Euthanasia / Assisted Suicide

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by Turambar, Aug 31, 2006.

  1. Cascador

    Cascador Who's Anakin?

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    30,515
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Belgium
    Ratings:
    +384 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia, Religion and Politics

    I didn't even know that it would be 'morally' wrong to give blood transfusions? Euthanasia, I can have some understanding for that, while I don't agree of course, but blood transfusions? That's just ridiculous.

    Edit: Right me and Padmé were talking about something else and this beats everything. She told me about a boy, who was stung by hundreds of bees. So his family finds him, what would you do as a parent. Take him to the hospital, would sound logical (and sane btw). But no, they all got to their knees and prayed to God to heal him. Result, the boys' body completely swelled up, so bad he drowned in the poison. He was discovered hours later, and the parents were put to jail, as it should be, for negligence.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2008
  2. Alchemist

    Alchemist The Fighters Guide House Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    A Pirate city in international waters
    Ratings:
    +192 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia, Religion and Politics

    People who that crap piss me off. God did not gift us with the power of intelligence to kneel down and ask for something that can be done on our own. God (according to my view) gave us this intelligence that sets us not apart just higher up than simple animals (of course we are still animals just smarter), the human race was given the ability to reach new places discover new things, invent remedies and cures, so that we can do just that. Not so that we can all sit on our knees and watch children (and others) die.

    I recently found out that I am pretty close to a deist. Someone who believes in God, that God created the universe, but is not actively involved in our day to day affairs. God set the ball in motion eons ago, and we are pretty much on our own.
     
  3. Panthera

    Panthera Empress

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    the Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia, Religion and Politics

    I think euthanasia is a good thing, but ofcourse not with depressed teenagers. nor depressed elderly for all that matters, but what if someone is dementing, no more relatives. i think that perhaps, like a donor cod. everyone could also have registered: "when i no longer understand the value of live, nor is there any chance this can change i would like to be put to sleep."
    I would sign.
     
  4. darkfox

    darkfox New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    Euthanasia

    Euthanasia, or doctor assisted suicide has always been a hot button topic with as points of view as the night sky has stars.

    I personally believe the only real reason people have a problem with Euthanasia is a selfish desire to keep their loved ones around, no matter how much pain they are in. We certainly don't mind "pulling the plug" if a person is only living thanks to a machine...so what's the difference? If any.
     
  5. Jorick

    Jorick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,407
    Likes Received:
    55
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Oregon
    Ratings:
    +55 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia

    Well, there's a HUGE difference between euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide. It technically means the same thing, but by modern definitions of the word "euthanasia" it's not quite exact. Euthanasia is generally understood to be when a doctor chooses to end the life of a patient with a terminal illness or too much pain or whatever. Doctor assisted suicide is when a patient asks the doctor to help them die.

    Now, about the actual question at hand... I live in Oregon, a state with an assisted suicide program. I think it's a good option to allow people who have horrible terminal illnesses, let them choose not to go through that pain and not put their family through it, and to go out on their own terms. The majority of people who use the Oregon program have Lou Gehrig's disease (or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/ALS for those outside the US/Canada). Most of the rest have other similar slow and traumatizing diseases and painful cancers. I'm a big supporter of assisted suicide, nobody should have to go through that if they don't want it.

    Euthanasia is another matter entirely. The doctor choosing to end a patient's life because they think the person should die is not okay. It is by it's very definition an act of murder, something we as a society have deemed unacceptable. Okaying that would lead to a whole bunch of doctors with god complexes offing perfectly healthy patients because they're unfit to live by whatever crazy criteria they decide to work off of.

    There's a large gray area, however. In places with no assisted suicide laws, if a terminal patient wants to die early and gets the doctor's help, should that be considered murder and a criminal act? I personally say no, and think that all places should have assisted suicide programs. And to any detractors against the idea, I have this to say: would you want to live through a disease slowly killing you, that paralyzes you bit by bit over five to ten years, until you can't move anything but your eyes, until it finally paralyzes your lungs and you suffocate? Does that sound like a good time? That's Lou Gehrig's disease, the disease most people who use assisted suicide have. You wouldn't want to go through that, so neither should anyone else.
     
