paintingploddy
New member
Is this time to point out that Soylent Green is people.
assisted suicide clinics???
- Thread starter uberdark
- Start date
Legacy Account
Active member
What I find more distasteful than euthanasia is how very loud and vocal minorities can impose their ethical and moral ideas on society as a whole.
Everyone should be free to make their own choice where this is concerned IMO. Which means legalisation and regulation.
Everyone should be free to make their own choice where this is concerned IMO. Which means legalisation and regulation.
evil tendencies
Cake or Death?
I know - I just thought I\'d toss this into the pot as a different view on things. I know how hard this is, and I don\'t want to diminish that.
However, it does make me nervous when we start saying that someone would not benefit others by staying alive. It scares me how close making that decision for ourselves comes to other people making it for us...if we start making value decisions on someone else\'s life, we\'ve crossed into dangerous territory.
EDIT: Just thought of a better way of saying it: I can understand the dilemma when it comes to someone\'s own life, though I have my own views. I just don\'t want us to start encouraging death decisions for \"inconvenient\" people - something I don\'t think anyone here is advocating, BTW.
freakinacage
Well-known member
aye good point and that wasn\'t what i was trying to say, despite the fact that i said it!
my point was the opposite in fact (oh god i can\'t put my words down properly). the problem is that other people put a value on these people\'s lives, and think that thats more important than how much they value their lives. it\'s shouldn\'t eb up to us to choose, it should be up to them
green stuff
Active member
In theory I\'d agree to this; though it won\'t be simple. I can see a catch that actually happened a year or two ago : a person was horribly suffering from an illness that not only caused pain, but also provoked mental problems. So this person\'s familly was legally in charge; and they favored euthanasia ... to get the life insurance money ...
I understand and support your desire here Donna.
The ONLY voice that really matters in this whole discussion is THE PERSON who wants that choice made available, in this case YOU.
From my point of to have someone say that YOU cannot choose how you want to end your life when suffering from a disease is as much a denial of the right to recognise you as an individual as is slavery. It takes away you as a human and defines you as subject to someone elses whim.
Earlier in this thread the subject of the young rugby player and his choice to go to DIGNITAS was raised. His situation was one of having been a Healthy fit and robust man, reduced by a single second to a Quadriplegic unable to continue any form of activity.
For most Quadriplegics that means simple things that we take for granted have to be taken care of by another person.
The simple acts of Urination and Defication having to be manually assisted becasue there is no control of the body.
Just please take a moment to think of how undignified that is.
These are the natural acts we are taught to control as infants and to regard as private and personal.
Now place yourself in his position facing untold years of this level of reliance on others for these things we take for granted.
So when I say I understand his choice that is exactly what I mean.
desertdragon1964
New member
[No message]
Agree completely, and it´s also close to my reason for thinking it would be a very very bad idea.
This is for me the nr. 1 reason why state sanctioned assisted suicide is wrong is that the second the state says it´s ok to help other people dying there will be a minority (a rather large minority I fear) of ill people who will do it because \"it´s the right thing to do\", or because \"it´s expected of me\" whether it´s true or not. I basically fear that some (a lot of ) people will feel pressured into suicide once the state sanctions it.
Regardless of my opinion on suicide, I think it is better if people who are determined to commit suicide do so under psychological and medical supervision, with means that will guaranty a painless and dignified death, rather than trying to commit suicide amateurishly at home with the danger of a long and painful death, survival with (even more) severe medical consequences or the heavy burden on relatives who might find them.
Legacy Account
Active member
Good point. The onus would need to be on individuals to \'opt in\' somehow I reckon - through their will or some other legal document so that consent has been given prior to anything happening. Similar to what we do with donor cards, but obviously more rigorous.
Shawn R. L.
New member
In the last two years I have seen my mother die an agonizing and prolonged death....my dad faded to black for years with alzheimers...........I REALLY do understand the desire to make the suffering stop. That said I am a believer in the slippery slope. Below is not my words, it\'s from someone who knows more than me.
