Euthanasia

[Amnesiac]

[-]I can't recall whether or not I've written about this before, but whatever.[/-] I'd like to hear VT's opinions on euthanasia, which is the practice of ending a life in a manner which relieves pain and suffering. Do you think euthanasia should be an option for every individual? Should it be limited to those with crippling disabilities and diseases? Should it be an option at all?

With my strong belief in complete individual liberty, I believe people should have the option to end their life in a painless manner. It would definitely reduce the rate of suicides in this country and put thousands out of the horrible emotional or physical pain they have to endure on a daily basis.

[Disappear Completely]

askjdnasld

[Death]

Although I support the idea of putting a terminally ill person (or someone with literally or virtually no quality of life such as a man completely paralysed and can do nothing but communicate through REMs (rapid eye movements) - this actually appeared on the news; he asked to die and there was a campaign about it) out of their misery being legal, I do see possible issues with doctors abusing the law and killing those who they could have treated if it is too difficult of complex. I think that it should be initially avoided but it should not be ignored as a last resort. I'm sorry, but I've always found something sickening about the idea of watching a man slowly die in agony whilst knowing there is nothing you can do to cure him but you can end his suffering quickly.

[Korashk]

I do see possible issues with doctors abusing the law and killing those who they could have treated if it is too difficult of complex.
Criticisms of this notion:
- It is not in a doctor's/hospital's interest to kill patients that are hard to treat. The longer the patient stays alive, the more treatments they get the more money they owe the hospital.
- The doctor loses NOTHING by treating a patient.
- By treating them, they're advancing medical science.
- It's unlikely that doctors would just be able to give patients euthanasia anyways.

[Jennifer's Ashes]

Well, this is a tough one. Because once disease takes hold, and a person knows they will die eventually, they should be able to make at least one descision for themselves; whether they live or die. However, infant euthanasia is a whole other story. I am very against is. A person should not have the descision made for them at such a young age that they will not be given the chance to live. And no, I don't mean abortion. but back to the adults. I think that if it is the person's choice to be euthanized, then that is all well and good. However, even so, suicide is illegal. And is euthanasia by choice not a form of suicide?

This really gets me thinking

[Korashk]

However, even so, suicide is illegal. And is euthanasia by choice not a form of suicide?

This really gets me thinking
Where do you live? Suicide isn't illegal in America, the UK, Australia, Ireland, and a bunch of other places.

[Sith Lord 13]

So long as: A) A signed release is given by the patient at the time of the procedure and B) a psych eval is given and comes up clean, I'm OK with administering high enough doses of pain killers that it may decrease life expectancy.

[Death]

Criticisms of this notion:
- It is not in a doctor's/hospital's interest to kill patients that are hard to treat. The longer the patient stays alive, the more treatments they get the more money they owe the hospital.
- The doctor loses NOTHING by treating a patient.
- By treating them, they're advancing medical science.
- It's unlikely that doctors would just be able to give patients euthanasia anyways.

Good points here. I was more thinking of either corrupt doctors (which admittedly would be difficult to find) who didn't want to go throught the trouble and didn't care about the advantages of treating them. But you're right, this would be very unlikely.

[Happz]

How can suicide be illegal? Would they throw your dead body in jail for a year or what?

Anyhow, i support letting people kill themselves if they fully believe it is for the best, but they would need to sign forms, make a verbal statement, ect. so that people know the doctor didn't just kill off a patient. Mostly because (of what ive learned from school anyhow,) In some countries, doctors are paid more for NOT treating patients, as this saves the hospital, and the government, money. This of course would have no effect on the countries where doctors are paid based on how many people they treat.

[RAWWR]

I fully support it. I remember watching a video in year 10 at school, about a woman who had a terminal illness, which would eventually mean she couldn't do anything for herself, she would be alive, but not really living. Assisted Euthinasia is illegal in the UK, so this woman crushed a load of painkillers and sleeping pills into her dinner, and tied a plastic bag around her head.
Shouldn't people have the right to choose a humane way of going, rather than spending their last hours, days or even weeks, in agony, sometimes without even being able to communicate to others what they are going through?

