The debate the right to die (euthanasia)

[Baz 0]

The debate over the right to control your own terms and conditions of your mortality has sparked again... The famous HBO film "You Don't Know Jack" starring famous actor Al Pachino as the infamous Dr. Jack Kevorkian raises awareness and questions in this debate.

So where do you weigh in on the issue? Do you think it should be a fundamental right to be able to find relief and end your suffering?

Why delay the inevitable? We all will die some day, there are many people working on ways to cheat death so that you may continue your life long struggle for the pursuit of happiness which may possibly never be attained.

In the USA the health care industry is counting on you wanting to fatten their pockets by seeking to extend your life as long as possible, do you have any idea how much money the industry makes on nursing homes and extended care facilities alone? Do you know the condition that the people are subjected to living in such facilities and in what state they physically are in?

[HyperU2 11]

I'm very much for it, I'm also against heroic measures being taken in cases where there is no positive outcome possible.

[echo1 0]

This somewhat worries me.

[Baz 0]

that doesn't shock me, do you have any idea the amount of people that die every year because of medical mistakes / negligence?

Which speaking of... Are not normally painless nor peaceful ways of departing.

What about in cases of psychological pain? Such as depression, anxiety, fear, terror, etc etc...

Would you allow this right as a fundamental right or would you attach "conditions" to it and for whom to decide?

What if you feel that the struggle of life and its pain is just no longer worth your mortality? For what? To endlessly attempt to work to make a meaningless wage and barely be able to provide for yourself much less others? And be forced in a way to borrow money you do not have nor will be able to pay back?

There are many questions able to be raised. But the bottom line is, what if you felt you just wished to end it all and enter the end game. For whatever reasoning you have.

Should you be stopped? Should you be criminalized and thrown in jail? Should we just not interfere? Should people assist if you are not able to say because of physical handicap? Or should people offer you advice on how to manage it successfully and with the most peace and control?

Should we all just wait to become victims of circumstance? or "god's will." Is it not god's will if there is a god? For giving you these circumstances and the thoughts you have?

or should we wait for us to be on our death beds? Or be victims of circumstance such as car accidents, natural disasters, war, and just plain old accidents?

Did you know, more people die from a wide range of accidents every year than firearms?

Edited September 11, 2010 by Baz

[echo1 0]

There was a case of a woman in the Netherlands who was bereaved of her children in an accident, and successfully sought euthanasia because of the anguish she felt. Anywhere else, she would have been given counseling, maybe some anti-depressants. In a society that tolerated euthanasia, she was bumped off.

The issue with euthanasia is this - as it stands in most countries, we don't actively kill sick people. We help them along in the late stages by increasing the morphine dose which can speed up the death process, but not directly cause it. The usual argument is "But why should someone in a hopeless condition have to live on in agony, and without hope, in order to get to that point?" and this is a reasonable argument in isolation. So we legalize Euthanasia with provisions so that only people in the terminal stages can be killed, for example - the patient has to be certified to be terminal, in agony, and is estimated to have about 6 months to live.

But then comes the slippery slope. People start to ask "Why should I have to wait till I have only one year left?", "Is it really necessary for me to be in agony? I may not be in agony, but I'm paralyzed and can't do anything at all". Of course, now that killing people in agony with only six months to live is morally acceptable, that seems pretty reasonable now too. So we change the laws accordingly. Sooner or later, we are killing people suffering from depression. Sooner or later, we just kill anyone who is sick. If we don't, the system begins to seem as arbitrary as our current one does to some people.

Obviously a line has to be drawn in the sand somewhere. The most consistent and logical place to draw it is at the bit where euthanasia is not allowed. Simple as that.

[Baz 0]

so essentially it would open the flood gates so to speak? But for psychological cases... Why live a life of torment and harassment? Just because it is your own self or your environment to blame doesn't mean there is no pain or suffering.

Psychological pain and distress is just as real as its physical counterpart.

What about if you had dementia or Alzheimer? Would you wish to live the rest of your life unaware of your loved ones around you and confused? And maybe even unresponsive to verbal stimuli?

The fundamental question seems to be do we have a free will over our body? After all it is the person who is inhabiting that body that has to live with it... Not society.

[Cotala Studios 10]

For psychological cases, they have medications and counseling. For untreatable conditions like alzhimers, just because the person can't remember stuff doesn't meant they want to be dead. My great grandfather had a stroke when I was eight, and he has been kept alive all this time, because despite the fact that he cannot talk or move, or even remember who we are half the time, it is clear that he does not want to die. He is happy living his "groundhog day" existance, where he wakes up on the same day every morning. And who knows, maybe one day he will wake up, and he will be better. You never know if someone will get better until they are actually dead. When it is a person's time, God will take them. Until then, we have a responsibility to do everything we can in order to keep them alive.

