Euthanasia?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-05-2017, 07:59 AM
RE: Euthanasia?
For the shit quality trolls here, it should be compulsory.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like adey67's post
31-05-2017, 09:49 AM
RE: Euthanasia?
While being jabbed repeatedly by the person attempting to start my IV yesterday, the nurse asked me if I had an Advanced Directive on file. Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2017, 06:34 AM (This post was last modified: 01-06-2017 07:16 AM by GenesisNemesis.)
RE: Euthanasia?
(30-05-2017 06:53 PM)KUSA Wrote:  Every person on this planet has contemplated suicide during bad times of their life.

I haven't. Consider

Quote: I think suicide or euthanasia should be decided by someone that is of sound mind. Someone that is terminally ill and suffering can make a rational choice. Someone that is depressed can't.

Would a religious person who has a strong belief against suicide because they believe in Hell have a "sound mind"? If the answer is no, how do you exclude religious people from making that decision? Also, what about people undergoing a high amount of stress, due to a personal tragedy, or their job, etc? Wouldn't stress influence the decision making process?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GenesisNemesis's post
04-06-2017, 02:44 PM
RE: Euthanasia?
Yes. it should be allowed in certain circumstances like terminal illness
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-06-2017, 11:05 PM
RE: Euthanasia?
What about ritual fasting to death?
Link
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-06-2017, 04:49 PM
RE: Euthanasia?
(16-04-2017 10:37 AM)RearViewMirror Wrote:  We have no issue with putting down a pet once their quality of life becomes unbearable to them. And as many well know, some pets are part of "your" family. Why shouldn't we be afforded the same luxury?
This is the crux of my view on the matter. Not only do we have no issue putting down a suffering pet, we generally consider it selfish assholery to keep them suffering so you don't have to say goodbye one moment sooner than necessary. It also seems rather sociopathic to be more bothered by our feelings around losing the pet, than by the pet's suffering.

There is nothing about humans that should flip this 180 degrees on its ear. Even if you think human life is more valuable than, say, a dog's life, then it follows that human suffering is even more intolerable than dog suffering.

We had a little two year old puggle that blew out a disk in its spine and was in excruciating pain, lost bowel and bladder control and was pretty much paralyzed on its back half. Expensive and painful surgery may or may not have fixed it in part or in whole but then the fact it had happened once made it likely to happen again in another spot. We wept for days afterwards but I did not want her to live one minute longer with such agony. Some day when I'm in a body cast with a smashed pelvis or something I would want someone to respect my wishes if I chose to stop having new experiences.

Depression or acute stress have to be considered, I suppose, but it really is up to the person and to a lesser extent their family, not to be second-guessed by outsiders.

Oregon's law and others like it are better than nothing but far too restrictive. You have to have at least two doctors agree you have a death sentence within 6 months and then by the time you jump through all the hoops to get the assistance your six months may be largely over anyway. It's a lot to ask of someone who may be in great pain or very weak in the first place.

Recently in the Netherlands (IIRC) a woman in her late 30s or early 40s was allowed euthanasia based only on terrible unremitting and untreatable mental suffering. This is a little more of a grey area but she HAD tried everything to no avail. She had experienced a horribly abusive childhood and was in constant anxiety, terror and depression. She just didn't want to fight it anymore with so little prospect for improved quality of life. I can't think of a good reason to force someone like that to suffer just because you have the notion she could simply "suck it up" and choose to be happy. That is just the judgment of someone for whom some acceptable level of mental peace comes fairly effortlessly. Here again ... it is the individual who must decide for themselves. It isn't for us to second-guess. So long as it's voluntary, rational and uncoerced, go for it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like mordant's post
09-06-2017, 06:53 PM
RE: Euthanasia?
(09-06-2017 04:49 PM)mordant Wrote:  
(16-04-2017 10:37 AM)RearViewMirror Wrote:  We have no issue with putting down a pet once their quality of life becomes unbearable to them. And as many well know, some pets are part of "your" family. Why shouldn't we be afforded the same luxury?
This is the crux of my view on the matter. Not only do we have no issue putting down a suffering pet, we generally consider it selfish assholery to keep them suffering so you don't have to say goodbye one moment sooner than necessary. It also seems rather sociopathic to be more bothered by our feelings around losing the pet, than by the pet's suffering.

There is nothing about humans that should flip this 180 degrees on its ear. Even if you think human life is more valuable than, say, a dog's life, then it follows that human suffering is even more intolerable than dog suffering.

