The Right to Die

[Booko]

I want to ask a question of everyone here, would you wish a slow and painful death upon anyone?

Certainly not. But then, I thought I was working on one of those. Fortunately in my case I found a way out.

I am so fortunate I can't even begin to explain just how fortunate I feel. First, I seemingly quite by accident found out some "alternative" methods that did the trick. Then, I had the money to pay, because insurance sure isn't going to cover it.

If I was poor, uneducated, and had to depend only on allopathic medicine, and euthanasia was offered to me, and if religious beliefs were no constraint, I would be dead now.

Instead, I'm working on enrolling in a doctoral program this week, getting set up for an election in March, finding suitable curricula for my daughter's further education, and typing on RF.

So, when it comes to euthansia, I take a decidedly Entish approach due to my own experience and other things I've observed over the years.

While religious belief plays a large role in my *personal* approach to the subject, I'm not inclined to apply my religion's principles on those who do not share them with me. Uh...no one died and made me God or anything. :cover:

 

[Booko]

Can we set up a test on the BTK Killer and make a decision after that??

:slap:

 

[Pardus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeyEPJLkjOg

Certain parts of this song explain my take on suicide, the sudden or slow bit.

[edit] The song in general explains my misanthropy.

 

[Engyo]

Life and death are Gods decision. Of course, people will jump in and take that decision into their own hands, which, because of free will, God allows. This sin does not go unpunished, though.
Of course the idea of euthanasia sounds like a more caring thing to do than stabbing someone to death, but it all amounts to the same thing; taking someones life, and it is not for any of us to make that decision. This is from a view point of a christian, of course.

Sola -

By similar logic, isn't medical intervention (f any kind) also then taking God's decision into human hands? Especially in the case of feeding tubes and ventilators, I would think that this is interfering in God's decision to take that life, isn't it?

Bump. I'd like to broaden the target of this question: the logic here is something that has always puzzled me; can anyone answer this one?

 

[FatMan]

Bump. I'd like to broaden the target of this question: the logic here is something that has always puzzled me; can anyone answer this one?

Not trying to be simplistic, but I find that when most people cannot explain things in a way that is easily explainable, they skirt around the difficulty by invoking the concept of God's will or something being God's decision.

It sounds official without ever really saying anything of substance. I don't know if I can blame ones who invoke this method, however, for they ofetn are only shown one side of a topic or they choose to ignore that another side is debateable.

 

[gnomon]

True, but it's worth taking a look at the studies that have shown that poor pain management practices are the culprit.

I would not like to rush into euthanasia when pain is the issue, if it's just that the pain management is ineffective.

(fwiw, I don't speak from a completely "theoretical" pov here either)

Thank you for pointing this out. Considering the rise of patients who are suffering from severe pain and the governments new crusade against pain management asking whether or not the government should allow those people to die brings in scary scenarios.

I mainly side with the concept that if an individual wishes to refuse medical treatment than that wish must be granted if that person is actually of sound mind. That exception, however, pretty much allows the state full control over determining if a patient ever can refuse treatment. I cannot come up with a better solution on the issue.

So, when it comes to euthansia, I take a decidedly Entish approach due to my own experience and other things I've observed over the years.

Hroom-vra-room. You're not that old!.

 

[NoahideHiker]

link



Does keeping a person alive who is incredibly ill amount to torture? Or is it simply a matter of prolonging life? Do people have a right to die at their own request? If so, in what cases would this apply?

This topic is very interesting to me because starting Monday I will be taking care of the terminally ill who have been sent home to die. I am completely against the shortening of lives so it will be even more enteresting to see how my views change as I go along with my new job.

 

[Booko]

Bump. I'd like to broaden the target of this question: the logic here is something that has always puzzled me; can anyone answer this one?

The argument comes off odd because it's usually not phrased as an argument, but just "it's in God's hands."

The difference I've found, when I've asked further, is one means of "taking things into your own hands" aims to preserve life, while the other seeks to end it.

That seems to the crux of the matter for many people.

 

[Engyo]

The argument comes off odd because it's usually not phrased as an argument, but just "it's in God's hands."

The difference I've found, when I've asked further, is one means of "taking things into your own hands" aims to preserve life, while the other seeks to end it.

That seems to the crux of the matter for many people.

OK, I understand that. I just never read or saw where interventions to preserve life were always acceptable, and those to end life were always unacceptable. If the choice is God's to make, why are we allowed to intervene at all?

 

[Ozzie]

link

Does keeping a person alive who is incredibly ill amount to torture?

Depends on the perspective of the persons involved, every time.

Or is it simply a matter of prolonging life?

Ditto.

Do people have a right to die at their own request?

Thats a normative question. So should your or any one else's personal response to the first two questions influence your response to this third question which applies to everyone? Or is it better to judge these things on a case by case basis?

If so, in what cases would this apply?

Thats how the question of euthanasia should be decided, on a case by case basis. It is an exercise in applied ethics, not normative morality.

