Euthanasia?

[Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi]

Euthanasia? Yes, no, maybe? Why? In what situations? Who should be able to decide? My answers after I see the response of others.

[Guest Big Samurai]

This is one issue that I have visited again and again, and I have boiled it down to one rule: If I am too sick to wipe my own butt -- yes, that's the rule -- and can only live a degrading, humiliating existence, kill me. Similarly, if keeping my comatose ass alive is plunging my family into medical debt -- remarkably easy to do under the current health care system in the U.S. -- and ruining their chances of enjoying full, rewarding lives, kill me. Do I think it should be legal? Yes. Who do I think is responsible? It should be the responsibility of the individual as a key part of a living will; otherwise, closest surviving family ought to have power of attorney, also clearly designated. It should be on the short list of things that people consider when they think about their own mortality, right up there with who takes care of the kids, who inherits what, all of that.

I, for one, refuse to die a slow, agonizing death. If I'm going out anyway, let it be quick, painless, and dignified.

[dazzledfirestar]

I agree with Sam on this one. It's one of those conversations that need to happen in every family. I have had it with both my parents and my husband, and they all know my wishes and I know theirs and that, in my mind, is how it should be. It isn't an easy conversation to have, but it is a necessary one no matter which side of the debate you fall on.

[NightScribe]

I agree with Sam and Daz and it's a discussion that should take place within all families.

[redsliver]

It should certainly be a family matter as stated by everyone.

However, I'd like to state for the record when I was younger (and its sad that I was this brainless at 16) and heard about "youth in Asia" and the debate surrounding it, I was mildly confused.

[Guest Agaib]

I think that its up to the individual. Obviously, if we allowed other people to easily decide when it was someone's time to go then we might have a problem. However, if a person has stated that they would like to die under such and such conditions. It should be their right to do so.

[Guest Alien Pirate Pixagi]

I think that its up to the individual. Obviously, if we allowed other people to easily decide when it was someone's time to go then we might have a problem.

While, for the most part I support euthanasia, that very issue does come up in my mind. Not to mention that for some people, they'd want to die if they lost a limb, let alone if they were dying of a fatal disease. This brings up another question. If euthanasia became legal, should restrictions as to which conditions should be met, and who can make the decision?

Should it be mandatory that a doctor declares the disease fatal no matter what they do? Should the decision be made strictly by the patient and be made known in a will, or should whoever has their power of attorney (who may or may not be a family member) be allowed to make the decision if they're comatose? There are many questions here to consider.

Assisted suicide, if legalized in the US, would have to be a very closely regulated thing, which can in the end do much more harm then good. Can you imagine all the red tape one would have to go through to in order to end the life of a suffering loved one?

On top of that, another issue comes to light. We already have good amount of people who jump from cliffs because they got dumped. Now, if we legalize euthanasia, what is it saying to all those teens? Or maybe we can give out life evaluation surveys to determine whether their quality of life is low enough below certain standards to justify that little cliff dive.

And then, we have a question brought up in "The Giver" (a futuristic novel by Lois Lowry). Do we, as humans, have the right to determine when it is someone's time to die? Would assisted suicide get to the point where, once a person lives past their usefulness, they are killed so they don't take up precious resources? Will we have to do this at some point? Even scarier, is that such a bad thing?

Before anyone hitches a fit over that last question, please note that I in no way mean to trivialize life. It's a gift, to be certain. However, it is also worth noting that with the rise of population, there is also a rise in the percentage of those born, and dying, in abject poverty. Their quality of life is far below standards that us, as people living in powerful nations, and been raised to believe in. In that light, wouldn't severe population control aid, rather then hinder, human existence?

[StoryJunkie]

Live until you die.

Die with dignity.

My only thoughts. Whatever you think dignity is, that is what I think it is. Whatever you think death is, that is what I think death is. (There are zombies amoung us!)

Do we really know how many seniors commit suicide?

[CainTheEternal]

Mercy killing, IMHO, should be illegal. Regardless of the how merciful it is meant to be, murder is murder. The question of who is to decide who is to die and who is to suffer is too influenced by opinion.

I believe ignorance is a disease and in my perfect JCV-inspired world, all stupid people would be allowed a merciful end to their stupidity but that would more be to my benefit than theirs.

Like StoryJunkie said a person should be allowed to die with dignity and if I were to deny them that death by smothering them with a pillow, despite the fact that they were in a losing battle with cancer (which is the stupidest phrase ever. I always imagine the white blood cells arming up as Spartans and overtaking cancer cells.), they could not die with the appearance they wanted to leave for their loved ones.

I believe that assisted suicide should be officially separated from euthanasia, considering that suicide is a conscious decision to end one's life. If one is rendered unable to end his or her own life, than those who assist should not be penalized, i.e. Dr. Jack Kevorkian.

In conclusion, -- ew, it felt like a school essay for a second.

Either way, euthanasia and assisted suicide need to be acknowledged as separate actions and treated as such.

