[Euthanasia]: Mercy Killing/Physican-Assisted Suicide

[nano]

For any of you who aren't aware, Euthanasia is the act of purposefully ending someone's life in a pain-free manner; The Free Dictionary describes it as "The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment."
Since it is a controversial topic, I think it'll be interesting to debate it on here. Also considering other posts on here dealing with religion, death and such, I don't think it's too sensetive of a topic.

Basically, do you think euthanasia is a good idea? Should people legally be allowed to request a painless death if they have a terminal ilness? Or, should it remain illegal as it morally wrong, and considered murder/suicide in your mind?
(I know euthanasia is not illegal in all countries/U.S.A states, but it is in most.)

[Chromekatana]

Well, I think its morally wrong. BUt rather should people do it or not is their choice. Also, the doctor would have to be alright with it.

[EdFry]

I am proud to live in a state where you can have the option to end your life instead of suffering a painful slow death from a terminal illness. After my teacher told me what his experience was like watching his mother die I would never wish that onto anyone no matter how "bad" they were.

[Nick Tasogare]

Well, the legal form would be something like a DNR, but I think that if a person is in a vegetative state, and they are in pain, with no chance, you should be able to kill them peacefully, the only reason people "get mad" when someone does it is because they see an opportunity to sue, or they were being selfish, not wanting the person to go.

[Toma RNK]

As someone who was crippled and in constant pain for 8 months with almost no chance of ever being able to walk or work I have some "hands on" experience with the issue.

I will not go into details but will say this.

I feel if both the patient AND the doctor agree that Euthanasia is a good choice, it can be a mercy.

Constant pain that makes you unable to see or think is maddening. Seriously, it drives a person insane.

In cases of cancer, where death is inevitable, the pain is immense, and you have to feel each organ die slowly, losing your ability to hold your bowels, and seeing your family go bankrupt trying to pay your midical bills is a terrifying experience.

I understand many have religious reasons for being against it, but I (having once been in the religious camp) now understand the concept of dying with dignity and not wanting to pass on so much debt your family will be unable to live well for a generation or two.

As I say, if the doctor AND the patient are in agreement, I believe it fine. The two people involved will have to answer for it in the afterlife. If a man can't take the pain or humiliation any more, let them die with dignity instead of forcing the person to do it some other way.

And to those who say making it illegal is a moral thing consider this. When you are in that much pain, and close to dying, you don't care about the law, it just means you have to suffer more in death by biting your tongue or poisoning yourself. It's just more pain to the dedicated patient in pain. You're trying to die, you don't care about the law. In the end this just makes the death more painful to appease the moral beliefs of those not suffering.

Again close regulation is important to insure only people with a chronic and fatal disease with little to no chance of survival are put out. And both the patient AND doctor must sign off. But I am for it, cause I have been there, and understand the concept of dying with dignity and ultimately a person should be in control of their life.

I won't debate this or try to prove my perspective, but I feel firmly about it based on my own lif experience.

[EdFry]

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

As someone who was crippled and in constant pain for 8 months with almost no chance of ever being able to walk or work I have some "hands on" experience with the issue.

I will not go into details but will say this.

I feel if both the patient AND the doctor agree that Euthanasia is a good choice, it can be a mercy.

Constant pain that makes you unable to see or think is maddening. Seriously, it drives a person insane.

In cases of cancer, where death is inevitable, the pain is immense, and you have to feel each organ die slowly, losing your ability to hold your bowels, and seeing your family go bankrupt trying to pay your midical bills is a terrifying experience.

I understand many have religious reasons for being against it, but I (having once been in the religious camp) now understand the concept of dying with dignity and not wanting to pass on so much debt your family will be unable to live well for a generation or two.

As I say, if the doctor AND the patient are in agreement, I believe it fine. The two people involved will have to answer for it in the afterlife. If a man can't take the pain or humiliation any more, let them die with dignity instead of forcing the person to do it some other way.

And to those who say making it illegal is a moral thing consider this. When you are in that much pain, and close to dying, you don't care about the law, it just means you have to suffer more in death by biting your tongue or poisoning yourself. It's just more pain to the dedicated patient in pain. You're trying to die, you don't care about the law. In the end this just makes the death more painful to appease the moral beliefs of those not suffering.

Again close regulation is important to insure only people with a chronic and fatal disease with little to no chance of survival are put out. And both the patient AND doctor must sign off. But I am for it, cause I have been there, and understand the concept of dying with dignity and ultimately a person should be in control of their life.

I won't debate this or try to prove my perspective, but I feel firmly about it based on my own life experience.

this is almost exactly what I was thinking

[Chromekatana]

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

As someone who was crippled and in constant pain for 8 months with almost no chance of ever being able to walk or work I have some "hands on" experience with the issue.

I will not go into details but will say this.

I feel if both the patient AND the doctor agree that Euthanasia is a good choice, it can be a mercy.

Constant pain that makes you unable to see or think is maddening. Seriously, it drives a person insane.