We had a little two year old puggle that blew out a disk in its spine and was in excruciating pain, lost bowel and bladder control and was pretty much paralyzed on its back half. Expensive and painful surgery may or may not have fixed it in part or in whole but then the fact it had happened once made it likely to happen again in another spot. We wept for days afterwards but I did not want her to live one minute longer with such agony. Some day when I'm in a body cast with a smashed pelvis or something I would want someone to respect my wishes if I chose to stop having new experiences.

Depression or acute stress have to be considered, I suppose, but it really is up to the person and to a lesser extent their family, not to be second-guessed by outsiders.

Oregon's law and others like it are better than nothing but far too restrictive. You have to have at least two doctors agree you have a death sentence within 6 months and then by the time you jump through all the hoops to get the assistance your six months may be largely over anyway. It's a lot to ask of someone who may be in great pain or very weak in the first place.

Recently in the Netherlands (IIRC) a woman in her late 30s or early 40s was allowed euthanasia based only on terrible unremitting and untreatable mental suffering. This is a little more of a grey area but she HAD tried everything to no avail. She had experienced a horribly abusive childhood and was in constant anxiety, terror and depression. She just didn't want to fight it anymore with so little prospect for improved quality of life. I can't think of a good reason to force someone like that to suffer just because you have the notion she could simply "suck it up" and choose to be happy. That is just the judgment of someone for whom some acceptable level of mental peace comes fairly effortlessly. Here again ... it is the individual who must decide for themselves. It isn't for us to second-guess. So long as it's voluntary, rational and uncoerced, go for it.

:slowclap: -an emoji we could use here. My wife's chihuahua has a liver that is enlarged to about 3X its normal size, so we're feeding it less per meal and more meals to reduce discomfort. What the hell kind of solution is that? I'm scheduling another visit to the vet, and my wife is gonna cry (I don't blame her, I probably will, too- she's a sweet little dog). But, as has been said, why should a pet live, just to make one happy, especially when one can see it is in pain? What the hell kind of happy is that? That xtian shit has to get out of hospitals and hospice care. That torture porn death cult shit is where that attitude comes from. Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fireball's post
10-06-2017, 06:00 AM
RE: Euthanasia?
I missed this entirely but because I have researched this topic so much, I would like to say a few words too.

On one hand I can understand that doctors and nurses may not want to end someone's life. They see the patient's suffering, but it is not about the patient really. It is about the personnel's sanity. I can understand on some level that even if the patient is the one requesting to die, they would feel like murderer's if they helped the patient with that.
The law's in place, I think are outdated to be honest. I understand about the Hippocratic oath and all that. But if we euthanize our loved pets to end suffering, then for me it would be a logical step to offer this to my loved human people as well. And also to then honour this request.

Yes, I think it is reasonable to have a doctor or psychologist assess the person that requests euthanasia / assisted suicide like they do it in Switzerland. But I do not think it is reasonable to talk people out of it or force them to continue living when this is against their will.
So yes, maybe the source of a person wanting to die can be treated and it should be part of that assessment, to offer treatment. Be it psychological or physical. But if the patient declines and seems to be of sound mind, their request should be honored.

Now from the other side. I know for a fact that one day I will decide that it is time for me and I will end it myself. I know that by the time I reach the age that I want to die, it is unlikely that the laws have changed. So unless I travel far to get it done professionally, I will be doing it myself. I know that in most places, even if my family knows and is ok with it, if they are near me when I do it and they do not try to prevent me, they might be charged with some stuff and go to jail.
So I am aware that I might not be able to have my family around which is sad when you think of it.
I have researched this in depth and found several ways that are relatively painless and humane. I would like it to be a warm and loving experience. I would like to be surrounded by my family when I leave for ever. But probably I won't get that. That is the sad part of it for me.
Death is such a taboo topic in our society and people are so needlessly scared of everything related to death that it is almost impossible to have a mature conversation about it.
I think that Euthanasia should simply be an option offered to certain ill people. Terminal illness, once the suffering is too great and no medication can help with it anymore, should be kindly offered euthanasia or at least if they ask for it, should be granted the request. It should be a standard possibility to have this in writing even before the situation arises. So I would like the possibility to go to a lawyer, set up something in writing that explains exactly in what circumstance I would like to be euthanized, and I would like the medical community to honour this wish.

I see it like this:
I didn't ask to be born.
I receive all the medical help to stay alive.
But I do not get to choose if I even want to stay alive.
If I wish to not be alive anymore, then that should be my decision. Is it not my body and my life?