[Guest Agaib]

I really think that the proper way to solve world population problems would be through managing to control procreation in some way. Force euthanasia of the elderly is just wrong. People have a right to decide when to bring someone to life, but people should not ever have the right to take it away.

In any case, the population of the United States and most other developed countries is hardly a problem compared to 3rd world countries, where "euthanasia" of the elderly is called survival of the fittest and happens merely because of lack of medical help and resources.

Euthanasia should be something people do to themselves. Most people are capable of killing themselves if they so wish. I just hope that they consider the consequences to the people around them.

[AmyMcClair]

I don't think forced euthanasia is right under any circumstances. If a person wants to have no life-saving measures taken, let them fill out a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate order). If they don't want to be on life-support tell them to get a living will. Otherwise, it is up to the families and the courts to help the families decide what is in the best interest of the patient.

Barring any of the measures listed above, people should not be allowed to end a person's life prematurely. There is one northern-European country (I think it is Sweden, but I am unsure.) that pulls the plug w/ or w/o a living will because they have socialized healthcare and the country does not want to pay for life support. Because of this, many non-religious people are suddenly becoming Catholic to avoid death-by-hospitals. I think this is wrong.

[NightScribe]

Webster's Dictionary: Euthanasia: 1. An easy and painless death; 2. act or method of causing death painlessly, so as to end suffering: advocated by some as a way to deal with persons dying of incurable, painful diseases

I am an advocate of euthanasia, and have been for many years, for those who are dying of an incurable disease, if that is their wish as communicated to family, health care givers, and appointed power of attorneys. (I also support the Hemlock Society). Maybe I'm misreading some of the posts here, and if so, I apologize, but it seems that some of the comments view it as an attempt to legally commit murder as a means to control the population or rid society of the poor, aged, undesirable, etc. That is not what euthanasia (or mercy killing) is truly about. (Again, if I'm misunderstanding, please accept my apologies).

Consider this scenario. A man with cancer goes through chemo and radiation treatment, which is not successful. He then ends up having to have a tracheotomy, leaving him incapable of eating or speaking, catheterized, and bed ridden. He asks (via writing) how long it takes to starve to death, but eventually agrees to a feeding tube. He's hooked up to a machine, which provides oxygen, the site of the trach needing to be suctioned regularly. He needs 24/7 care. He cannot bathe or dress himself. The pain of the still present tumor presses on his sternum and, due to the inability to move, has the added problem of back pain. He cannot even groan or cry out, only grimace, and contort his hands into a claw like gesture to indicate he's in pain. His body is dying and begins to reject the feeding tube nourishment, (via projectile vomiting) so it is removed (if it remained, he would basically drown on what was meant to help keep him alive). Through all of that, he is mentally alert and aware of what is going on. Shortly thereafter, he starves to death, his body, already weakened, wasted away, having "fed" off his organs and muscles.

That was no hypothetical "what if" story. The man died a little over a month ago; and he was my father. Fortunately, for the last couple of days, he was, in addition to pain medication, heavily sedated, but if euthanasia (doctor assisted suicide) was legal, he wouldn't have had to go through that. Being still mentally with it, he could have signed the necesary papers, granting the physician permission to end his suffering. And I, all of us, would have supported that decision 100%; unless you've gone through it, I cannot describe how extremely heartrending it is to watch someone die slowly and painfully, wanting nothing more than to offer them comfort and relief, but unable to do so, rendered impotent by legalities. As I've said, I've long supported euthanasia; that experience only reinforced my opinion.

As for population control, there's a line of thought referred to as "Zero Population" (they've since changed the name, but I don't immediately recall to what). Anyway, the basic idea is to keep birth to death rates even. There was a European country (again, I don't recall which) that was pretty successful with it. As for DNR (no heroics) it only works to a point; if you're on the table, in surgery, they're not just going to shrug and let you go, even if you signed the form. They will attempt to resuscitate you. I can understand doing that, but hell, if they succeeded, but I had irreversible brain damage, I would rather have died. But that's just me.

I'm not trying to convert anyone to my way of thinking; every individual has the right to their opinion. I normally avoid divulging personal matters here, but I felt that story helped to better illustrate my pro euthanasia stance. Everyone must do what they feel is right for them. Unfortunately, as things stand now, should I find myself in such a situation, I couldn't do what I felt was right for me. And that rankles me.

[DarkCabaret]

I would have to say Euthanasia is okay when the condition calls for it. Like my dad for instance, even though I don't like to talk about it I will....

My dad had COPD and Emphazyma(sp?), he was in the hospital for THREE WEEKS before he passed away. I remember sitting next to him in the hospital for three days straight only sleeping a total of four hours and whispering to him in the middle of the night to just let go. If there had been an easier way, I would have agreed to it. His condition was bad enough he had trouble breathing and was on oxygen. I remember him telling me I had say in what happened to him and as badly as I wanted to say to put him on life support, I couldn't let him be on a respirator for years to come knowing it would be difficult to pull him off even if his condition got better.

