78 replies to this topic

[Coops]

Should euthanasia be legal? And should it be accessible to people of all ages? What circumstances do you believe it's okay?

 

Discuss. Please keep your shit civil though.

[cara]

I know that there has been a thread here on this in the recent years, but my answer has not changed.

Yes, it should be legal when someone is diagnosed with a terminal illness and all reasonable measures have been exhausted and more treatment would cause pain. I think all ages should have the option of mercy, with consent of a doctor when they are underage.

[DonValentino]

There's been a few, the latest one: http://www.neocodex....h-with-dignity/

[Coops]

Oh cool. I wasn't really around much then; so I didn't know.

[NapisaurusRex]

Should euthanasia be legal?

Yes

And should it be accessible to people of all ages?

I don't want to stick an random number on ending life, but surely there's some kind of emotional IQ test that could be adapted for people of any age, otherwise it'd also be excluding people like 90 year old dementia lady who knows for sure she's done with life, but not a whole lot else. Probably some kind of pre-death therapy to make sure it's not anything that can be worked through.
 

What circumstances do you believe it's okay?

Any, provided they're aware of the consequences and why they're doing it. 

[sprockets]

Yes, I support it. It sure beats waiting to die from a terminal illness.

 

Quebec actually had a couple cases passed for this http://news.national...others-reported

 

Disclaimer: I may be biased as someone I was closed to had a terminal illness that I had to see gradually get worse over the years. 

[Jozie]

Wouldn't this be considered suicide? Which is against God's wishes and makes a person go to hell? Just another thing to ponder when answering this question.

 

As for me, I am all for euthanasia as long as it is done by a doctor, after therapy has been completed if they can, some people may be to far off to even go to therapy. There needs to be guidelines and standards for it. I don't think a young child should be allowed this because they don't have to mental capacity to truly understand everything, but if the illness absolutely will make them suffer and unable to live a normal life without immense pain and suffering and no cure or treatment, a parent may sign legal papers to do so.

 

This is a great topic for discussion.

[cara]

Wouldn't this be considered suicide? Which is against God's wishes and makes a person go to hell? Just another thing to ponder when answering this question.

That's assuming you believe in God.

[HiMyNameIsNick]

Wouldn't this be considered suicide? Which is against God's wishes and makes a person go to hell? Just another thing to ponder when answering this question.

 

As for me, I am all for euthanasia as long as it is done by a doctor, after therapy has been completed if they can, some people may be to far off to even go to therapy. There needs to be guidelines and standards for it. I don't think a young child should be allowed this because they don't have to mental capacity to truly understand everything, but if the illness absolutely will make them suffer and unable to live a normal life without immense pain and suffering and no cure or treatment, a parent may sign legal papers to do so.

 

This is a great topic for discussion.

 

 

What if I don't give a flying fuck about god?

[Swar]

Last semester there was a congress at my college, and one of the lectures I watched was about euthanasia, disthanasia and orthothanasia. Pretty interesting stuff.

 

Basically euthanasia is an assisted suicide, disthanasia is to make the patient live more, but suffering (the worst of the three) and orthothanasia is the "correct death", in which you helf the patient feel fine while he's dying (no pain or anything, but you don't rush the death either).

 

I didn't know about the other two, just euthanasia (which is currently illegal here, as is disthanasia). After watching the lecture, I personally prefer orthothanasia, but I do think euthanasia should be legal. If the patient doesn't want to keep living that way, it's their ultimate decision. Who am I to say they should keep suffering and living through a life they don't want?

 

I don't think it should be accepted in every case, though. It's a really really serious decision and it shouldn't be taken lightly.

 

I found a short but interesting article about how it works here.

 

 

Thanks for posting this @Coops, I love discussing these kinds of things!

[Jozie]

That's assuming you believe in God.

 

Correct, which I don't, but was wondering if those who do would consider this a deal breaker.

What if I don't give a flying fuck about god?

 

See my above statement please.

If there's a god that wishes you to suffer to death, and if you bring yourself a little comfort in not having to keep enduring the pain. And go to hell for it.

Is that really a god worth believing in?

 

One of the many reasons I refuse to believe in a God that would rather us live in pain then end the pain! There is so much wrong with the "God"

[Swar]

Relevant

 

I can't even imagine how she feels

[Jozie]

Relevant

 

I can't even imagine how she feels

 

Wow, what courage! Marieke Vervoort is a strong woman!! I support her decison which ever one she makes!

[Romy]

What if I don't give a flying fuck about god?

She presented a viewpoint in a civil manner and you responded standoffishly.

 

I'm all for being contrarian if you want to understand a person's position a little better but you do it just to be "edgy" or to look like a pseudo-intellectual. Don't be a dick man.

 

 

 

Euthanasia is interesting. 

 

How can a government regulate it?

Is there a difference between someone in a lot of pain wanting to commit suicide and a person that doesn't want to be a burden to their family?

What's okay? Someone in physical agony? Is emotional agony okay (eg if someone is paralyzed from the neck down but in absolutely no physical pain)?

Thoughts @Coops @cara @Jess @DonJonathan @Aria @Meowish ? (All the Pro people)

 

 

I say no. There is no plausible way to regulate something like this. This is one of the rare instances where I'm in a complete grey zone however.

[Kaddict]

I have made very clear instructions to my spouse and my parents that if I were in a vegetative state, or a coma that looked extremely unlikely I would wake from etc etc that they pull the plug. And if something happened so my mind went kaputz, (not like Alzheimers, like unable to function on my own anymore) I dont want to keep living (with the medical judgement of my family and all other factors blah blah blah).

