Right to Die

[psychoslice]

My mother was left to chock to death, she has cancer in her throat, she died three times, each time I closed her eye's, but she started to breath again, and choking for breath all over again, it was horrible to watch, I even felt like smothering her with a pillow, but just couldn't do it. So if you have never seen something like this, then you wouldn't have a bloody clue, and should just keep your thoughts to yourself.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Everyone's life is their own.

 

[Sand Dancer]

My mother was left to chock to death, she has cancer in her throat, she died three times, each time I closed her eye's, but she started to breath again, and choking for breath all over again, it was horrible to watch, I even felt like smothering her with a pillow, but just couldn't do it. So if you have never seen something like this, then you wouldn't have a bloody clue, and should just keep your thoughts to yourself.

I am so sorry you and your mother had to deal with that.

 

[SomeRandom]

I think that showing mercy is part of Dharma (duty, ethical etc.) making someone comfortable and then allowing them to die peacefully surrounded by loved ones trumps any and all supposed "morals." As it stands now terminally ill people are committing suicide in full knowledge of their family who are forced to be separate from them during the deed, which means they are left to die alone (this is due to our laws.) Dogs have more ****ing dignity than this in death and yet people have the gall to say this isn't the same? Like hell! They are treated better than humans. Not that I'm against putting down an animal with no quality of life. That too is a mercy, albeit both are extremely difficult to do.

People should be able to die as painlessly and with as much dignity as possible.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I think that showing mercy is part of Dharma (duty, ethical etc.) making someone comfortable and then allowing them to die peacefully surrounded by loved ones trumps any and all supposed "morals." As it stands now terminally ill people are committing suicide in full knowledge of their family who are forced to be separate from them during the deed, which means they are left to die alone (this is due to our laws.) Dogs have more ****ing dignity than this in death and yet people have the gall to say this isn't the same? Like hell! They are treated better than humans. Not that I'm against putting down an animal with no quality of life. That too is a mercy, albeit both are extremely difficult to do.

People should be able to die as painlessly and with as much dignity as possible.

This is why the eastern religions run circles around the western religion.

 

[Noa]

This is why the eastern religions run circles around the western religion.

Dat's a pretty big circle. I would be so tired.

 

[Sundance]

This is going to be very emotional for me. What is the ‘right to die’? The very wording of this concept is ridiculous to me, not to mention the concept itself. You experience pain and suffering, which can be excruciating, near your deathbed, and you use it as a reason to commit what is practically suicide. I find it absolutely despicable, quite frankly. Every single human being is destined to experience suffering in life, some to greater degrees than others. Though, a good many unfortunate souls are here in this world even now experiencing levels of physical pain and suffering the likes of which proponents of the ‘right to die’ cannot even begin to measure, cannot even begin to fathom. It's like attempting to compare a man being kicked in the testicles to a man being flogged. What is all the more depressing about this sobering truth is that many of these are young men, young women, little children, babies even. Not dieing in a hospital bed, but on the f***in streets. And people want to talk about a ‘right to die’. My ***.

 

[Noa]

This is going to be very emotional for me. What is the ‘right to die’? The very wording of this concept is ridiculous to me, not to mention the concept itself. You experience pain and suffering, which can be excruciating, near your deathbed, and you use it as a reason to commit what is practically suicide. I find it absolutely despicable, quite frankly. Every single human being is destined to experience suffering in life, some to greater degrees than others. Though, a good many unfortunate souls are here in this world even now experiencing levels of physical pain and suffering the likes of which proponents of the ‘right to die’ cannot even begin to measure, cannot even begin to fathom. It's like attempting to compare a man being kicked in the testicles to a man being flogged. What is all the more depressing about this sobering truth is that many of these are young men, young women, little children, babies even. Not dieing in a hospital bed, but on the f***in streets. And people want to talk about a ‘right to die’. My ***.

You are comparing suffering when there is no need to do so. It is simply a question of whether someone should have the right to end their own life.

 

[Aquitaine]

Hell I think we should provide voluntary euthanasia for adults who aren't even terminally ill.

 

[psychoslice]

I am so sorry you and your mother had to deal with that.

Thank you, I think people need to see the agony of how some people die, before criticise peoples wish to die in dignity.

 

[Sundance]

You are comparing suffering when there is no need to do so. It is simply a question of whether someone should have the right to end their own life.

I disagree with you on that, especially due to the fact that typically the justification for assisted suicide/euthanasia stems from the experience of suffering.

 

[Noa]

I disagree with you on that, especially due to the fact that typically the justification for assisted suicide/euthanasia stems from the experience of suffering.

Sometimes it does, but euthanasia 'on demand' is also a concept.