"Freedom is the freedom to say that 2+2=4" - George Orwell (in 1984)
- Wotsefack?! -
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-06-2017, 08:17 AM
RE: Euthanasia?
(09-06-2017 06:53 PM)Fireball Wrote:  
(09-06-2017 04:49 PM)mordant Wrote:  This is the crux of my view on the matter. Not only do we have no issue putting down a suffering pet, we generally consider it selfish assholery to keep them suffering so you don't have to say goodbye one moment sooner than necessary. It also seems rather sociopathic to be more bothered by our feelings around losing the pet, than by the pet's suffering.

There is nothing about humans that should flip this 180 degrees on its ear. Even if you think human life is more valuable than, say, a dog's life, then it follows that human suffering is even more intolerable than dog suffering.

We had a little two year old puggle that blew out a disk in its spine and was in excruciating pain, lost bowel and bladder control and was pretty much paralyzed on its back half. Expensive and painful surgery may or may not have fixed it in part or in whole but then the fact it had happened once made it likely to happen again in another spot. We wept for days afterwards but I did not want her to live one minute longer with such agony. Some day when I'm in a body cast with a smashed pelvis or something I would want someone to respect my wishes if I chose to stop having new experiences.

Depression or acute stress have to be considered, I suppose, but it really is up to the person and to a lesser extent their family, not to be second-guessed by outsiders.

Oregon's law and others like it are better than nothing but far too restrictive. You have to have at least two doctors agree you have a death sentence within 6 months and then by the time you jump through all the hoops to get the assistance your six months may be largely over anyway. It's a lot to ask of someone who may be in great pain or very weak in the first place.

Recently in the Netherlands (IIRC) a woman in her late 30s or early 40s was allowed euthanasia based only on terrible unremitting and untreatable mental suffering. This is a little more of a grey area but she HAD tried everything to no avail. She had experienced a horribly abusive childhood and was in constant anxiety, terror and depression. She just didn't want to fight it anymore with so little prospect for improved quality of life. I can't think of a good reason to force someone like that to suffer just because you have the notion she could simply "suck it up" and choose to be happy. That is just the judgment of someone for whom some acceptable level of mental peace comes fairly effortlessly. Here again ... it is the individual who must decide for themselves. It isn't for us to second-guess. So long as it's voluntary, rational and uncoerced, go for it.

:slowclap: -an emoji we could use here. My wife's chihuahua has a liver that is enlarged to about 3X its normal size, so we're feeding it less per meal and more meals to reduce discomfort. What the hell kind of solution is that? I'm scheduling another visit to the vet, and my wife is gonna cry (I don't blame her, I probably will, too- she's a sweet little dog). But, as has been said, why should a pet live, just to make one happy, especially when one can see it is in pain? What the hell kind of happy is that? That xtian shit has to get out of hospitals and hospice care. That torture porn death cult shit is where that attitude comes from. Facepalm

It's the humane thing to do...though not the easy thing to do. I had to make a similar decision with Lady last fall. Her quality of life was declining and even the vet said she was not the same dog he had operated on three months prior. I knew what had to be done when things became dire. I held her and told her she was a good girl as she slipped away...the vet, Lady and me all on the floor in the exam room with her wrapped in her blanket with a beloved toy.

Why people will hang onto the shell of a human loved one though they no longer have a reasonable quality of life is beyond me...I see two things that come into play with attempting to keep someone alive when only prolonging their suffering...one is selfishly not being able to let go and the other being the idea that only their loving god can end a life. My husband's grandfather was removed from the ICU when he began screaming and praying for god to take his wife and end her suffering because he would not allow medical life sustainment to be ended.

Too many people treat loved ones with less compassion than they treat their pets.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
10-06-2017, 02:57 PM
RE: Euthanasia?
(16-04-2017 10:37 AM)RearViewMirror Wrote:  I'm curious about everyone's thoughts on Euthanasia?

Euthanasia is immoral and should continue to be against the law.

However, Physician Assisted Death (or Physician Assisted Suicide whatever you want to call it) should be permissible.

There is a difference between Euthanasia -- where a 3rd Party like the government is involved, and Physician Assisted Dying, where the patient is in complete control of the process.

The enemy numbered six hundred - including women and children - and we abolished them utterly, leaving not even a baby alive to cry for its dead mother. This is incomparably the greatest victory that was ever achieved by the Christian soldiers of the United States. -- Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: