The world has lost a great humanitarian

[Gareth]

Being horribly maimed, losing my eyesight, hands, or ending-up paralyzed due to an accident or stroke. Being able to maintain what I personally consider to be my quality of life is vital to me. This doesn't mean I think other folks who are blind, for example, should not feel the desire to continue living their lives if they so choose.

Also, due to my age, I'm naturally more concerned these days with how I'm going to make my final exit from this twisted world that warehouses the elderly for the sake of money, and even tries to squeeze money from those who have passed-away in the form of increasingly exorbitant funeral expenses.

You folks may or may not agree with my views regarding a State sponsored euthanasia program based solely on individual consent. But when the heartbreaking time arrives when I have to do the right thing by taking one of my furry friends to our veterinarian’s office for the last time, it really makes me wonder why we can't provide this humane service for each other. What is so wrong with helping someone humanely end their misery when they realize their quality of life cannot be recovered due to advanced age, horrible injuries, a terminal illness, or some other ghastly affliction?
　
　

 

[edsinger]

I think you mean "moot".

You are correct, it was late but I guess no one was listening anyway

And , for a couple of reasons.
Pain is a subjective experience. We don't even know if coma patients are in pain. All we know is that they look relatively peaceful.

So we don't know then right?

Add to that the War on Drugs and its effect on pain management, which anyone who's looked into it knows has been disastrous. Terminally ill patients are given just enough to not be driven insane from their suffering, never enough to eliminate it or end it.

Hmmm , I would think that enough pain meds would drown almost anything....but I am no expert. But you get the concept, a self induced overdose would be my line of thinking.. keep pushing the button for more until...

Finally, if your argument against assisted suicide is completely theocratic in nature...

Precisely, I agree, I admit etc etc

Maybe everyone is right, we don't need God and His moral values anymore. I mean they must be overrated and such as society is doing so well now.

It sickens me that when it comes to medicine of all sorts, we have allowed paranoia to rule the day to the point where we now treat our dogs better than our fellow human beings.

Well that is to be expected with the change in society of the perception of the value of life itself. This is a direct result of that change in the last 50 years. We didn't bring animals up to the level of humans beings, we went the other direction.


So I guess it is now ok to put your fellow man down if he asks for it?


Truly we reep what we sow.....

 

[downzero]

But when the heartbreaking time arrives when I have to do the right thing by taking one of my furry friends to our veterinarian’s office for the last time, it really makes me wonder why we can't provide this humane service for each other.

This isn't a very good analogy, if for no other reason than your furry friend is a piece of property, with which you're free to do whatever you want.

The same is not true of human beings.

This is not to say that I don't think we should allow assisted suicide or even active euthanasia for that matter, but I don't think the reason is that human beings are equal to animals.

Although it's possible to characterize the principle of self-ownership as a property interest, I'm not sure comparing humans to dogs makes for the best analogy.

 

[edsinger]

No. People can reach a point where they're incapable of anything more strenuous than a whisper.

Oh that is absolutely true, that same thing can come from a car accident. So at that point 'who' makes the call if they are a vegetable? Where does society draw the line?

No. Putting it mildly, pain management is not precisely an exact science. Living with agony and doped to the ears isn't something I'd wish for myself either.. there are tolerance issues with painkillers and assorted side effects, beginning with opiates basically shutting down the digestive system.

I understand that we can't always know. Living with pain is not easy. some probably think I am a heartless ^(^&% for my opinions but I have seen this before with my father. He died in pain....He had cancer and refused pain meds. But he would not have even considered a button that would 'kill' him. It would have been morally abhorrent to him to even consider it. Whether you believe in God or not I guess does have a play in ones belief along these lines.

No. I have personally seen severe terminal cancer progress until it'd almost be easier to list the places where it hasn't metastatized, then apparently stop, with patient surviving for months with painkillers alone.

See I have also...personally with family.

Then you would tell someone without hope or chance of recovery, living in extreme agony, wishing to die, that they will continue to suffer because of your religious beliefs. How selfish is that?

