetime, and if they had had an easy out at the time - ie: someone else to painlessly do it for them, may have chosen it.

It's exactly the same thing. It's about making a choice. That the person is not around to regret it would seem to me to be a plus.

Did you read about why he helped? And the question I raised? It was what he would have wanted. Yet many paraplegics go on to live really great lives. So that's what such decisions should be based on - what the person assisting would want? Or should anyone who is suicidal simply be assisted at that moment in time? Would you want that service available for your loved ones? I think it's a scary thought, as life has it's ups and downs.

I read that. That's why I asked the question, did the quadriplegic make it clear that that was what (s)he wanted. Dr' K's reasons for helping are his own. As long as the person requesting the help hets the help, it doesn't matter.

On the other hand, helping a terminally ill person painlessly achieve what their illness is eventually going to do anyway is a different issue.

That's one reason for assisted suicide. I just contend it doesn't have to be the only reason. I want to be able to what I want with my own life and my own body, and I see no reason why it should be illegal to help me if I request it.

[jbg]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/10/05/gloria-taylor-b-c-woman-at-centre-of-assisted-suicide-court-battle-dies/

Quite a touchy issue, all i am going to say is i believe a person, who is of sound mind, has the right to decide when their own life ends.

I agree, and you saved me setting up a thread.

This article (link) is but one of a series of articles chronicling the struggles of a 28 year old terminally ill with brain cancer.

MANHASSET, N.Y. (CBSNewYork) — The family of a 28-year-old terminally ill New York City woman says she has had a change of heart and no longer wants to be removed from life support.

Grace Sung Eun Lee, 28, became ill with brain cancer last year and is being kept alive by breathing and feeding tubes at North Shore University Hospital’s palliative care center.

*******************

A judge ruled Grace is competent to make the decision, but her parents immediately appealed. On Friday, a panel of judges ruled the motion to stay the decision was denied.

Before she became ill, Lee was working as a financial manager and training to run the New York City Marathon.

Now she is paralyzed from the neck down and breathing and being fed by tubes which she wants removed. Doctors said they would like to respect Lee’s wishes and remove the tubes.

“She is desperate both because of her physical pain and the days that she’s being made to endure in the hospital to simply have it end,” Smith said.

A spokesman for North Shore University Hospital said with all end-of-life decisions, it abides by the patient’s wishes and follows the law.

Now I am not sure, with the family's and her pushing and pulling, what the patient really wants. I do believe that a patient, or where necessary a health care proxy, should be able to make the decision.

On December 30, 1972, with my consent and my mother's, the tubes were removed from my father. His brother and sister had them put back in. He died January 5, 1973. I cannot fathom the purpose of six days of comatose existence.

[Melanie_]

I'm not opposed to this in principle, but have some reservations about how it might be done in practice. What kind of parameters are people willing to allow - would someone have to provide clear and sound reasons for ending their life? Would there be an age limit (i.e., over 18? 21?) and who would have a say in the decision? I say this because I've seen too many adolescents who think life is intolerable; it scares me to think that they might be assisted to end lives that are full of promise, simply because of teenage drama. What would a law look like, that allowed assisted suicide?

[Melanie_]

On December 30, 1972, with my consent and my mother's, the tubes were removed from my father. His brother and sister had them put back in. He died January 5, 1973. I cannot fathom the purpose of six days of comatose existence.

Even 40 years later, this resonates deeply. I hope you were able to find peace with your aunt and uncle.

[jbg]

Even 40 years later, this resonates deeply. I hope you were able to find peace with your aunt and uncle.

Thanks and sort of.

My aunt made sure she missed us at a "Shiva" or condolence call for another relative, after screwing me out of what I was supposed to inherit. Nevertheless I went to her place of business and had a warm visit. The only problem was her conversion to a bizarre version of Buddhism, along with three of her four children. She died in 1983 and my uncle, ironically, stayed with me and my stepfather for the funeral.

My uncle and I had mostly a good relationship after. He died in 1988, after my cousins tried but did not succeed in dealing me out of the family money.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Not me. I'm thinking more like first episode of Futurama.

I just think that if you wanna die, you should be allowed to.

I agree with this too.

It's your life... why can't you choose to end it peacefully?

We have enough people on the planet.

[Bonam]

I agree with this too.

It's your life... why can't you choose to end it peacefully?

Agreed.

We have enough people on the planet.

Has nothing to do with the argument here.

[dre]

I agree with this too.

It's your life... why can't you choose to end it peacefully?

We have enough people on the planet.

The problem is this is an easy thing to support when you are talking about a person with a terminal illness. But what about a person with threatable conditions like depression and mental illness? What about a person thats lost their job and their home? Should they be able to march down to a death boutique as well? What about a student thats being bullied?

[jbg]

The problem is this is an easy thing to support when you are talking about a person with a terminal illness. But what about a person with threatable conditions like depression and mental illness? What about a person thats lost their job and their home? Should they be able to march down to a death boutique as well? What about a student thats being bullied?

I think we can craft rules restricting the right to assisted suicides to terminal illnesses and treatable illnesses with ultimately terminal results.

[dre]

I think we can craft rules restricting the right to assisted suicides to terminal illnesses and treatable illnesses with ultimately terminal results.

Two things...

Why? If this is a "right" why would only people that have a terminal illness be allowed to excersize it?

Also... what you are really talking about is setting up yet another government beaurocracy and a shitload of more laws. We are running out of money to pay for all this stuff.

[wyly]

i've saved an impressive amounts of drugs over the years from various surgeries i think i can manage nicely should the time come and i'm ready for the big sleep...