  6. Raff the Sweetling

    Raff the Sweetling Threadkiller

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,421
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    My own personal hell
    Ratings:
    +46 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia

    I have no problem with assisted suicide in any form if the patient makes the decision, or it is documented before their incapacitated. I wouldnt want to give the right to make the decision over to physicians though. If a person is sick or in pain with no options, why should we make them suffer till the end? We have more compassion than that for our dogs for christs sake.
     
  7. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia, Religion and Politics

    I've merged the new thread with an existing thread. Please remember to do a search on the topic before creating a new thread to avoid cluttering the forum with duplicates.

    Linking my previous post:

     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 10, 2009
  8. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    I agree on both points. It must be the patient's decision, or they can make a written statement before they are unable to make that decision.

    The fear of greedy family pressuring rich old grandma into "voluntary" suicide is counteracted by the need for a psych evaluation that proves you are of sound mind and body and understand what you are deciding.

    My wife and I have the understanding that if one of us is turned into a vegetable with no prospect of recovery, to turn each other off. The person we love would already be gone, we see no point in keeping the flesh container alive.
     
  9. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    Resurrecting an old topic. This fellow from my home state was an active normal man then became a quadraplegic after an accident. After living in agony he decided eventually to legally pursue the right to die, by not allowing his carers to feed him via a tube, and to take no action if he got sick.

    In effect, the only way he could legally die is by starving himself to death. There are laws against treating animals that way. If someone kept another person prisoner and starved them to death we'd all be horrified. But if this man, of sound mind if not body, chooses to end his life, this is the only way he can do so.

    I think that if stringent checks and safeguards are put in place to stop some morose teenager killing themselves, I personally see no problem with someone sick or elderly taking their own life in a manner of their own choosing. Without having to jump under a train or let their shocked family find them dead in the garage and be forever traumatised.

    I think this is a stepping stone on the road to voluntary euthanasia. Realistically I think it will start out being restricted to extreme cases like Christian Rossiter. There should be psych evaluations, a waiting period, and I believe the State government has already said you need to be a citizen of this state for 3 years before you can do this, which prevents the "euthensia tourism" efect.
    RIP Christian, you'll be noted as an important milestone on the slow road of progress.
     
  10. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    The bit about the animals is interesting. You're right; it's judged humane to put an animal down if suffers too much. It's judged humane if this is from starvation. Reversely, humans have to starve themselves to reach the same effect.

    I am still of the opinion that it is a sure sign of a Theocracy if people cannot decide over their own life. I don't understand that, within a liberal democracy, the Ultimate habeas corpus is placed outside the law. And the only reason can be any given religion; mostly because it's judged that Life is God's or Godsent and thus cannot be taken by that same person, since that is a sacrilege.
     
  11. SilverDragon.Xx

    SilverDragon.Xx New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Lybster, Scotland!
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0
    In My opinion there are certain circumstances which should allow euthanasia, like if someone is extremely disabled and is going to die anyway or if someone with Cancer doesn't want to live with the pain of it. Like when babies are going to be born extrememly disabled, where it would affect there chances of survival or quality of life, it is the mother's right to decide whether she wants to keep the child, so if we go by the philosophy that we do not have the right to take or own life or take anyone elses life if they are asking us to then on that matter we are being hypocritical, because killing a child before it's born is even worse because we don't know what it is going to want, so Euthanasia should also be up to a person but only in extreme circumstances such as great disability or the fact they are going to die anyway.
     
  12. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    More progress. Societal evolution inches forward. Baby steps are possibly the safest way to proceed to gain public acceptance.

    I think many people simply don't give the issue much thought until they themselves, or someone close to them, faces a situation where assisted suicide would be a merciful release. If it doesn't affect me, why should I care? Classic lack of empathy that makes humanity so slow to evolve.


    That last it is a very legitimate concern, Especially in western society where elderly people are not valued as in other cultures, and rather are shoved in a home and ignored by many people.

