Euthanasia

[ShyGuy68]

I think this have been a subject here before, but I'll risk it, and try again

I just finished watching a program about euthanasia, and heard that 70% of people here in Denmark support it, and would also like to see what the result are here.

I’m pro it myself, and have been for years. To me it’s a natural part of life that you can choose when and where to die, if you have the desire.

But I will also say that it should only be permitted if you were terminally ill, without a chance to get cured. I wouldn’t like to lay there and get more and more sick from lets say cancer, and just get filled with painkillers, until I die. I find it much more dignified that I can say that the time has come, and it’s time to end it now, while I’m still clear in my head, and can say I’ve lived a good life.

Please feel free to share your point of view on it here.

 

[Andreina]

Yes. We grant people dignity while they are healthy. We should them grant dignity when they are sick.

I acknowledge that there are problems to be considered with relatives who might talk people into Euthanisia for purely monetary reasons, but with thorough control and sophisticated supervision that might be a side issue.

 

[April]

What you said, Shyguy. Absolutely, unequivocably, yes I support it.

I want the option to end my life in a dignified manner if I should be diagnosed with an incurable disease. I don't want to be trapped in a body that doesn't work, needing to be turned like an egg in a skillet. Or drooling and incontinent, completely unable to do a thing for myself. These ideas horrify me.

 

[TWB]

This is too complicated a subject to have a yes or no poll. I agree that there are situations where euthenasia should be sanctioned, but there are too many variables to say yes or no. Sorry I Couldn't vote.

 

[Calamity Jane]

I support it.

When my grandmother was dying of cancer, she had a self-dosing morphine drip. The doctor told her "This much will help the pain, but be careful, this much could put you into a coma or kill you."

She morphined herself to death rather than live with the pain.

 

[GuyJD]

My how this thread looks familiar. Is it posted in another forum? LOL

 

[ShyGuy68]

My how this thread looks familiar. Is it posted in another forum? LOL

And so what? Aren't I entitled to post the same question different places on the net?

 

[RhumbRunner13]

I support it.

When my grandmother was dying of cancer, she had a self-dosing morphine drip. The doctor told her "This much will help the pain, but be careful, this much could put you into a coma or kill you."

She morphined herself to death rather than live with the pain.

That's probably the most common form of euthanasia in the US. Your Grandmother had a very caring, compassionate doctor. I'm sorry for your lose and I hope her passing easier was a blessing for you both.

It is simply too easy to find solutions to curb misuse of euthanasia or assisted suicide. I could never allow an animal to suffer in it's last days of life, why are we "humane" when we watch a loved one suffer greviously toward their final end?

Rhumb

 

[Shy Tall Guy]

This is too complicated a subject to have a yes or no poll. I agree that there are situations where euthenasia should be sanctioned, but there are too many variables to say yes or no. Sorry I Couldn't vote.

Ditto - much too complex an issue to just say yes or no to. I agree that people may be allowed to end their own lives, maybe even whether they are sick or not - after all, if their life isn't their own then whose is it? But the term "euthanasia" encompasses a lot more than someone choosing to end their own life - there are all kinds of other issues including who ends their life for them if they can't themselves, counseling, etc. - just too complex to say yes or no.

 

[Ishmael]

I am totally against it.

My reasons are somewhat simple. It is a violation of the Hippocratic Oath to cause harm. The law should never place the option of the ending of life in the hands of one person, even if the 'victim' is obliging.

Most people have the option of ending their life at any point. Yes their are some unique cases where the individual is so physically incapacitated that they may not be able to perform the deed themselves. These cases are very rare, but get a lot of press attention when they occur. I remember two so far. A woman in California and a more recent case in the UK.

My mother died of cancer, very slowly and painfully. The doctor prescribed for her, and she had in her possesion, enough dilaudid to kill 5 healthy adults. She had the option at any time to end her life. She choose not to. I make no judgement as to the right or wrong of that. It was her decision to make. But I'll be damned if I would have fed her the pills, or allowed anyone else to do so. It was her choice to make and her option to take the pills at anytime.