 

Also, I read that the majority of medical care costs happen in the last 6 months of life. Allowing Physician-assisted suicide would save on a lot of medical costs. The main thing that worries me are some gray areas. Such as, when should you allow a PAS? If the person is terminal, if they are in severe pain, if they are in a coma? The other problem is that most of the time someone would want/need a PAS, they are not in a state that they can make their own decisions. In this case it would fall upon their power of attorney. I would at that point only be worried if the family just didn't want to rack up a big medical bill, or wanted a life insurance payout. But, if person trusted other person enough to give power of attorney, hopefully they wouldn't be doing it for a money payout.

 

Quality of life has to be considered. Living for an extra 6 months? Sounds great. Living for an extra 6 months in an ICU, not being able to do things you want to and it costing your family/the government $500k? Not so much...

Anyway, those are my thoughts (copied/pasted from the thread last year), but the main problem is the legality and regulation. Who determines if the person is in a position where they can do it? A doctor? A lawyer? A Senator? It just gets messy, as grey lines would keep appearing. Also, it becomes hard as a physician to weigh this against the Hippocratic Oath of doing no harm (of course individuals can say death is less harm than slowly dying painful, but you know). 

[cara]

Correct, which I don't, but was wondering if those who do would consider this a deal breaker.

 

See my above statement please.

 

One of the many reasons I refuse to believe in a God that would rather us live in pain then end the pain! There is so much wrong with the "God"

 

Hey, I'm an agnostic. I have no problem with people believing in whatever they chose to believe in - as long as it doesn't impede on my legal rights. Ie, I should be able to get an abortion even if your bible thumping uncle thinks I will burn in hell. Same with physician assisted suicide; I don't think religion has any business in this.

 

The sooner we separate laws and human rights with religion the better.

 

Also, when I say 'you', I don't literally mean you.

 

How can a government regulate it?

Is there a difference between someone in a lot of pain wanting to commit suicide and a person that doesn't want to be a burden to their family?

What's okay? Someone in physical agony? Is emotional agony okay (eg if someone is paralyzed from the neck down but in absolutely no physical pain)?

Thoughts @Coops @cara @Jess @DonJonathan @Aria @Meowish ? (All the Pro people)

 

 

I say no. There is no plausible way to regulate something like this. This is one of the rare instances where I'm in a complete grey zone however.

 

First of all .. heh. You called me pro. 

 

Second of all, I think it can be regulated, just very loosely. It's funny though, I was thinking about that a lot after I posted. There are lots of laws that are passed that fail at the enforcement level and when that happens the legislation is either sent back to the drawing board or repealed.

 

I feel like the enforcement of this law is more so about taking every precaution to ensure that a life is not taken without full consent and understanding of that consent. Meaning, they must not only agree to die but understand what that means. I think an array of policies should be put into place (multiple doctors opinions, therapy, etc). I don't know enough to suggest further though. I'd have to think more about it.

 

I understand that the average Joe thinks it is the governments responsibility to hold their hand through their life and tough decisions - but I don't. If I am dying from a terminal illness, I believe that the government should offer all the support and information I need to make a logical and educated choice. But in the end, it is my choice.

 

But that's a really good question and quite a thinker. So, I would say anyone in extreme physical pain from terminal illness should quality for assisted suicide. I think anyone with a physically debilitating condition, as you said, should also qualify.

 

I think that all these details can be panned out to ensure that assisted suicide is available to all those who suffer gravely. It'll just be a long process and unfortunately, trial and errors.

[Adam]

In general I think people should be allowed to off themselves without it being frowned upon. I guess I really don't have much else to add. Yes, I realize that's a pretty grave, and dark thing to say.

[Audax]

I don't understand the con-arguments for euthanasia, really. The only issues are currently legal ones as far as I am concerned.

 

I read a book in high school about euthanasia that pretty much convinced me there's nothing really wrong about it as long as the person is old enough to be mentally conscious and can consent to it... just like pretty much any major medical procedure. Whether it's a physical or mental pain, other options should be considered first, of course. But if there is absolutely no cure... then I don't think it's harmful.

[Romy]

Eh, it's not really that grave when you realize, people know when it's their time to go generally speaking. 

No. No they don't.

[Generic]

Let me preface this by saying my opinion is VERY wishy-washy on this. If it were somehow my choice to write the law, I'd have no idea what final decision to make.

That being said, I see big pros and big cons for making it legal. The pros are obvious, like not making someone suffer, less medical expenses in terminal cases, etc. And suffering a slow death from a terminal condition would be horrible I imagine. But at the same time, making it a law is... weird to me. Doctors can't be certain they won't make it. When would the patient be asked? Lots of people would pick euthanasia over suffering in the moment. And if you say that they have to be in sound mind to decide, who's to say they'll ever be in sound mind while suffering? What if they decide, before their condition gets worse, they never want to be euthanized and then when things get very rough they decide they want to be? They were in sounder mind before, but they didn't know what they were in for apparently. In some people, completely sound mind doesn't even exist. I feel like the term "Sound Mind" is kind of silly in general - I don't think anyone can think completely logically or soundly when picking suffering or death. I don't think I could ever have a sound mind answering that.

You get my point. I'm not saying it shouldn't be legal, I guess, I just can't wrap my head around how many problems there are with it. If I were to make a blanket statement, I suppose I'd think it should be an option for terminally ill who are sound of mind OR perhaps terminally ill who are comatose for X amount of time and... they said they wanted it?

Again, wishy-washy.