[maddogx 13]

As a Humanist, I have no problem with voluntary euthanasia. If someone makes a conscious decision to end their own life, I believe they should be allowed to do so in a way that is quick and painless.

Ending someone elses life without their consent is a different thing entirely, and should not be permitted.

[Laertes 10]

As a Humanist, I have no problem with voluntary euthanasia. If someone makes a conscious decision to end their own life, I believe they should be allowed to do so in a way that is quick and painless.

Ending someone elses life without their consent is a different thing entirely, and should not be permitted.

This sums up my opinion on the matter quite nicely

[That guy 10]

I am all for assisted suicide. I want to have control of my life, and not be stuck in some painful pointless life of limbo (physical incapacitation) and not deal with the horrid psychological after effects of living in such a state. die with a little dignity

I have had the misfortune to watch people have to live and eventually die in such a sad state.

I also think it is healthier (both psychologically and financially) for family members to end it quickly rather than have to watch some one linger for months or years

[Cotala Studios 10]

Just playing devil's advocate, but isn't it also traumatic mental burden to know that you knowingly killed someone when there was even a remote possibility that they might recover?

[That guy 10]

thats true, but there is a major psychological difference between "killing" and "murdering".

but then it all just starts to come down to specifics about each individual case, and we need alot of information to really make educated assessments.

and of course, there is the fact that each person is different, thus voiding what i said about killing and murdering.

but as a general rule, if some one wishes to end their life, and some one can handle doing it, then it should be done.

[Big Mac 19]

If someone wants to die that's their choice. We have no problem putting our pets to sleep when they get to the point in their life where it's too painful to live. I don't see what's so wrong about applying the same concept to a human, but in the end it's my opinion that your life is yours to do with what you will.

[Laqueesha 474]

Just playing devil's advocate, but isn't it also traumatic mental burden to know that you knowingly killed someone when there was even a remote possibility that they might recover?

The money helps with the trauma.

[froggyluv 2136]

Whomever said "slippery slope" hit the nail on the head. Personally, i'm against suicide but yet, who am I to tell a person living in agonizing pain.

I can forsee some spooky commercials though for physcological pain

"Had a bad year with the stock market, family bumming you out, consider a euthanasia package at one of our friendly clinics. We'll guide you thru it with calming music and even tell your family after...."

...seems we as a society should do everything in our power to prevent that sort of thing. We all suffer some sort of mental trauma in our life, if this was a legal option, that would mean your shrink could ethically recommend it.

[sic-disaster 311]

I doubt that, froggy.

As it is now, it is legal over here but it happens only in extremely severe cases.

These cases being people who live in agony through each day with 0% hope of getting better. That is no kind of life, and in these cases i support euthanasia.

If somebody is just being a mental wreck i say stop being emo and get over it. If you wanna die, jump of a bridge if need be. But essentially with euthanasia you are asking someone else to kill you, which you cant ask for no reason and can sincerely mess with the other person too if the need was not really there.

[froggyluv 2136]

I doubt that, froggy.

As it is now, it is legal over here but it happens only in extremely severe cases.

These cases being people who live in agony through each day with 0% hope of getting better. That is no kind of life, and in these cases i support euthanasia.

If somebody is just being a mental wreck i say stop being emo and get over it. If you wanna die, jump of a bridge if need be. But essentially with euthanasia you are asking someone else to kill you, which you cant ask for no reason and can sincerely mess with the other person too if the need was not really there.

Yeah I was exaggerating to make a point :p

If physical pain can absolutely not be remedied, I would see a strong argument in favor of giving them the choice. Mental anguish was more what I was alluding to.

[maddogx 13]

Jumping off a bridge - and every other concievable form of suicide - will cause some form of distress for at least one other person. Jump off a bridge, people may see you, perhaps even as you hit the ground, but at the very least someone will find your mangled body. Similar if you decide to off yourself by driving your car into something hard, except now you could be endangering other people. Even if you commit suicide in the confines of your own home, someone is going to find you eventually, and it isn't going to be a great day for them.

If someone really wants to commit suicide, I say let them do it in a way that causes the least possible distress to everyone else. In a hospital with some form of pill or injection, monitored by professionals. Of course there should be limits, though. If the person in question is neither terminally ill, in some form of severe pain or at least certifiably suffering from heavy depression for a significant length of time, there should be a waiting period.