In doing research I found that it is quite common for physicians to over prescibe pain medication in terminal cases. Thereby providing the individual the option to terminate the pain, permanently. Those that have excersized that option have had their death certificate labled as "accidental overdose" or " death by (hepatic, renal, etc ) failure due to carcinoma". The coroner does not stigmatize these people.

I find little value in legalizing a physician as deliverer of death.

Ishmael

 

[RhumbRunner13]

Opposite side on this one, Ish.

"I am totally against it.

My reasons are somewhat simple. It is a violation of the Hippocratic Oath to cause harm."

Any "humane" doctor would realize that not providing the release of death in cases where a patient is suffering extreme pain to no end is the opposite of "do no harm".

Assisting death could be in many cases the least harmful service a doctor might provide.

Rhumb

 

[Laurel]

I think life is more important than anything. If I were in an explosion and left as just a head attached to a box of wires & pumps, I would be happy to be alive - to be able to think, to experience the world. No amount of pain or discomfort could convince me that not living was better than living.

That said, I understand that there are people who feel differently. If a terminal cancer patient wants to take his/her life, he/she should legally have the option to do so. We should be able to make our own decisions - even final ones - regarding our own bodies without government interference.

I get a little antsy, however, when middlemen come into play. It's one thing to take your own life - it's another to ask a third party to do it for you, or to place the burden of such a decision in the hands of a third party. I'm not sure where I stand on doctor-assisted suicide. I guess it would depend on the degree of doctor participation.

 

[Ishmael]

I think life is more important than anything. If I were in an explosion and left as just a head attached to a box of wires & pumps, I would be happy to be alive - to be able to think, to experience the world. No amount of pain or discomfort could convince me that not living was better than living.

That said, I understand that there are people who feel differently. If a terminal cancer patient wants to take his/her life, he/she should legally have the option to do so. We should be able to make our own decisions - even final ones - regarding our own bodies without government interference.

I get a little antsy, however, when middlemen come into play. It's one thing to take your own life - it's another to ask a third party to do it for you, or to place the burden of such a decision in the hands of a third party. I'm not sure where I stand on doctor-assisted suicide. I guess it would depend on the degree of doctor participation.

And therein is the issue that presents a problem to me.

I don't care if anyone chooses to take their own life. (This is not entirely true, I would attempt to dissuade them.) Engaging a 'facilitator' is a whole different issue. And then there is the issue of the level of facilitation.

Ishmael

 

[cybergirly]

I feel to some extend that someone who is terminally ill should have the option to end there own life, however when a doctor or even more so an HMO gets involved who can say that the "patient" is not being overly encouraged to end their life for the sole purpose of saving some business money? I feel that if anyone wants to end their life badly enough they will find away to do it, even in the cases where the person is totally immobile if they want to die that badly I believe they can "will" themselves to it.

 

[Guest]

I'm agin it!

I'm constantly looking for ways to live forever.

 

[lilfrk]

I agree with ShyGuy. I think in cases of people being terminal and with no chance of cure they should be allowed to ask for dignity in their death. Either by their own hand or with help of another.

I have worked in a nursing home for years and watch many many people die horrible deaths. I've actually been begged by some for help to end their pain and I never have. It's a horrible thing to watch. Young people drowing in their own fluids because they are strong enough to cough and clear their airways. Old people dying from cancer or parkinson's. Slowly slipping away while horrified families watch, wishing that it would be over soon.

In those cases I wish more than anything in the world that someone could come and end everyone's suffering. The living and the dying. I know that it'll never happen though. There is just too much shit involved for anyone to be able to say: "Yes this is how it should be." And make it be that way.

 

[bored1]

Mixed feelings here. Ive watched close relatives waste away with no hope of recovery,Painful for all involved. Then again it could be argued that eutanasia is just an extension of choice. Remember the scene in Soylent Green? When Edward G. Robinson had decided it was time to go. Maybe thats our future.