In cases of cancer, where death is inevitable, the pain is immense, and you have to feel each organ die slowly, losing your ability to hold your bowels, and seeing your family go bankrupt trying to pay your midical bills is a terrifying experience.

I understand many have religious reasons for being against it, but I (having once been in the religious camp) now understand the concept of dying with dignity and not wanting to pass on so much debt your family will be unable to live well for a generation or two.

As I say, if the doctor AND the patient are in agreement, I believe it fine. The two people involved will have to answer for it in the afterlife. If a man can't take the pain or humiliation any more, let them die with dignity instead of forcing the person to do it some other way.

And to those who say making it illegal is a moral thing consider this. When you are in that much pain, and close to dying, you don't care about the law, it just means you have to suffer more in death by biting your tongue or poisoning yourself. It's just more pain to the dedicated patient in pain. You're trying to die, you don't care about the law. In the end this just makes the death more painful to appease the moral beliefs of those not suffering.

Again close regulation is important to insure only people with a chronic and fatal disease with little to no chance of survival are put out. And both the patient AND doctor must sign off. But I am for it, cause I have been there, and understand the concept of dying with dignity and ultimately a person should be in control of their life.

I won't debate this or try to prove my perspective, but I feel firmly about it based on my own lif experience.

I do agree with most of this. I mean,it IS wrong BUt it is right at the same time. The part about the bills and money problems is something I didn't even think of. Also, I feel sad that you been "there" to where "Euthanasia" was a option.

[Toma RNK]

Originally Posted by Chromekatana

I do agree with most of this. I mean,it IS wrong BUt it is right at the same time. The part about the bills and money problems is something I didn't even think of. Also, I feel sad that you been "there" to where "Euthanasia" was a option.

I ended up going for a radical treatment plan that would have killed me or made me better. Luckily it made me better.

I made my mother lose her house while I lay in a bed getting sponge baths screaming in pain for 6 months and regret the loss of all she worked for her whole life, but my insurance company "hung me out to dry."

Morality is tough. Look at killing. We can all agree you should not do it.

But soldiers kill, and most people and religions agree it is not necessarily murder.
To kill a man trying to stab your mother/daughter for no reason is killing but not murder. And in the original language, the commandment read "Though shall not murder" which implies that it is the intent of the circumstances matters.

I feel the same about killing yourself. It believe it morally wrong to kill ones self to avoid punishment, or to shirk duties. But I beleive the specific circumstances I have spelled out have a different intent, and so in this case the action IS moral.

Everything is subjective, but I don't see why a person cannot make a choice about their own life, if it does not affect the rights of others.

[Chromekatana]

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

I ended up going for a radical treatment plan that would have killed me or made me better. Luckily it made me better.

I made my mother lose her house while I lay in a bed getting sponge baths screaming in pain for 6 months and regret the loss of all she worked for her whole life, but my insurance company "hung me out to dry."

Morality is tough. Look at killing. We can all agree you should not do it.

But soldiers kill, and most people and religions agree it is not necessarily murder.
To kill a man trying to stab your mother/daughter for no reason is killing but not murder. And in the original language, the commandment read "Though shall not murder" which implies that it is the intent of the circumstances matters.

I feel the same about killing yourself. It believe it morally wrong to kill ones self to avoid punishment, or to shirk duties. But I beleive the specific circumstances I have spelled out have a different intent, and so in this case the action IS moral.

Everything is subjective, but I don't see why a person cannot make a choice about their own life, if it does not affect the rights of others.

Yeah,it is a tough topic. I agree with the killing doesn't equel murder thing. But..it It makes me feel different when its about yourself...

I don't know what I personally would do,and hope to god not to end up in that situation,but its everybodys choice... I guess I'm not agaisnt it,but I'm not for it...

[nano]

Thank you for the great responces so far guys, especially Toma RNK for giving some valuable personal insight on this issue.



I, too, am pro-euthanasia, but I'll try bringing up a few different sides to the argument.

• How can people who have perception-altering conditions be expected to make a fair decision to end their life? Does this not turn into an involuntary death?
• If dying is simply a matter of gaining you and your doctor's written permission, when will the line be drawn? In such societies like the United States, where health care is not a human right but a business, what's stopping a doctor from profiting from mercy-killing and "legally" putting to death people with non-terminal illnesses that still request it? A good example may be a severely clinically depressed person - they may not understand the treatment availible for their condition, and have no sensible doctor to stop them from requesting euthanasia. (This is not a stretch, by the way.)
• If we can morally take a human life away so easily, does that not devalue it? How can life be considered precious if it can be ended so willingly and easily, and with the consent of professionals who are trained in prolonging life?
• What's stopping Euthanasia from becoming a way for families to cut health care costs? In countries that don't provide public health care, a $1000 mercy-kill would be a lot more convenient than a $50 000 surgery that doesn't even have a 100% sucess rate, especially to poorer families. And although the family may not openly request euthanasia for money purposes, the patient could certainly feel pressured and guilted into chosing it for the better of their family.

Just some general anti-euthanasia points to consider. I find these are usually the arguments people against it bring up.

Anyways...

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

Everything is subjective, but I don't see why a person cannot make a choice about their own life, if it does not affect the rights of others.