Say a physically healthy and non-depressed person wants to end their life (which is pretty unlikely anyway) they should be required to visit a psychiatrist a set number of times over a specific period (for example twice a week over a period of one month), and each time they must reaffirm their wish to end their life. Just to make sure healthy people don't off themselves on a whim because they lost their job or their dog died...

[abs 2]

I can't say I've admitted this to any of my friends, but I do want to off myself well before my time. I'm not depressed, and I'm physically healthy, I just want to be able to choose how I exit and when. I mean, I make all the other decisions in the story of my life and I don't see why I shouldn't be able to choose how to write the final chapter. Of course, the closer I reach the age I want to die I may change my mind, but as of right now I'm thinking late 40's early 50's.

I'm not saying any of that to be a shit...I'm absolutely serious. I think that euthanasia should be an option for those who want to call it quits because they've decided to as well, not just because someone is sufferring.

Abs

[Sennacherib 0]

I agree; the freedom should be applicable even to death

[echo1 0]

Just playing devil's advocate, but isn't it also traumatic mental burden to know that you knowingly killed someone when there was even a remote possibility that they might recover?

When, for example, a life support machine is turned off, there's always a chance that if it was left on for one second longer that the person would make a miraculous recovery, jump out of bed and scream Alleluia. But probability tells us strange things may happen when we now in reality that they're not. So a fine line has to be drawn somewhere.

[BF2_Trooper 0]

If someone wants to die that's their choice. We have no problem putting our pets to sleep when they get to the point in their life where it's too painful to live. I don't see what's so wrong about applying the same concept to a human, but in the end it's my opinion that your life is yours to do with what you will.

Really? You don't see the difference between HUMAN LIFE and ANIMAL LIFE? It doesnt even have to take a religeous person to see difference dude. You don't even have to believes in Souls an' shit to see the worth of an idividual human being compared to an animal's. Humans have rights to live, animals don't, humans are obligated to take care of animals as stewards of this planet, but that's another story. But thanks for making the point about "slippery slopes", sooner or later the ending of human life might just be as casual as terminating pets if more people thought like you.

Edited September 19, 2010 by BF2_Trooper

[dmarkwick 261]

Really? You don't see the difference between HUMAN LIFE and ANIMAL LIFE? It doesnt even have to take a religeous person to see difference dude. You don't even have to believes in Souls an' shit to see the worth of an idividual human being compared to an animal's. Humans have rights to live, animals don't, humans are obligated to take care of animals as stewards of this planet, but that's another story. But thanks for making the point about "slippery slopes", sooner or later the ending of human life might just be as casual as terminating pets if more people thought like you.

Well, we ain't talking about rights to live, we're talking about rights to die :) I think the point BM was making is that a human ought to be allowed to make the decision to have their life legally terminated, and NOT that people have the power to arbitrarily end someone else's life.

[vilas 477]

"So where do you weigh in on the issue? Do you think it should be a fundamental right to be able to find relief and end your suffering?"

i believe that if person has no hope and knows himself his life will be hell , than should have right

if you are healthy and you know about cancer that will kill you in suffering, you can shot yourself

but if you for example would be paralised or hands cut off, than how can you kill yourself ?

i am totally against "other people decision", cause it can be misused (for example bad family member wanna take money and say "mother is suffering, kill her")

but if sane person decides himself, he should have right

as i said above

if you have hands, you can kill your self

if you have no hands than why others can decide about you ??? i know some people who died of horrible cancer , my friends mother was almost eaten by cancer in some months

she suffered very much, but country do not allow euthanasia

she died in horrible pain , being all time on "tramal" drugs, stronger than morphine

i cannot imagine myself live without being able to move or such like

untill you have hands healthy and gun/knife, you can decide

when you have hands paralised, law do not allow you to decide about life and death taking away dignity

cause when you are on wheelchair than how can you decide about yourself ??? or if you have perspective of cancer eating you alive, than what for suffer few months, if you know you will die ???

i wouldn't like to end like my friend's mother, which knew she will die, but has to suffer few months , when cancer simple eaten her alive

(she lost weight , looked like skeleton and her stommach cancer made her look like in 13th month pregnancy)

it was horror for her and her family , which couldn't do anything, just watching her suffering

Edited September 19, 2010 by vilas

[maddogx 13]

if you have no hands than why others can decide about you ???

Hint: It's called "assisted suicide" for a reason. If you do not have the ability to kill yourself, but are still able to make the conscious decision that you want to die, then you can get someone to do it for you / help you do it.