[Guest]

i've saved an impressive amounts of drugs over the years from various surgeries i think i can manage nicely should the time come and i'm ready for the big sleep...

Yeah, but you want to be sure. You don't want to wake up from the big sleep with no more brains than a carrot.

Quite simply, it's my body. When I want to it to stop I ought to be able to make it stop, and if I can get someone to agree to help me with that, there should be no penalty.

My reasons for wanting it to stop shouldn't enter into it.

[Mr.Canada]

The more people who choose this waste less of my tax dollars on expensive health care. I'm all for it. I hope they allow it for all ages and even if nothing is wrong with the person physically. if people just want to die we should help them so they can stop wasting my tax dollars.

It does go against the Hippocratic oath though of doing no harm.

[Guest Manny]

How old are you allowed to be to have such powers of decision? 18?

Do you know how many teenagers and young adults think about suicide, because they are going through an emotionally turbulent time in their lives, excperienceing their first relationships and so on, and all the feelings that go with that.

Would you make it very easy for them to commit suicide? Knowing full well that the pain and anguish they go through is a normal part of the growing up process, something we all experience and must overcome. And we do. But suicide has no redemption.

[Bonam]

How old are you allowed to be to have such powers of decision? 18?

Do you know how many teenagers and young adults think about suicide, because they are going through an emotionally turbulent time in their lives, excperienceing their first relationships and so on, and all the feelings that go with that.

Would you make it very easy for them to commit suicide? Knowing full well that the pain and anguish they go through is a normal part of the growing up process, something we all experience and must overcome. And we do. But suicide has no redemption.

Anyone with half a brain that wants to commit suicide can easily do so. As for how many young people consider suicide because of the "difficulties" they go through, humans have been going through such difficulties since the dawn of time, and the means of suicide have always existed.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Agreed.

Has nothing to do with the argument here.

Actually it does. Letting people die when they want to will reduce the burden on our planet.

[Topaz]

My view is only up to the governments to make the laws to ALLOW people to have a CHOICE when to die, with the assistance of the medical industry, it's up to the person to make that decide when they make out a living will and name the person they feel will carry out their wishes. Who should use this law, anyone who is just existing in this world and not living. One who can't communicate, one who can't take care of themselves and one who is dying and there no help for them. Why do we watch someone die of cancer or Alzheimer's, who ends up in a nursing home from 8-16 years before they die. We allow our pets to die, why not our loved ones, IF that's what THEY want? There could be laws setup to monitor this and no one would be force to do this if that's what they didn't want. I can't see the present Tory government going for this though and this kind of issue always brings church and state together.

[Wayward Son]

Two things...

Why? If this is a "right" why would only people that have a terminal illness be allowed to excersize it?

The general argument when it comes to rights, is that able-bodied people have the right and ability to commit suicide on their own. Those who, due to severe terminal illness, are unable to commit suicide on their own are denied that right.

Rodriguez committed suicide because the Supreme Court denied her the right to assisted suicide. She was physically able to commit suicide at the time of the supreme court decision, but her position was that very soon ALS would rob her of the ability. She wanted to live longer, spend more time with her children. Had she been allowed access to doctor-assisted suicide she would have been able to enjoy that time knowing when it became to much she could have ended it with help.

The situation was similar for Elizabeth MacDonald on the east coast - suffered from MS, went to Switzerland for doctor assisted suicide at a date earlier than she wished to because she felt that if she waited much longer she may not have been healthy enough to physically make the trip. Had doctor assisted suicide been legal in Canada she would have lived longer.

Most recently, this summer the courts in the UK ruled that Tony Nicklinson, who had locked-in syndrome, must stay alive. The judges should be thoroughly embarassed with themselves. Following the decision he starved himself, dying 8 days later. The legal system only ensured that his few final days were as miserable as possible. Bravo.

[Mighty AC]

Great post Wayward. I can't see why there would be opposition to this issue. The legal issues are minor and could easily be handled by documentation similar to a living will. Access to doctor assisted suicide is clearly the humane and moral route; so, where is the opposition coming from? Is it a religious thing?

[Mr.Canada]

if people want to die let them and get them off of my tax roll. No more expensive disability pension and no more expensive healthcare that could cost millions per year in palliative care. Sounds great to me. I'd like to make Doctor assisted suicide available to everyone who wants it, not just terminally ill. Teenagers, single parents, people on social assistance. Absolutely anyone who wants their doctor to kill them should be allowed to die with dignity. This is the next logical step, lets push it forward.

We can already kill children within the womb lets make it legal to kill them outside it as well. I guess the earliest age would be 18 years old as that's when are legally adults. Or should we start a petition that anyone of any age can have a Dr. assisted suicide? Sounds like a winner to me. Will this be part of their next election platform?

[jbg]

My view is only up to the governments to make the laws to ALLOW people to have a CHOICE when to die, with the assistance of the medical industry, it's up to the person to make that decide when they make out a living will and name the person they feel will carry out their wishes. Who should use this law, anyone who is just existing in this world and not living. One who can't communicate, one who can't take care of themselves and one who is dying and there no help for them. Why do we watch someone die of cancer or Alzheimer's, who ends up in a nursing home from 8-16 years before they die. We allow our pets to die, why not our loved ones, IF that's what THEY want? There could be laws setup to monitor this and no one would be force to do this if that's what they didn't want. I can't see the present Tory government going for this though and this kind of issue always brings church and state together.

This may be a rare moment, but I just about totally agree with you on this post. And the moon is not full.