18 replies to this topic

[Adam]

If someone wants to kill themselves to avoid an otherwise painful death, I see no problem with it. Assisted suicide should not be the first, second, or even third option, but it should be available to certain individuals after exhausting a reasonable amount of other avenues. 

[Artleyz]

If doctors have concluded that the person has no chance of survival, and has a small amount of time left to live (in agony), I don't see a problem with it. It should be their choice whether they want to go on like that or not.

Edited by Artleyz, 26 July 2017 - 01:26 PM.

[Generic]

I suppose I basically agree with what's been said so far. I don't like the idea of it being taken lightly, or being allowed too... frivolously... But I suppose it shouldn't be off the table entirely in extreme cases.

[NapisaurusRex]

Yes, it should be allowed. No age limits or any other requirements than a mandatory therapy. People have the right to choose how to live their lives, provided physical harm doesn't come to others, even if it means they want to die.

[Sweeney]

While I agree with assisted suicide in theory, it is an extremely difficult thing to put into practice. After all, we already take steps in our society to protect those who are deemed unable to sufficiently protect themselves, due to mental or physical disabilities. Where do we draw the line between someone who has the mental faculties required to make an informed decision to end their own lives, and someone who does not? It could be argued that someone who desires the end of their life is by definition not in a fit mental state to make that decision.

So yes, I do agree that someone should have the right to end their own life if they want to (no matter the circumstances, in fact - not just in cases of certain suffering as previous posters indicated). But the ethical implications of such a practice are fantastically complex.

[Hikimaru]

In my opinion, if the person wants to die, they should be allowed to, nothing else is needed.

[Sweeney]

In my opinion, if the person wants to die, they should be allowed to, nothing else is needed.

What about if the person just wants to hurt themselves, but not die?

[Jozie]

I think people should be able to have assisted suicide as an option so long as it is something that is being done along side a doctor and a psychologist! I think if all options are exhausted and nothing else can be done, why let the person suffer!?

[NapisaurusRex]

What about if the person just wants to hurt themselves, but not die?

I don't see any difference between this and making all drugs legal.

[Sweeney]

I don't see any difference between this and making all drugs legal.

Why? Taking drugs isn't necessarily inherently harmful.

[NapisaurusRex]

Why? Taking drugs isn't necessarily inherently harmful.

self injury isn't necessarily inherently harmful. Tattoos, scarification, etc.

[Sweeney]

self injury isn't necessarily inherently harmful. Tattoos, scarification, etc.

I didn't say "self-injury", I said "hurt" quite specifically implying harm. If you'd like, though, you can just substitute the word harm for hurt and avoid the semantic distortion altogether.

[NapisaurusRex]

I didn't say "self-injury", I said "hurt" quite specifically implying harm. If you'd like, though, you can just substitute the word harm for hurt and avoid the semantic distortion altogether.

I thought they were all synonyms. Can you give me an example?

[NapisaurusRex]

I'm assuming hurt doesn't just mean self injury. Self injury implies physical damage, cutting, burning, etc. 
 
Hurt can do anything from self sabotage, drug abuse, self inflicted emotional pain, ignoring taking your medications. Basically anything you can do to cause yourself non physical hurting.
 
Again, an assumption, but that's what I read out of it.

ehhh self injury is a huge range of things

[Nymh]

To answer the question: Mercy

 

My personal views on suicide are pretty open, but don't really matter regarding this debate.

 

Almost anyone can kill themselves whenever they want.  I don't have to believe that people should have the right to do this.  They just can (though if they fail, they could be put into protective custody).  People who are physically incapable of killing themselves (or just can't bring themselves to do it for some reason?) must enlist the help of other people.  Involving other people in your death complicates things.  There must be lines drawn in areas that are incredibly hard to quantify.  How can you really tell if someone is incapable of rehabilitation?  How can you know someone wouldn't change their mind?  There is almost always the possibility of these things, so there can almost always be the argument made that someone shouldn't die yet.  They just need to hold out and get treatment until they eventually understand that they don't really want to die.  And like Joe said earlier, in our society (USA) simply wanting to die is enough to qualify someone as not mentally sound, and therefore unable to make the decision for themselves.

[Sweeney]

I thought they were all synonyms. Can you give me an example?

How can you say that self-injury is a synonym for harm immediately after saying self-injury isn't necessarily harmful? Harm isn't necessarily harmful?

And you already gave examples... tattooing would be technically injuring yourself, but not regarded as harmful by most people.

[Kaddict]

ehhhhh... this is one I still struggle with. I could absolutely debate both sides on this one. I'll try to be super succinct.

 

Pros: Why prolong death (these people are usually not living, they just aren't dead, even though they are in the process of death)?, Healthcare costs in last 6months of life often/usually exceed the entire cost of healthcare dollars of the rest of their life, patient autonomy

 

Cons: What Joe said, insurance companies*, the fact that if we are concerned someone may suicide on their own, we can legally keep them locked in a hospital indefinitely (eventually it has to go to court depending on state though) to keep them from killing themselves, doctors reconciling with "Primum non nocere" 

 

 

*= Doc I worked with has had 2 separate occasions in the past year where the patient went through the authorization process for a curative (not palliative) treatment, and the insurance companies told him that "We will not pay for this procedure, but we will pay for assisted suicide, if that is what you guys want to do." I am not ok with a bunch of non-physicians pressuring people into killing themselves without almost any knowledge of their situation.

 

 

I could expound upon any of these if anyone wants. But I know you guys are probably thinking "shut the hell up already" so I will do you a solid and just not for now. 

Spoiler