This sums up pro-euthanasia very well, I think. Great way of wording it.

[Toma RNK]

Originally Posted by nano

• How can people who have perception-altering conditions be expected to make a fair decision to end their life? Does this not turn into an involuntary death?

Health care proxy, thats what that form is for.
If the person has no proxy there should be an opt in process like organ donation, if the person opts in and has no proxy, the decision becomes the doctors.

Originally Posted by nano

• If dying is simply a matter of gaining you and your doctor's written permission, when will the line be drawn? In such societies like the United States, where health care is not a human right but a business, what's stopping a doctor from profiting from mercy-killing and "legally" putting to death people with non-terminal illnesses that still request it? A good example may be a severely clinically depressed person - they may not understand the treatment availible for their condition, and have no sensible doctor to stop them from requesting euthanasia. (This is not a stretch, by the way.)

It should be a right, but that aside. What profit is there in putting someone out? You gain more in the long term by diagnosing.

Also doctors should not be allowed to specialize in euthanasia, they must have another practice. As far as mental illness, if the person is considered sane enough to vote or take care of themself or WORK, they should have the right to make their own decisions. Unpleasant as it is, it's your life. That said anyone under 18 has no right to decide, that's the parent/legal guardians domain.

Originally Posted by nano

• If we can morally take a human life away so easily, does that not devalue it? How can life be considered precious if it can be ended so willingly and easily, and with the consent of professionals who are trained in prolonging life?

I don't consider the process easily, the patient (or appointed agent) and the doctor need to agree. As you say these doctors are trained to extend life. Getting one to accept a plea for death adds validity to the need to do it.
[/quote]

Originally Posted by nano

• What's stopping Euthanasia from becoming a way for families to cut health care costs? In countries that don't provide public health care, a $1000 mercy-kill would be a lot more convenient than a $50 000 surgery that doesn't even have a 100% sucess rate, especially to poorer families. And although the family may not openly request euthanasia for money purposes, the patient could certainly feel pressured and guilted into chosing it for the better of their family.

The patient would have to choose his family over himself. And honestly if he wants to, in my experience, he will just bite his tongue or jump off a bridge.

I don't think the legalization of the process will change the end result.

[Chromekatana]

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

Health care proxy, thats what that form is for.
If the person has no proxy there should be an opt in process like organ donation, if the person opts in and has no proxy, the decision becomes the doctors.

So the doctor can chose to put you to death?O.o

It should be a right, but that aside. What profit is there in putting someone out? You gain more in the long term by diagnosing.

Yeah,putting people out of theri misory is bad for them. Longer they stay there,thenm ore money for them.

Also doctors should not be allowed to specialize in euthanasia, they must have another practice. As far as mental illness, if the person is considered sane enough to vote or take care of themself or WORK, they should have the right to make their own decisions. Unpleasant as it is, it's your life. That said anyone under 18 has no right to decide, that's the parent/legal guardians domain.

If I was under 18, I wouldn't want my parents ending my pain,for me! I think that is something that needs change.



I don't consider the process easily, the patient (or appointed agent) and the doctor need to agree. As you say these doctors are trained to extend life. Getting one to accept a plea for death adds validity to the need to do it.


Yeah,agreed to this too. But,asking a doctoc to end your life must be a hard thing on them to...

[/LIST]The patient would have to choose his family over himself. And honestly if he wants to, in my experience, he will just bite his tongue or jump off a bridge.

I don't think the legalization of the process will change the end result.[/QUOTE]



(5charlmt)

[KyuubiAkatsuki]

gaaaaaaa! *is confused*

[Toma RNK]

Originally Posted by Chromekatana

(5charlmt)

If you OPT IN, and end up in a state where you cannot make a choice if you have no health care proxy then it becomes the doctors call.

If you opt out or have not filled out the form, you cannot be killed medically.

As to under 18s. Legally minors have virtually no right and parents can take kids off life support in most states, I am just saying it is a medical decision. I also meant a kid cant ask to be killed, a kid could say he does not want to die.

[Chromekatana]

Originally Posted by Toma RNK

If you OPT IN, and end up in a state where you cannot make a choice if you have no health care proxy then it becomes the doctors call.

If you opt out or have not filled out the form, you cannot be killed medically.

As to under 18s. Legally minors have virtually no right and parents can take kids off life support in most states, I am just saying it is a medical decision. I also meant a kid cant ask to be killed, a kid could say he does not want to die.

Ah,ok. I missed that part.


Wow, I would hate my parents for the last seconds of my life if they decided to kill me.-_-

[Sabra Kusabana]

Toma has more then covered why I believe in mercy killing.

You can't understand suffering till you've been there, even if you've watched it happen and have a good grasp most can't understand the depression and desperation you feel. Even after you've recovered sometimes just remembering makes you feel sick. I believe it should be allowed, but with a limit to it. I think in the case of marriages and children the other people involved should have some say, the person suffering really may not be in a state to choose. As a last option I feel it should always be on the table, but only when all else, that the patient is willing to do, has been tried.