Well I guess it could be seen that way. So where do we as a society draw the line? has anyone even looked into what is happening in Holland where this is legal? Maybe seeing the picture in a society that condones it will present the other side of the argument better than I am.

Assisted suicide differs from murder because the decision belongs exclusively to the sufferer. The only point in common is that a life ends, and that reeks of intellectual dishonesty. Me, I believe there are worse fates than death, I believe if someone's life is truly their own then they are free to end it, and I believe those that assist in this manner are only compassionate and kind..

That makes sense, and I guess if one wants to be an accomplice to the act it is there choice....after all they have to live with it.

Being horribly maimed, losing my eyesight, hands, or ending-up paralyzed due to an accident or stroke. Being able to maintain what I personally consider to be my quality of life is vital to me. This doesn't mean I think other folks who are blind, for example, should not feel the desire to continue living their lives if they so choose.

So its all about individual choice then?

Also, due to my age, I'm naturally more concerned these days with how I'm going to make my final exit from this twisted world that warehouses the elderly for the sake of money, and even tries to squeeze money from those who have passed-away in the form of increasingly exorbitant funeral expenses.

On this I agree and I find this one the most personal. Nursing homes for the most part suck. Folks this is already happening with the 'pain' patches. Your loved ones that are beyond taking care of themselves are sometimes being hurried to meet the ultimate end. It is a nasty truth that not many are aware of. I am struggling to keep my mother ,who I can not stand to be around for very long out of a home for just this reason. Assisted living places are much better but they cost more than most can afford.

We as a society are slowly moving the elderly toward the expendable side. This is what disgusts me, it is what Joseph Mengele was doing in a sense.

You folks may or may not agree with my views regarding a State sponsored euthanasia program based solely on individual consent. But when the heartbreaking time arrives when I have to do the right thing by taking one of my furry friends to our veterinarian’s office for the last time, it really makes me wonder why we can't provide this humane service for each other. What is so wrong with helping someone humanely end their misery when they realize their quality of life cannot be recovered due to advanced age, horrible injuries, a terminal illness, or some other ghastly affliction?

Once you place a human life in the same category as an animal, then the battle has been lost.

What is next drive up suicide barns?

 

[edsinger]

Here I will try my GoogleFu.......just to shed some light..

Of course. Anything can go wrong, and when you involve life-or-death situations, the results can be devastating. The most striking example of Euthanasia gone wrong can be seen in the Netherlands, where several sources estimate that around one thousand people are euthanized by doctors every year without their consent, for the simple reason that doctors decided it was time for them to die. According to a video by the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide called Euthanasia; A False Light:

It has gotten so bad in Holland that people have in their wallets little cards that say, "Do not euthanize me without my consent."

Now this is something that I was not aware of, so GoogeFu taught me something.

Still what I was aware of I want the folks reading this thread to consider. IN Europe where 'God' is an afterthought and especially Holland, this practice has been legal for a while.

There are cases, documented ones, in which the children/grand children have quilted their family member into this practice for monetary reasons, convenience reasons, and for just plain selfish ones.

Not to say that things are different here the the states, but I would argue that we have yet to fall that far down that path YET, but it has started.

I do not want to be a burden to anyone, and when the elderly start loosing their minds, what do you do? You have to have some sense of humanity left.

We are not talking about someone who has 48 hours to live and that 48 hours will be complete misery. In those cases the argument makes sense to us, but the problem is when it becomes acceptable to do this and then the time gets longer and longer.

Should we spend 1 million dollars to keep someone alive another month? No and I am not arguing that point. Natural death can come without postponing it with high dollar medicine. And in most cases, the patient can be made to be comfortable to some extent to await that time.

Personally, this is my feeling on this and only mine, I think it is a control thing. "I" want the control.........to me and my beliefs, that is the wrong attitude....this is only MY opinion though...

 

[level.eleven]

What is next drive up suicide barns?

Probably more like a booth.

