This weeks moral debate- Euthanasia. Right or Wrong

[smallharmlesskitten]

Hey guys

In an effort to stimulate the collective brain of the thing known as the interwebs I have put up this thread to start a healthy debate.

This weeks topic is Euthanasia. Euthanasia is a fancy medical word for assisted suicide. People who are terminally ill (no hope of recovery) sometimes opt for this as a way to end their suffering.

I will put my opinion later and chip in with some healthy rebuttal. You will probably find out my view rather quickly.

Here is some background material for you to read if you feel you do not know much on the topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia (long)

 

[sammyfreak]

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.

 

[GothmogII]

Didn't we talk about this a month or two back? Anyway, my stance is the same, allow it if it's what the patient wants. Ideally at best I think the means should be provided, but that wherever possible the doctor etc. should have no direct involvement with the actual death itself. I.e. give the patient the syringe but have the patient use it themeselves. Or at the very least provide some legal document by the doctor wouldn't be held criminally liable for the patients demise in such a manner.

However, it has to be ensured that the doctor in question, or even the family members are not any way pressuring the person to take or seek aid in taking their own lives. Another point of contention is that, whereby a person is otherwise unable to request or deny such treatment, like if they were under the effects of a coma etc. The best way I can see around this is some kind of legal document with instructions to family members or medical personel on what to do in such an event. But, many people don't have such foresight, and these kind of debilitations are often as the result of injury or accident.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Under a specific set of circumstances, I have no problem with killing someone. My objection is to medical proffessionals doing so- them fuckers are paid their ridiculous salaries to heal, not kill.

 

[Psychochef]

Despite being such a nice guy, I'm ALSO decidedly pro-death. I'm in favor of abortion. I'm in favor of capital punishment. I'm in favor of euthanasia. Pretty much anything that gets rid of people on this planet, I'm 100% behind.

 

[Exterminatus]

Despite being such a nice guy, I'm ALSO decidedly pro-death. I'm in favor of abortion. I'm in favor of capital punishment. I'm in favor of euthanasia. Pretty much anything that gets rid of people on this planet, I'm 100% behind.

I find your views intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[GothmogII]

Despite being such a nice guy, I'm ALSO decidedly pro-death. I'm in favor of abortion. I'm in favor of capital punishment. I'm in favor of euthanasia. Pretty much anything that gets rid of people on this planet, I'm 100% behind.

Do I detect a smidgen of sarcasm? -_^

I don't know, under normal circumstances I find killing most assuredly wrong. -However- in certain situations where the person is in such a state, that to -them- death would be preferable, then yes, I think it should be allowable and non-criminal.

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

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

 

[milomalo]

its like in everithing... should be a profesional or a group of people who has knowledge of the situation... and past cases of the same and will decide and get paid for doing that job... maybe like a jugde... because if you are in pain and it is your live... should it be your choise...

and to see thats nothing else that can be done will be... those educaded persons...

 

[GothmogII]

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

Yes and no I think, I believe there are instances where a person needs some kind of artificial support to live, but is not technically dead. i.e. brain death has not occured. But, this does not mean that the person is likely to recover. However you're right that, unless the person themselves have expressed a desire -not- to be kept alive this way, it would be very difficult for another person to have them cut off.

In this case, if the patient is not in pain, or unaware of their surroundings, then it seems like a good idea not to interfere. However can you imagine being in such a state -and- being concious of what was going on around you? Although, I guess it depends on how you think of it, one, that as long as no-one cuts you off, you have a reasonable chance to recover, or two, that you are essentially locked in your own body with no way to control anything that happens to you, or even let anyone know that you are aware. But, I don't know how common that kind of codition is, seems kind of unlikely.

 

[BlazeTheVampire]

If the patient requests it and is in his or her right mind, it should be allowed. If they no longer want to suffer, then it's the doctor's duty to assist them. Doctors are there to ease suffering, not prolong it. It's just downright cruel to drag someone's life out if they're completely miserable and going to die anyways. I personally wouldn't be strong enough to request it. That's just me. Other, more strong-willed people, would rather end their lives quickly instead of being in critical condition for a long time beforehand. And I applaud them.

I do specify "in their right mind" because my grandmother kept asking us to kill her, but thirty seconds later she would remark about the polar bears flying outside her window. She was in no state to make a decision like that. This was post brain-surgery, so that was probably why her sanity was questionable, but other patients' judgment can be clouded by medication or something like that as well. And we don't let old people with Alzheimer's make their own decisions, so why would we let a patient whose brain functions are clouded over by drugs?

 

[vede]

If a person is incapable of rational thought, they become a waste of resources.

I'm all for keeping resources for more fruitful purposes.

 

[ReepNeep]

Under a specific set of circumstances, I have no problem with killing someone. My objection is to medical proffessionals doing so- them fuckers are paid their ridiculous salaries to heal, not kill.

So if the patient in question is guaranteed to die an agony despite anything the doctor can do, just let it happen? First do no harm can be violated by inaction just as easily as action.

If its what the patient wants and they're being rational about it, it should be obvious they have the right to end their own life with as little pain and as much dignity as possible.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

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?'

 

[Hyatari]

As free individuals we have as much right to a merciless death as we have the right to live.

 

[John Galt]

I have no problem with it. So long as both parties consent to it, then there's really no room to argue. I don't want to deny some suffering cancer patient the right to die simply because some old preacher won't shut up about God's will. Then again, there's the possibility of doctors killing off people in vegetative states without family consent(no idea why anyone would do that, they stop being paid ludicrous sums for life support when the person dies). So yeah, I see nothing wrong with humane euthanasia when applied to those who are terminally ill. I'm not sure how anyone could be against this.

 

[TomNook]

What a person does with their life is their business, not min or the governments.

 

[TerribleTerryTate]

I've had relatives turn from healthy strong people, to skin and bones from Cancer. Agonisingly slowly, everyday was filled with pain. I would've done anything to have let them slip away into a sleep they wouldn't awaken from. I'm for Euthansia as long as the person in question knows what they're doing (not in a coma, or in a vegetable state, with no clue what's going on.)
I don't think it should be in our power to stop them. If I'm in so much pain I can't hold food down or even move without excruciating agony, I'd want to slip off peacefully too. Who are we to say otherwise.

 

[LewsTherin]

Personally, I am terrified of having to live like that, indefinatly in a state of existence without being. If they wouldn't do it, I would just have to Sheath the Sword. It is my belief that if its going to be me living as a vegetable for 40 some years, it would be far more cruel to keep me alive.

 

[Milkatron]

This is going to sound so cruel, but it's my opinion.

It's not a bad thing at all. If people want to die, so be it. If I were to be a vegetable, I would want death immediately so as to avoid a state of permanent vegetation. I'm pro-anything that lowers the population (outside of straight murder) since we as a world are very crowded and not having the necessary food production. We give our whole lives to making choices, why not end it with yet another choice.