[Iceman]

It sounds good, but there would surely be a legal hell-storm.

[whodatbe]

i like the idea because some ways of dying are so horrifically painful to endure that i believe a fast and less painful way to end life is better.

[huginnmuninn]

However, even so, suicide is illegal. And is euthanasia by choice not a form of suicide?

This really gets me thinking

no, suicide isnt illegal but torture is and if a person is in pain 24\7 and the person is forced to stay alive then aren't they being tortured?

[Severus Snape]

I am pro euthanasia. In fact I consider myself a bit of a eugenics supporter in general. I know that this is going to outrage people, it isn't my intention but it is inevitable, but I think every fetus diagnosed in vitro with dilapidating mental illness should be aborted.

[Spook]

I would say that euthanasia should be an option for people in extreme pain or suffering, but I would NEVER approve of it for people who self harm or attempt suicide. They should get help, or there should be a center in every town for suicide/sh help. The teens who do that don't really realize how special a gift life is. Anyways, i'm rambling. Oh wait, this IS called "Ramblings of the Wise." :D

So yes, for people in physical pain.
No, for people in emotional pain.

[RAWWR]

I would NEVER approve of it for people who self harm or attempt suicide. They should get help, or there should be a center in every town for suicide/sh help. The teens who do that don't really realize how special a gift life is.

Emotional pain can be just as big as physical pain. And it's not just 'teenagers' that are in that situation. I think it should be up to each individual person when their life ends. However I don't think under-17's should be allowed to make that choice, too many hormones, bullying at school, and things like that which could corrupt their descision.

[SilentlyCrying]

I think that under extreme circumstances, and the patient is the one to fully agree and is in full mental state to do so, then go for it. Some people suffer physically or emotionally, and if the end to it truly is ending it all, then the safest way to do it would be through Euthanasia. We do it to animals all the time, so it's just as right or wrong to do it to people.

[Modus Operandi]

If someone's quality of life would be better if they were dead, then go for it. However, they must be age of majority and have a clean psych eval.

[User Deleted]

yes i agree with this HOWEVER, i do not belive teens should be allowed to use this as suiside, there is a high rate of teen suiscide like 7 a day, that might increase the rate to exclude pain

[jason_smitty]

The choice should be with the terminally ill person if they wish to end their life in a painless and dignified way.

[SometimesThere]

If someone is terminally ill then I think they have the right to ask a doctor to end their life for them. And that's what I'd like to happen for me if I was ever in that situation.

But I remember my religion teacher debating this with us one day. She argued that sometimes a person can beat all the odds and survive. What if a person who had died through euthanasia actually had the chance to survive their illness?

My own answer to that would be that miracles such as that are sadly rare. And you shouldn't count on the fact that everyone with a terminal illness does have a chance to live. But it's still an interesting question to think over.

[Continuum]

For euthanasia to be truly authentic, it must be requested by the ailing patient itself. There's not much reason not to prevent any further suffering, especially if it was unavoidably fatal. It should be an open choice for the ailing. But, without any consent, it could be quickly pointed out for murder, so watch out.


But I remember my religion teacher debating this with us one day. She argued that sometimes a person can beat all the odds and survive. What if a person who had died through euthanasia actually had the chance to survive their illness?


Probability is not a guarantee. Even if it was a 80 percent chance of survival, you cannot deny the remaining 20 percent, especially in the face of pain. Same goes for vice versa. A buffer always exists in the game of chance.

[SometimesThere]

Probability is not a guarantee. Even if it was a 80 percent chance of survival, you cannot deny the remaining 20 percent, especially in the face of pain. Same goes for vice versa. A buffer always exists in the game of chance.

I agree. If I was in that situation where I could seriously consider euthanasia, I would probably do it, if I felt that there was little chance of my body recovering. It wouldn't matter if the illness was terminal or not.

But if it was a friend of mine, I think I'd sometimes think "what if they could have survived their illness, and didn't need euthanasia?"

Although, the above example is pretty pointless. As it wouldn't be my decision to make. I'd just wouldn't be able to stop myself from thinking what if...