Suicide booth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Fletch]

Hmmm , I would think that enough pain meds would drown almost anything....but I am no expert. But you get the concept, a self induced overdose would be my line of thinking.. keep pushing the button for more until...

The precise standard you are championing prevents this from being a possibility.

Precisely, I agree, I admit etc etc

Maybe everyone is right, we don't need God and His moral values anymore. I mean they must be overrated and such as society is doing so well now.

If you don't think God factors into my position, you are sadly mistaken. There is a deep doctrinal rift between our positions, and forum policy precludes hashing it out. But I'd appreciate it if you'd stop claiming a monopoly on knowing what God wants.

 

[edsinger]

The precise standard you are championing prevents this from being a possibility.

Not exactly, its a legal thing. If you grabbed a bottle of pills and took more than you should, the the prescriber has done nothing wrong, morally nor legally.

I would not say it should be legalized for the reasons I have already stated.

If you don't think God factors into my position, you are sadly mistaken. There is a deep doctrinal rift between our positions, and forum policy precludes hashing it out. But I'd appreciate it if you'd stop claiming a monopoly on knowing what God wants.

OK fair enough...and no we cant.

I have no monopoly on this by any means but I feel strongly about my position as do you.

Some can say God condones homosexuallity......I read in my Bible where He does not. That being said what is to say that my Bible is right and someone else's wrong? There is nothing that says that in an absolute manner.

We differ and that is what makes this country great. We can differ and still discuss it. Am I right? I think so but that is my very biased opinion as yours is also I presume.

The problem I have is with the legal definition of life and the taking thereof.....it was set this way for a reason. I am not deliberately trying to be non-compassionate by any means. I am just saying in the way that I value Human life, the Doctor is not a hero by an stretch of the word.

 

[Fletch]

Not exactly, its a legal thing. If you grabbed a bottle of pills and took more than you should, the the prescriber has done nothing wrong, morally nor legally.

The push-button machines are tightly regulated to prevent overdose by push-button, which is what made Kevorkian's machine (and attendant actions) illegal. If by your worldview a prescriber can set you up with a machine that will allow you to overdose, then Kevorkian did nothing wrong.

 

[edsinger]

Reading......

OK I have a link with a good article on this exact subject. It addresses much of what the reasons on both sides are and explanations thereof.


Please take the short time to review it....

Active Euthenasia | Essay Coursework

Some notable points in it are:

Murder is defined as; "The unlawful, premeditated killing of one human being by another

This seems a reasonable definition to me.

Euthanasia, in Canada, remains unlawful as of today, and the act of euthanasia is premeditated, thus whether for the purpose of mercy or not, euthanasia is, by definition, murder

Exactly one of my points, it is premeditated. The only difference in the doctors case is that he 'assisted', he did not pull the trigger so to speak.

Dr Pieter Admiraal, a leader of a movement to legalize assisted suicide in the Netherlands, stated pubicly that pain is never justification for euthanasia considering the advanced medical techniques currently available to manage pain in almost every circumstance.

This was a point that I was trying to make.....pain can be negated in almost all circumstances I would think. Drugs are pretty powerful today.

As a side note to this discussion, and actually an argument against my case, is battlefield triage. There are cases I am sure that a person has been lethally shot and has xx time left. The medic gives this person massive doses of Morphine or something like it. The patient might have been asking for a bullet or something of that kind. Is the medic accountable for doing what he did? In my opinion no, he did the best he could under those circumstances. But what if a buddy was asked to place the 'last' bullet for some reason? Would that be murder? Well by definition yes, but I would tend to say more a justifiable homicide. I would not convict this person as the mental baggage he would carry would be great.

There are extenuating circumstances for sure.....but we would have to tread lightly...as I have said in my case...Masada is the example I have no answer for.....

We ought to take into consideration, the statistics which tell us that fewer than one in four people with terminal illness have a desire to die, and that all of those who did wish to die had previously suffered with clinically diagnosable depression

^^^ THIS ^^^

But as some have pointed out, the sick might truly want this, but does it take into account the ramifications of the feelings of those being asked to assist?