But even if it is directly related to suffering it should not be arbitrarily comparative by stating they have to live because somewhere someone is having a worse time than them. That is neither here nor there.

 

[Sundance]

Sometimes it does, but euthanasia 'on demand' is also a concept.

But even if it is directly related to suffering it should not be arbitrarily comparative by stating they have to live because somewhere someone is having a worse time than them. That is neither here nor there.

You mean, “someone has to wait to die”, which is saying that someone must struggle longer in order to stall something that people in this scenario are close to doing anyway? It's called “allowing Mother Nature to do her (inevitable, at the point we're discussing) job”. That is especially why the concept is laughable to me.

 

[Noa]

You mean, “someone has to wait to die”, which is saying that someone must struggle longer in order to stall something that people in this scenario are close to doing anyway.

I mean the fundamental question here is whether people have the right to choose whether they wish to die. Whether or no someone else out there is suffering more than them is irrelevant.

 

[Sundance]

I mean the fundamental question here is whether people have the right to choose whether they wish to die. Whether or no someone else out there is suffering more than them is irrelevant.

Indeed, which is why greater suffering is merely something to think about. The concept of a ‘right to die’ is still ridiculous, regardless. That is, to me.

 

[Unification]

Inspired by the Consequences of Suicide thread I thought I'd pose more specific questions. In some places there are laws concerning the right to die for terminally ill patients. What are your personal feelings on terminating life when one is already going to die? And how do you think your faith plays into your position? Does it? Does your religion have a stance on it at all?

For the "terminally" ill, that are tasting/feeling the body go, would have to be their own call. The physical body has broken down and can no longer sustain the energy inside of it. The places where there are laws against, I suppose they are designed to keep one without a choice. Designed to keep one tasting/feeling agony in mind.

Personally, if my body were terminal... I'd want to stay as long as I can by the power within me, when that power ceases to keep my body functioning, I'd want no assistance in my body kept by machine energy. Use my organs to help another.

Pain and suffering is of the brain/mind, I've learned to control it, and through the great energy within, heal and reconstruct my mind. But that's me, and is not applicable to the freedom another has in choosing their route, or how they experience and handle their own pain. Everyone is unique.

External religion plays no role for me. If a mind has any salvation(freedom)... It would be their own free desire. No matter what a religion or anyone believes, what's going to happen will be true. Even if by our train of thinking, and our thoughts... an alternate reality in an alternate universe we create for ourselves exists... it still would be true.
One scenario has nothing we can do about it, while the other scenario does.

 

[Draka]

Indeed, which is why greater suffering is merely something to think about. The concept of a ‘right to die’ is still ridiculous, regardless. That is, to me.

Why do you find the concept of an individual having the right to determine how and when they should die, especially and specifically in regards to terminal situations anyway, "ridiculous"? You think it ridiculous for a person to rather have a simple injection and drift off, without pain, to die than remain in a slow torturous death of agony? Or do you find it ridiculous to let them? Deciding for them that they must endure? To what other end than death anyway? Just what is "ridiculous" about this concept?

 

[Sees]

I can't see a problem with a person who is suffering away towards certain death deciding to take a swift exit instead. It has been going on for a long time.

What can be a problem though - thinking that other people must help with it taking place.

 

[Sundance]

Why do you find the concept of an individual having the right to determine how and when they should die, especially and specifically in regards to terminal situations anyway, "ridiculous"? You think it ridiculous for a person to rather have a simple injection and drift off, without pain, to die than remain in a slow torturous death of agony? Or do you find it ridiculous to let them? Deciding for them that they must endure? To what other end than death anyway? Just what is "ridiculous" about this concept?

Once again, the ridiculousness of such a concept stems from my belief that Nature/Fate will decide a different path to the grave for each of us. It is far more profound to leave any unknown specifics of the inevitable to chance, don't you think? Either way, you're bound to die. Assisted suicide, to me, is another disappointing way of desiring to control, to gain stability over the infinite variability inherent in life.

(As a side note, if a painless death is what you're going on about, try dying in your sleep. It gets the job done, plus it's metaphorical. Also, it's not about making decisions for anyone else, more about criticizing and poking a little bit of fun at anything I deem worthy of ridicule...)

 

[Aquitaine]

My mother was left to chock to death, she has cancer in her throat, she died three times, each time I closed her eye's, but she started to breath again, and choking for breath all over again, it was horrible to watch, I even felt like smothering her with a pillow, but just couldn't do it. So if you have never seen something like this, then you wouldn't have a bloody clue, and should just keep your thoughts to yourself.

I am sorry to hear you both had to experience that. It further highlights how inhumane the natural death process can be. In an age where we have common use of anaesthetics, I really don't understand why people are opposed to humane Assisted Dying atleast for those who are terminally ill or suffering.