    Hence the need for the independent psych evaluation, consideration of family situations, etc etc. Stringent but not ridiculous safety measures will go a long way to helping the public accept this sort of change.
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2009
  13. Rob Darken

    Rob Darken New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    865
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    In the midst of the Celtic Winter, following the v
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0
    I personally believe that Euthanasia should be lawful. That said however I believe very strict guidelines need to be put into place to stop unscrupulous types taking advantage of the system.
    For example, the person must be of sound mental state. One must be terminally ill or suffering so badly from a debiliating disease that life is too painful to go on. Counselling on alternate paths must be tried first in instances where the person is not suffering from a terminal disease. Wills changed less than 6 months prior to death are null and void. And so on, you sort of get the picture. The laws must be well written and tight to prevent any slipping through the loopholes for gold diggers etc.
    The issue of Euthanasia for children, particulary infants is a very hard one to decide on. My gut tells me that natural selection should be adhered to, in order to continue a sound genetic code. In this case we should probably get rid of humicribs (?) vaccinations and a myriad of other things we use to enable maxium survival rate among children. I know a lot of you probably disagree, but the world is beginning to become overpopulated, and we are running out of resources. We probably need to depopulate a bit!
     
  14. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    That's progressive.... I'm quite sure this is still illegal in The Netherlands.

    But, whilst I am not immediately against, there's one issue, being that of documentation. There will be instances in which the decision of the family is drawn into doubt - and by that time, there's no asking the person in question. And the Crown has no choice but to prosecute in matters of doubt, which is all the more painful. I would say that this needs to be a very last resort, I still believe that the entire matter is still better judged and documented by medical professionals.
     
  15. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    This is a horrible situation to be in as a parent, but personally, I agree with the bottom line of the story:

     
  16. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    Sad but inevitable :(


     
  17. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    The only time I would ever support euthanasia is if the person involved gives a specific request that he or she wants to die. In plain spoken language and without question. Only then can it truly be a persons choice. No one should have the right to decide for anyone else.

    For the situations in which people are on life support and cannot answer, it really is up to the families and those in the medical field to render care. If a person would die naturally without life support, that is not euthanasia. Life just took its course.

    In the actually IMPLEMENTING the pathway towards death, only the person who wants it should decide. Anything else comes far to close to playing God for me.
     
  18. Window Bar

    Window Bar "We Read for Light"

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0
    Re: Euthanasia

    I, too, live in Oregon; and though I'm not currently facing anything deadlier than plain old time, it's a comfort to know that nobody can make me go through the kinds of tortures I've seen others endure. Whaddaya know ... it's almost like living in a free country.
     
  19. Mububban

    Mububban Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,705
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    West Australia
    Ratings:
    +186 / 1 / -0
    Let's hope other parts of the world adopt thisattitude, and Oregon's government doesn't cancel it on a political whim.
     
  20. Overread

    Overread Wolfing it up! Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    6,537
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +342 / 1 / -0
    Interesting - I've read a lot of comments where people have said that (with capable adults) the adult in question should be in a position of a sane mindset when making the choice on euthanasia. This makes perfect sense that one should be proven to not be suffering from a condition or situation which would affect their judgement and thus lead them to making the wrong choice.

    However interestingly the subject of mental debilitation has not (unless I missed it) thus far been mentioned. Having lost three close relatives to alzhimers I have to say this is something that has to be considered as well. These days it is possible to live a lot longer than in the past, better food and medical care as well as far reduced injuries during life mean that we can make it to very old ages - and even when our bodies start to slow and age we can use machins to extend life further. However we (as yet) don't have a way to protect the minds aging process and - for a growing number of people - this means that whilst their body and basic needs can be kept going their mind falls apart - and there comes a point where the quality of life for these people results in horrific conditions; when they can't tell who they are, where they are who anyone is.

    Thus I think we have to also make provision for those people whose don't have the mental capacity to make the choice as well as for those who have lost the mental capacity for choice.

    We also have to be carefull of fluke events - often there will be cases where people might make a miraculous recovery from a horrific condition or they might even surive and live whilst suffering from some majorly debilitating condition. From these cases we should learn from them indeed, but not let their precense sway general throught by media promotion - since for every one of these cases there will be many more people who don't make this far.

    Also its my view that any family, doctor or group determined to end someone elses life so that they might profit or gain by the death will do so no matter the legal restrictions. Those in the UK will recall the case of Dr. Shipman who ended the life of many older patients of his after getting them to write him into part of (or all of) their wills. Legal restrictions will always be worked around by such groups.
     
Search tags for this page

real footage of assisted suicides