Have we as a society come to the point that we place no more value on a human life than say a piece of property like a racehorse that needs to be put down..


Again, this is another Pandora's box. Like abortion in the 70's, what are the ramifications 20 years down the road? None of us know that answer.

 

[edsinger]

The push-button machines are tightly regulated to prevent overdose by push-button, which is what made Kevorkian's machine (and attendant actions) illegal. If by your worldview a prescriber can set you up with a machine that will allow you to overdose, then Kevorkian did nothing wrong.

In the same token then is the checker at Wal-mart responsible when someone swallows a hole bottle of Aspirin?

The Dr's machine had one purpose and it was designed for just that. He assisted folks in killing themselves. How many of these folks were given or even told of other options?

I can not change your mind for sure, but at least you have to agree that what he did was against the law. They did not convict him and sentence him for not committing a crime. The problem is that some believe what he did should not be a crime at all.

Hence the reason I keep bringing up Holland. Please look into what has happened there and you can at least agree to understand my viewpoint I would think. You still might not agree with it but at least would understand it. I fully understand yours, but just don't agree with it.

 

[level.eleven]

Have we as a society come to the point that we place no more value on a human life than say a piece of property like a racehorse that needs to be put down.

WE aren't making any decisions. The person who owns the body is the only one making a decision. WE seem to think WE know more about HIS situation than HE does.

 

[edsinger]

WE aren't making any decisions. The person who owns the body is the only one making a decision. WE seem to think WE know more about HIS situation than HE does.

And that remains their decision, there is nothing in the laws that stop that now. Its the assistance that is the problem.

Plus how would life insurance deal with this? As of now the policy would be unpayable.........is this another reason to legalize it? Hence Euthanasia?

Have you looked into Holland?

 

[level.eleven]

I really don't understand your position. You say its okay to terminate your own life yet offering assistance to that person should be met with criminal charges. It's almost if you are condoning shotguns in the mouth or bags over the head. There aren't any dignified ways for bed ridden cancer patients to off themselves. Lets afford them a little compassion and offer them a dignified way to go. Honestly, your position strikes me as extremely selfish. Particularly in a matter in which I think you have no say.

Health/life insurance is a contract between the provider and the individual. That is for them to decide either with or without arbitration.

 

[edsinger]

I really don't understand your position. You say its okay to terminate your own life yet offering assistance to that person should be met with criminal charges.

My position is that I do not believe in legalized Euthanasia at all. If a person is knowingly assisting in a suicide then it is illegal. It already is so as that is why the Dr went to prison in the first place.

It's almost if you are condoning shotguns in the mouth or bags over the head. There aren't any dignified ways for bed ridden cancer patients to off themselves. Lets afford them a little compassion and offer them a dignified way to go. Honestly, your position strikes me as extremely selfish.

I am not condoning suicide at all, but it is not illegal by any means. You say dignified ways for people to off themselves. Think about what you just said. I find that selfish in that a person in this case is asking for help to kill themselves. Where do we stop? I take it you haven't looked at the case of Holland. Have any of you supporting the good doctor looked at this? I have tried to stress it but no one seems to give a rats arse...

Particularly in a matter in which I think you have no say.

Oh, but I do have a say in what society considers moral or not. I vote. I am trying to say that suicide in this manner IS immoral in my opinion and it would seem to be the same in the nations laws.

Y'all keep bringing up the terminally ill but have not looked into why this is such a Pandora's box. In places where it is legal is has had side effects to society in general. The same happened when we quit recognizing the rights of the unborn.

The only place I am inconsistent I am told is my view on Capital punishment in which I agree with. That however is another topic.

Health/life insurance is a contract between the provider and the individual. That is for them to decide either with or without arbitration.

True but I would bet NONE will pay the policy if Suicide is involved.

If one wants to die, there are many ways, if terminally ill, medical treatment can be concentrated on making one comfortable until nature takes its course.



Let me give you a hypothetical example ok?

