To be or not to be

[Banquo's Ghost]

As long as euthanasia is subject to stringent checks and balances to ensure it really is the individual's choice, it should be available to them. There's no murder involved if the person requests to end their life with full decision making facilities - as Papewaio notes, we extend this courtesy to the suffering animal all the time.

I believe that the means for dignified suicide should also be easily available. If I so wish, I can end my life quickly but messily (and traumatically for relatives and staff) with my shotgun. If I were minded to, it should be available to me to go to a doctor and request the necessary drugs to end life gently, and to arrange the going to my taste - without harassment from law or moralists - and with proper arrangements so that my family don't have to deal with such distractions.

Of course, it would be the right of medical personnel who do have objections, religious or otherwise, to refer on to someone else, but the principle would be one of my choice.

Once again, the only reason these choices are not available to us is the lingering impact of religious dogma. There is such a thing as the sanctity of life, but not because that life belongs to some Creator God. That life belongs to me, and I should have the choice as to how I end it, just as I have the choice of how to live it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I wouldn't even object to being made into Soylent Green. The trouble there was the corporate lying and exploitation, not the concept of recycling an excellent protein source. I joke not.

[InsaneApache]

This is a very pertinent thread for me.

A very good friend of mine is dying as we speak. An ex-athlete he broke his leg making a cup of tea. Sounds funny doesn't it? Funny that you should break a leg making a cuppa that is. The thing is, he has cancer of the bone and it's very advanced. It's spread to his spine and we didn't think he'd make it to christmas. He did and went home last week after 3 months in hospital.

A very proud man who has never had to rely on anyone in his whole 77 years. Now confined to a wheelchair for the last part of his life, he is trying to be upbeat, as it's his nature, but you can tell the guys miserable. It's in his eyes.

The analogy with animals is very apt. If I was to keep a dog in that condition, I'd probably (rightly) be prosecuted for cruelty. Because he's human, I'd probably be prosected for murder if I 'helped' him out.

In conversations in the past with him, he's always said that he would not want to live like this. I understand why, but when he's gone, I'll still be here.

Not as easy as it seems the choice to euthanize or not.

[Fragony]

Yikes that is the worst kind you can get. It is horrible to see someone waste away good luck with that.

[drone]

I believe that the means for dignified suicide should also be easily available. If I so wish, I can end my life quickly but messily (and traumatically for relatives and staff) with my shotgun. If I were minded to, it should be available to me to go to a doctor and request the necessary drugs to end life gently, and to arrange the going to my taste - without harassment from law or moralists - and with proper arrangements so that my family don't have to deal with such distractions.

Right here:



Personally, I don't have a problem with euthanasia/suicide for compassionate reasons. I have had relatives linger on for years in pain and humiliation, and I would never want to go through that myself, or put my loved ones through that hell. A legalized system would definitely need to be carefully watched for abuses, though.

Slightly off-topic: What exactly is the cause of the Western society's aversion to suicide? Does it all come from the Catholic Church?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Suicide = none of my business
Involving others in your suicide and having them actually facilitate it = My business to the extreme

If you feel so strongly about ending your life, do it yourself. Otherwise, you are trying to deflect personal responsibility.

If you are physically unable to do so (in the unlikely case) there lies the rub.

Too many people from the second camp will abuse this and ask others to murder them. Who can help you do this? Doctors? Why should they be the only ones to administer the final serum? When can they take over the responsibilities of the care giver and decide that you would rather be dead than on life support?

you will find yourself in situations like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_M...der_conviction

Long, drawn out court cases with the possibility of having a clearly sick murderer end up getting out of jail in a few short years. OR having the charges dropped entirely.

[Ser Clegane]

If you are physically unable to do so (in the unlikely case) there lies the rub.

There are other reasons to not do it on yourself and alone the just the physical inability.
- access to substances (not everybody is keen on shooting himself or jumping off a bridge)
- not wanting to die alone but in the circle of your beloved ones (and doesn't being present and not preventing another person from killing himself already make you an "accomplice").

If you grant a person the right to kill himself what is the problem with granting this person also the right to seek the help and support of another person?

Of course there is always the risk of the abuse of assisted suicide - but wouldn't legalizing it and establishing a clear and strict process potentially increase the transparency and reduce the risk of abuse?

[ICantSpellDawg]

I really can't get behind having the state allow the death of it's own citizenry by the hands of another except in defense. I think I am firmly set in that concept. I am against the death penalty. I am against abortion. I am for abortion if it is done in defense (the life of the mother is in danger).

It is a clear line. Once you step over it, the slippery slide begins.

[AntiochusIII]

If you feel so strongly about ending your life, do it yourself. Otherwise, you are trying to deflect personal responsibility.

Compare to Euthanasia, suicide is messy.

Pragmatically, it's a much bigger load on the State's resources, what's with having to investigate the matter, to clear out the mess, and to give psychiatric care to potentially traumatized individuals left behind...

It's not 'Hasta la Vista, baby.' It's dozens and dozens of man-hours for various organizations and a big trauma for the ones left behind.

[Vladimir]

I'll do it for free AND clean up the mess! Deal or no deal?

[Viking]

Just wanted to post this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...006003,00.html

"
A MOTHER of three suffering from a disfiguring, incurable disease and battling incredible pain has pleaded for the right to die by euthanasia.

....

"In 2000, I lost my sense of smell and taste, and then the tumour evolved and ate into my jaws, before attacking the eye socket. I lost my sight in October last year," she said.

The disease caused "atrocious bouts of pain that can last up to four hours at a time".

"In 2000, I lost the sense of smell and taste ... and I lost my sight in October 2007," she said.

"One would not allow an animal to go through what I have endured," she said in a plea aired on France 2 television and urged President Nicolas Sarkozy to pay heed to her request.

[LittleGrizzly]

I believe someone who wishes to end thier own life due to medical reasons should be allowed to do so.

Most Euthenasia cases involve people with terminal diseases so we are simply shortening a life that would end anyway, I think the freedom of assisted suicide is the ultimate freedom, these people have had thier own ability to do many simple things taken from then, after this follows pride, dignity.

If a loved one was ever in such a situation where they're racked by pain an have everything taken from them i would offer any assistance they requested and no potential jail time would distract me

The ultimate test is to put yourself in that position, and if i was ever suffering a painful dehabilitating terminal illness i would want help to get it over with

Of course numerous checks and balances would have to be put in place, family agreement (a few of closest relatives) doctors agreement 2nd 3rd or even 4th opinions, certian conditions such as, its a terminal illness, sufferer is of sound mind (and requested it), its a painful illness.

If all the above conditions are met and euthanasia is refused that is imo just cruel, i don't see why some peoples religous beliefs should force an extension of pain on those who have suffered enough, a few people have brought up the fact we put down animals for thier own good, why should a human deserve less when they request it thierselves...?