For those who advocate euthanasia as a solution providing a death with dignity [which I strongly challenge as completely unfounded], I provide some expert opinion by physicians who have studied the subject in depth:
Carlos Gomez, MD, Ph.D., wrote in his book, Regulating Death - Euthanasia and the case of the Netherlands, the following:
p. 138: \"...I remain unconvinced that under current regulations the practice [of euthanasia] is not abused. those in the United States who point to the Netherlands as a public policy model for assistance with suicide have not, I would suggest, looked carefully enough. If the Netherlands - with its generous social services and universal health coverage - has problems controlling euthansasia, it takes little effort to imagine what would happen in the United States, with a medical system groaning under the strain of too many demands on too few resources.\"
Herbert Hendin, MD, Executive Director of the American Suicide Foundation and Professor of Psychiatry at New York Medical College has written the following in his authoritative analysis of euthanasia in the Netherlands: Seduced By Death - Doctors, Patients and the Dutch Cure:
\"The doctors who help set Dutch euthanasia policies are aware that euthanasia is basically out of control in the Netherlands. They admitted this to me privately. Yet in their public statements and articles they maintain there are no serious problems....\" p. 14
\"The experience of the Dutch people makes it clear that legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia is not the answer to the problems of people who are terminally ill. The Netherlands has moved from assisted suicide to euthanasia, from euthanasia for people who are terminally ill to euthanasia for those who are chronically ill, from euthanasia for physical illneses to euthanasai for psychological distress, and from voluntary euthanasia to involuntary euthanasia (called \"termination of the patient without explicit request\"). The Dutch government\'s own commissioned research has documented that in more than one thousand cases a year, doctors actively cause or hasten death without the patient\'s request.\" p. 23
\"Virtually every guideline established by the Dutch to regulate euthanasia has been modified or violated with impunity.\" [emphasis added] p. 23
\"In the selling of assisted suicide and euthanasia, words like \"empowerment\" and \"dignity\" are associated only with the choice for dying. But who is being empowered? The more one knows about individual cases, the more apparent it becomes that needs other than those of the patient often prevail. Empowerment flows toward the relatives, the doctor who offers a speedy way out if he cannot offer a cure, or the activists who have found in death a cause the gives meaning to their own lives. The patient, who may have asked to die in the hope of receiving emotional reasusurance that all around her want her to live, may find that like Louise she has set in motion a process whose momentum she cannot control. p. 43-44
\"Euthanasia advocates are arguing that if there are ten cases in which euthanasia might be appropriate, we should legalize a practice that may wrongly kill thousands.\" p. 44
\" The alarming statistics in the Remmelink Report indicate that in thousands of cases, decisions that might or were intended to end a fully competent patient\'s life were made without consulting the patient.\" p. 77
\"The Dutch seem reluctant to acknowledge that the doctor\'s role in euthanasia is more than that of a neutral observer responding to a patient\'s needs. This is particularly evident when families pressure patients to request euthanasia .... more requests for euthanasia came from families than from patients themselves.\" [emphasis added] p. 93
Speaking about how doctors make decisions to implement euthanasia, even when the patient does not request it himself,
\"The Dutch courts have implicitly encouraged physicians to make such value decisions. Originally the courts interpreted force majeure as applying if virtually anyone in the doctor\'s situation would have acted as he did, essentially saying that basic human decency and compassion compelled such action. Subsequently the courts have interepreted it as applying if merely any other member of the medical profession would have acted as did the doctor, which is quite a different standard. Jos Welie, an ethicist formerly at the University of Nijmegen, points out that this ruling elevates physicians to a superior moral status, making their judgments on life and death always just.\" [emphasis added] p. 94
That is an extremely relevant observation, when considering so-called safeguards some suggest to put in place to prevent abuse of euthanasia and/or physician assisted suicide. A physician advocate of euthanasia, when working with a prospective euthanasia candidate, could refer the patient to a known physician supporter of euthanasia for a second opinion, and both being advocates of euthanasia, would of course come to the conclusion that euthanasia was appropriate, even if many other physicians would strongly disagree. This type of reasoning has resulted in the medical killings of depressed patients, chronically ill and others.
