This weeks moral debate- Euthanasia. Right or Wrong

[Gahars]

I don't think you can really give a right or wrong on a subject like this. It isn't as ambigious as "is killing right or wrong?". It really comes down to the circumstances.

So, I really couldn't give an answer.


On another note, if you want a great story on the subject, try Stephen King's The Woman in the Room. It's in one of his short story collections. Night Shift, I think.

Just putting it out there.

 

[pha kin su pah]

im all for involuntary euthanasia!

 

[Treblaine]

Euthanasia generally means doing something which will directly end the patient's life such as an OD of morphine. What is usually the case is when it becomes apparent to the doctor that treatment is futile and only prolonging suffering they can be legally allowed (with consent) to end treatment so "nature takes its course". The treatment removal can be selective so someone slowly dying from an untreatable infection may be kept sedated and pain-free as they slip away.

The problem comes with people who are not technically terminally ill; they may be sick and suffering but their condition is not killing them. Examples include brain damage, paralysis and even chronic diseases and massive burns or injuries, they can live for another couple of decades.

A Doctor's job is to fight conditions which negatively affect their patient. At a stretch their job is to use their medical knowledge to best assist their patient which would only be the case if no other treatment will make their life bearable.

The problem is that if someone is lucid enough to discuss with a doctor about ending their life then they are probably able to end it themselves, even driving their wheelchair over a cliff. The tricky issue is with severely brain damaged patients who are unable to communicate and it is then down to family members and long conversations about whether they are suffering or whether they are really alive or "brain dead".

It is cases like these that are the hardest to solve.

 

[Gooble]

It is right, but would probably need some agreement or legal document signed but the person who wants to die before it can be carried out, to ensure that in at least the majoirty of cases, the person does actually want to die. I know people can be forced into signing things, but that will hopefully only happen in extreme cases.

 

[BallPtPenTheif]

it would seem like you would want legally sanctioned euthenasia just to give the medical community a proper visibility of these people. from there you would have the opportunity to provide all the necessary resources (therapy, more medicine, etc) to ensure that this individual is making a sincere choice.

by out right banning it, these people will find other means and their lack of visibility means that potential survivors go under the radar and die.

 

[monodiabloloco]

since I was speaking to a friend about this earlier.

we decided on something

Switching off life support is not Euthanasia. If someone needs life support they are being kept alive by artificial means. Someone of life support cannot kill themselves no matter how much my friend tried to argue they could

My question there is: if a person is on life support, are they really alive? If machines have forced them into continued biological function with no chance of recovery, isn't it more immoral for us to force this to continue than to switch it off? How many families are faced with the question of to do so or not, and in the mean time, the hospitals (at least here in the US)are racking up huge bills per day for the survivors of said family to then pay along with the emotional burdens they have accrued from the loss? Isn't THAT truely the crime?

As for the core question:
I don't feel it is wrong in any way. What bothers me is that (here in the US) people cannot make their own decisions for the one thing that they should be able to own; their life.
We don't actually own it. There are laws like seat belt laws that MAKE us take precautions with our own lives. Granted we all SHOULD, but if someone wants to take their life, then who am I to force them to stop? I may try to convince them not to, but to force them seems wrong to me. People who only face a greater deterioration and massive pain may not want to go through it just to cling on and put off what's coming anyway. I can respect their decision to go and feel that they should be aided if they need it.
I watched my dad die of cancer. At the end, he was a gibbering shell of a human who had no idea what was going on around him because they filled him with as much morphein as he could stand. He had no control of himself or his functions and it was the single most horrible thing I have ever seen. I REFUSE to go out like that. There is fighting and there is acceptance of those things that cannot be fought. If my time comes like that, I hope my family understands when I ask for a gun.

 

[BlazeTheVampire]

Why not make asking someone to help you die punishable by the death penalty, while the person you ask is innocent of all charges? Case solved.