"Grandpa is very sick and the medical bills are piling up rather fast. Soon he will have nothing left and the doctors will get what is left. The children and grandchildren love ol gramps but the time has come to cut the natural process short and gramps decides he want to end it all. Was it his idea? Was it the kids/Gkids idea? Who knows but the decision has been made.

So Gramps how do we do it? Well lets get ol doc Brown down here to mix up a Elixir to solve the issue. Lets ask ol doc to break his Hippocratic oath and assist with an early exit...

So ol Gramps does it, He ALONE commits suicide, so the family is in the clear morally right?

What if a cure had come along? What if ol Gramps would have been able to see the great grandchild born. What if he had had the option of trying a new procedure a few short months later? What is he could have lived another 6 weeks while taking a very strong pain medication that somewhat gave him comfort? These are all speculations but they drive home a point.


And last but not least, I will state again. I feel that it is a power trip of ourselves to think we can control when we leave this world. We couldn't control when we entered it, but watch this Lord, I am in control at the last.
This opinion of course is based on my personal belief in a Creator so I stand by it with no regrets.

 

[Fletch]

The Dr's machine had one purpose and it was designed for just that. He assisted folks in killing themselves.

Sounds just like "these guns were built specifically for the battlefield"...

I can not change your mind for sure, but at least you have to agree that what he did was against the law.

Sure it was against the law, but that doesn't mean anything to me. I'm more concerned with right vs wrong than legal vs illegal.

 

[downzero]

He assisted folks in killing themselves. How many of these folks were given or even told of other options?

All of them.

I can not change your mind for sure, but at least you have to agree that what he did was against the law. They did not convict him and sentence him for not committing a crime. The problem is that some believe what he did should not be a crime at all.

Juries repeatedly refused to convict him because they didn't find that he did anything morally wrong.

I don't see it as a problem that some believe what he did shouldn't be a crime. In fact, I see it as a serious problem with individual liberty that you think otherwise. It's my body. I can destroy it if I want to, and there's absolutely no reason why it should be criminal for someone to help me do so at my request.

No matter how we characterize this, the real crux of this is a question of biomedical ethics. This is not a problem that the criminal law can solve.

 

[edsinger]

Juries repeatedly refused to convict him because they didn't find that he did anything morally wrong..

I can see that but he still broke the law, whether or not one agrees with the law.....it was broken....hence the jail time.

I don't see it as a problem that some believe what he did shouldn't be a crime. In fact, I see it as a serious problem with individual liberty that you think otherwise. It's my body. I can destroy it if I want to, and there's absolutely no reason why it should be criminal for someone to help me do so at my request..

So having someone cut off your leg because you want it even though no medical reason to do so? I remember there is a fetish of this type and the 'folks' who do the cutting claim they are doing what the recipient wants. I realize this is not a fair comparison but the logic fits.

No matter how we characterize this, the real crux of this is a question of biomedical ethics. This is not a problem that the criminal law can solve.

How right you are......ethics....you can not legislate them.

 

[Integraholic]

People got tired of riding in a carriage pulled by a horse, so someone invented a car.

People got tired of having their backsides itching after dropping a deuce, so someone invented toilet paper.

People invent things to make things easier to accomplish. If I want to die, I have every right to do so. The good doctor didn't choose to end lives, he chose to help people who had already made that decision themselves. If people want to die, they're going to die. His device made the clean-up easier. Made it so families could still have open casket funerals. It's my life. I'll do with it what I please. R.I.P. doctor.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

A tenet of the Roman Catholic faith is that our suffering in this life joins us through the suffering of our Savior and helps to complete His suffering to redeem mankind. It's one of the major reasons the Catholic Church doesn't condone suicide. Suicide, spiritually, is akin to the one unforgivable sin: "despair". I visited a friend in the hospital whose body was riddled with cancer; he was having minor seizures every few minutes. In between those seizures, he was still attempting to accomplish something for the good of others (he was discussing a fund-raising initiative with a possible donor). THAT is the kind of faith I hope I have when my time comes.