Oz

 

[Booko]

Thank you for pointing this out. Considering the rise of patients who are suffering from severe pain and the governments new crusade against pain management asking whether or not the government should allow those people to die brings in scary scenarios.

What's the campaign against pain management? (Probably missed that somehow.)

I mainly side with the concept that if an individual wishes to refuse medical treatment than that wish must be granted if that person is actually of sound mind. That exception, however, pretty much allows the state full control over determining if a patient ever can refuse treatment. I cannot come up with a better solution on the issue.

The exception being for minors, but again, that has it's problems. At what point does the parents' religious belief get ignored in favor of the child's welfare? It's one thing to override a belief against blood transfusions when a child is readily able to survive but needs a pint of blood. It's quite another for the state to stick their nose into the very complicated and very difficult decisions have to make about severely ill children and insist that their child be cut up and sewn back together, when the likely expectation is will only prolong life for maybe a couple of years.

Hroom-vra-room. You're not that old!.

Bless my bark and voo-ra-room! I surely do feel that way sometimes!

 

[gnomon]

What's the campaign against pain management? (Probably missed that somehow.)

I'm being a bit dramatic. Many libertarians see an effort by the ONDCP and the DEA to harass those doctors who prescribe pain medications as well as those who receive such treatment. The case of Richard Paey is an extreme example, the federal effort against marijuana treatment in California, some other cases of doctors losing their licenses or being imprisoned over questionable prescriptions and things like that. I tend to agree with them but this is a another issue.

The exception being for minors, but again, that has it's problems. At what point does the parents' religious belief get ignored in favor of the child's welfare? It's one thing to override a belief against blood transfusions when a child is readily able to survive but needs a pint of blood. It's quite another for the state to stick their nose into the very complicated and very difficult decisions have to make about severely ill children and insist that their child be cut up and sewn back together, when the likely expectation is will only prolong life for maybe a couple of years.

It's a very troubling issue. I really don't know if I can put forth any solid statements about what I believe about this issue. Any situation where any result tends to end in loss of life is tragic. It's actually thinking about things like this that make me isolative. I'll leave this issue to those with stronger emotional fortitude than myself.

Bless my bark and voo-ra-room! I surely do feel that way sometimes!

 

[lilithu]

In general I support a person's right to terminate his or her own life... except in cases where the person is suffering from depression. A person must be in a position to make a rational decision. And I didn't see that taken into consideration in either of the first two choices, so I had to vote "maybe."

Someone could potentially be diagnosed with a termimal illness but with treatment still live several more months or perhaps even years with high quality of life and be able to spend time with his or her family and loved ones. In that case, if they choose suicide, I would wonder about their mental health.

Basically, I'd want a mandatory interview with a trained mental health professional (preferably two) looking for signs of depression. And no, simply wanting to die is not sufficient evidence of depression. That would be a catch-22.

Also, I wouldn't want anyone to opt for suicide based on financial considerations, for example, being concerned about the cost to one's family. That seems like a noble but awful reason to choose death.

 

[Radio Frequency X]

Basically, I'd want a mandatory interview with a trained mental health professional (preferably two) looking for signs of depression. And no, simply wanting to die is not sufficient evidence of depression. That would be a catch-22.

Also, I wouldn't want anyone to opt for suicide based on financial considerations, for example, being concerned about the cost to one's family. That seems like a noble but awful reason to choose death.

Personally, I think that placing life and death situations that involve more than the person who is choosing to die is too great a decision to fall into the hands of social workers and psychologists. Most Hospitals have trained, PHD Ethicists on staff who are capable of making such a decision. However, in the case of Euthanasia, we are not merely talking about a person taking their own life or being allowed to die.

Were talking about circumstances where:

a) A doctor actually kills you.
b) A Hospital Staff whose responsibility it is to keep you alive, deliberately neglects that responsibility at your request.
c) Doctors and/or hospital staff assists you in taking your own life.

In each of these cases the individual choosing to die has made a decision that involves the lives of others. In a case where a disease is not terminal and does not involve what must be defined (somehow or another) as extreme suffering, an individual should not have the right to force other individuals to be involved in his or her death.

Euthanasia, in my opinion, can only be justified when it is an act of care, which includes both the prevention of suffering during a terminal period and/or for any condition that causes extreme pain (essentially including any pain that cannot be managed by morphine).

 

[Sola*5]

Sola -

By similar logic, isn't medical intervention (f any kind) also then taking God's decision into human hands? Especially in the case of feeding tubes and ventilators, I would think that this is interfering in God's decision to take that life, isn't it?

Not really, if God chooses to end someones life, then He will, regardless of what medical help there is on offer.
Feeding tubes and ventilators help to keep someone alive; that isnt a sin. Helping someone to die or murdering them is.
Look, if someone wants to end their lifes, thats their choice, what gets me is when they wanna rope other people into it, like getting a doctor or relative to kill them; bringing more sin and pain upon the people who assist in it.