On a trivial note, isn't it nuts when you see people who are anti abortion, anti euthanasia, but pro death penalty?

So if I'm terminally ill, I've gotta go kill a bunch of innocent people to get the release I want?

I guess you just go to the doctors and say 'Will you kill me? no? *shoots* next!' police arrive 'will I get the death penalty?' 'well, I'm sure we can settle with with a jail ter-*shoots* 'now will I get the death penalty?'

The sad thing is that if you do it that way, your family doesn't get stuck with the hospital bills. It would all be paid for by the state.

 

[the monopoly guy]

I think it's right. Cancer sucks, it really does and when your 90 years old with terminal stomach cancer and you just can't go on anymore then who is anyone else to say you can't? Further more if someone is so severely paralized that they are a "vegetable" and they have told their family and friends that if they should ever be in such a state that they don't want to live anymore then that wish should be carried out no questions asked.

 

[Copter400]

I think that killing is wrong and every step away from that is a dangerous step to take. Even if it might be the "right" thing in individual cases it poses so much of a "slippery slope" problem.

I, on the other hand, think we're not killing nearly enough and believe that any terminally ill individual has the right to have himself offed. Who is to pass judgement on someone else's suffering?

That doesn't mean we should open revolving-door suicide clinics, though. Or suicide booths.

 

[Smiles]

"Euthanasia, Everyone should try it!"

 

[huntedannoyed]

There is no reason why it should be illegal. Then again, I don't think most things should be illegal. But everyone has an inherent fear of a painful death, and if someone chooses to die with dignity rather than a pool of their own sick, then let them. My grandfather passed away from parkinsons when I was a teenager, there was nothing pleasent about his last torturous years. If the day ever comes and I am like that? If I cannot end my life with a doctors aid, then I'll litteraly bite the bullet and do it myself.

 

[PurpleRain]

Everyone's going to die eventually. Why not have a choice when you want to end yours. Sitting on death row waiting for a painful tumor to end you would be so unbelievably horrible.

 

[geldonyetich]

What if we invent a cure for their pain tomorrow?
What if we invent immortality?

Okay, those both are long shots, especially the later. However, it complicates the problem.

Personally, I'm under the opinion that a person should experience life as long as they're able. However, it's not my life, it's theirs.

It's their life, I say the choice is theirs. Who am I to judge it right or wrong? At what point is somebody else's decision unacceptable? Nail that, and you have your answer.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

What if we invent a cure for their pain tomorrow?
What if we invent immortality?

Okay, those both are long shots, especially the later. However, it complicates the problem.

Personally, I'm under the opinion that a person should experience life as long as they're able. However, it's not my life, it's theirs. It's their life, I say the choice is theirs. Who am I to judge it right or wrong?

Seconded. Freedomis the natural state of the human animal. A lack of freedom ensues when people stop realising that religion, goverment and all other things are but servants to society- dispensable, and subordinate to individual freedoms.

 

[Limos]

I have no problem with Euthanasia. Or suicide for that matter. As long as it's other people who want to die. I think that if someone really doesn't want to live we shouln't go against their wishes.

Also I don't really care about the lives of others so they can go ahead and kill themselves over failed relationships and other nonsense. More world for me then.

 

[Dioxide45]

I think that doctors have to take an oath that was a modified version of the ancient greek oath that priests(?) of Apollo had to take to vow only to heal and never to harm. I am not sure of this as I am not a doctor. Ancient Greece FTW

 

[KenzS]

I share the same opinion as Chef from South Park. "I'm not touching this one with a 40-foot pole."

 

[Limos]

I think that doctors have to take an oath that was a modified version of the ancient greek oath that priests(?) of Apollo had to take to vow only to heal and never to harm. I am not sure of this as I am not a doctor. Ancient Greece FTW

I think that would be the Hippocratic oath. I'm not really sure if I spelled that right, seems okay to me. And I think that does come from ancient greece.