So if there had been an easier way to end his suffering than him laying in a hospital bed and taking at least four days to slip away, I would have been all for it.

However if someone just can't handle things and wants to die, then that's not natural and shouldn't be permitted. I've had two family members kill themselves and it's not right.

So I guess I'm only saying if there is no hope what-so-ever of their health getting better, then I would agree. However for a perfectly healthy person who has years ahead of them. It isn't right.

[Guest Agaib]

I don't think its really very important to discuss whether or not healthy people have a right to commit suicide. If they want to, they'll be able to. And if they're able to, we cant exactly "punish" them for it. We should do our best to help those who are suffering from psychological illnesses that can lead to suicide for sure, we even have drugs that we use to try to treat them. Which, admittedly, are of dubious helpfullness

Dead people don't respond to punishment. With regard to a life ending illness I think people should have a right to end their lives, but the process shouldn't be easy. If I remember right I think that the state or Oregon has a "death with dignity" act, which allows for physician assisted suicide for a patient that fills certain requirements.

[Madilayn]

It's definitely something that should be discussed reasonably by everybody.

I am in favour for one simple reason: we often put our beloved pets to sleep when they are in great pain and have no chance of living a full, happy, long and pain free life. In other words: when there is nothing that can medically be done - or afforded.

To me, it seems hypocritical that we don't give humans this dignity. What right do we have to condemn them to live in pain, suffering and the humiliation of having somebody else do everything for them: espeically since they often have no means of expressing their opinion.

In my family, we have discussed this and all have agreed that we would rather have that option if the worst came to the worst.

Interestingly, a nurse I know in pallative care told me that "unofficial" euthanasia often takes place. When there is no chance of life, or the person is dying and in great pain, they are often put on a self-dose morphine drip/machine. The Drs & Nurses know that many patients, when they do this, will take the opportunity to end their own lives through an overdose of morphine.

This happened with both my father and my aunt - both of whom were dieing of cancer. Both of them, after saying farewell, took the option of the overdose of morphiene. Or if they didn't it was a huge coincidence that they died less than 12 hours after they said farewell.

I couldn't see my pets suffer from an incurable disease - why should it be different for people I love?

[Shirotaka]

My thoughts are simple.

No person has any right to determine the fate of any other person unless terminally ill and incapable of the mental activity necessary to stimulate bodily functions needed for survival. i.e. breathing, heartbeat, etc.

To my knowledge, this is only possible in someone in a persistent vegetative state, usually due to an an aneursym or other brain hemorrhaging.

Given this state, I bilieve the decision comes down to the next of kin, no doctors.

The scenario I describe does not occur often enough to raise a federal case over.

Oh and one last thing.

Never should there be an age limit at which people are put down to save them from suffering.

Any day we get on this earth is a blessing and should be treated as such and spent with the ones we love; because whether it's a doctor who pulls your plug or some gangbanger who pulls his trigger, life ends.

Enjoy yours and let others live without fear of another thing cutting theirs short.

[manta2g]

To quote my own mother, " Be it acident or illness, if they have to put me on life support indefinately to keep me alive, pull the plug or I'll come back and haunt you."

I think it's a matter settled amoung family, bit I have to agree with my mother, if the only way to be kept alive is bt life support machines and no chance of living wihtout them, it's really no way to live and best just to let nature take it's course. It's different if it's an emegency matter and the life support is only temperary in order to do repairs/segery to the body so it can function on it's own again once healed up.

Just my two cents.

It wouldn't surprise me though that if time and nature could be charged with murder for people dying, they would be.

[KuraiNeko]

First i will give you my opinion and then i will give you my families.

if i was stuck in a hospital bed with the loss of the use of both of my hands. and unable to eat solid food i would opt for it.

reason 1: my hands are my life I cannot create without my hands and thus...cannot live.

reason two: food is the most incredible thing next to sex...if i cannot eat solid food i'd might as well die.

my family...

Grandma: "it dosent matter how i die just play that 'ding dong the witch is dead' song at my funeral"

Grandpa: "I wanna go in my sleep."

Mom: "Keep me alive as long as it takes."

Sister: "Eh..." (i cant get a single word out of her on the subject)

[Guest Rosemarius]

Before starting, let me say that in my country Euthanasia is considered a crime (thank to that damn Rattzinger and the politicians who follows him, who seem to forget that Italy and Vatican City are NOT the same country).

For that reason, there had been many protests but nothing changed. That's unfair. You can't choose for the other persons if they have to live or not.

Personally talking, I'd rather jump from a tower than living with a serious cancer, Alzhaimer or AIDS. I've seen people dieing that way. It's not only painful. it's humiliating for that person to die like this.

And I know for certain that is something that I'm not capablenor wishing to do. Maybe I'm too weak, or maybe I'm a coward, but I don't care. I know I don't wanna end up like my aunt or my grandomother, and that's enough.

[Shinju]

I'm not sure what to say on this topic. I believe people should be able to do what they want as long as it doesn't harm others. But for me personally I would not because I was raised with a Catholic fear of hell.