\"Dr. Richard Fenigsen, ... was a strong critic of involuntary euthanasia, which he considers to be widespread. [in the Netherlands] ...his contentions concerning the prevalence of involuntary euthanasia, ... were supported by the Remmelink Report.\" p. 100
\"Chris Rutenfrans, a strong secular critic of euthanasia in the Netherlands, has a doctorate in law and criminology. Together with Caterina Dessaur, writer and professor of criminology at the University of Nijmegen, he had written a book suggesting the ambivalence of most requests for euthanasia, stressing the coercion of the patient that often accompanied the decision to perform it, and indicating how frequently it took place without the consent of patients.\" [emphasis added] p. 106
Excellent palliative care provided in hospice settings, either in the home or a facility is the preferred and truly compassionate way to provide a death with dignity. Pain relief modalities must be taught more in medical and nursing schools and put into practice using the latest medications and treatments for pain and relief of other distressing symptoms.
For those who advocate euthanasia as a solution providing a death with dignity [which I strongly challenge as completely unfounded], I provide some expert opinion by physicians who have studied the subject in depth:
Carlos Gomez, MD, Ph.D., wrote in his book, Regulating Death - Euthanasia and the case of the Netherlands, the following:
p. 138: \"...I remain unconvinced that under current regulations the practice [of euthanasia] is not abused. those in the United States who point to the Netherlands as a public policy model for assistance with suicide have not, I would suggest, looked carefully enough. If the Netherlands - with its generous social services and universal health coverage - has problems controlling euthansasia, it takes little effort to imagine what would happen in the United States, with a medical system groaning under the strain of too many demands on too few resources.\"
Herbert Hendin, MD, Executive Director of the American Suicide Foundation and Professor of Psychiatry at New York Medical College has written the following in his authoritative analysis of euthanasia in the Netherlands: Seduced By Death - Doctors, Patients and the Dutch Cure:
\"The doctors who help set Dutch euthanasia policies are aware that euthanasia is basically out of control in the Netherlands. They admitted this to me privately. Yet in their public statements and articles they maintain there are no serious problems....\" p. 14
\"The experience of the Dutch people makes it clear that legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia is not the answer to the problems of people who are terminally ill. The Netherlands has moved from assisted suicide to euthanasia, from euthanasia for people who are terminally ill to euthanasia for those who are chronically ill, from euthanasia for physical illneses to euthanasai for psychological distress, and from voluntary euthanasia to involuntary euthanasia (called \"termination of the patient without explicit request\"). The Dutch government\'s own commissioned research has documented that in more than one thousand cases a year, doctors actively cause or hasten death without the patient\'s request.\" p. 23
\"Virtually every guideline established by the Dutch to regulate euthanasia has been modified or violated with impunity.\" [emphasis added] p. 23
\"In the selling of assisted suicide and euthanasia, words like \"empowerment\" and \"dignity\" are associated only with the choice for dying. But who is being empowered? The more one knows about individual cases, the more apparent it becomes that needs other than those of the patient often prevail. Empowerment flows toward the relatives, the doctor who offers a speedy way out if he cannot offer a cure, or the activists who have found in death a cause the gives meaning to their own lives. The patient, who may have asked to die in the hope of receiving emotional reasusurance that all around her want her to live, may find that like Louise she has set in motion a process whose momentum she cannot control. p. 43-44
\"Euthanasia advocates are arguing that if there are ten cases in which euthanasia might be appropriate, we should legalize a practice that may wrongly kill thousands.\" p. 44
\" The alarming statistics in the Remmelink Report indicate that in thousands of cases, decisions that might or were intended to end a fully competent patient\'s life were made without consulting the patient.\" p. 77
\"The Dutch seem reluctant to acknowledge that the doctor\'s role in euthanasia is more than that of a neutral observer responding to a patient\'s needs. This is particularly evident when families pressure patients to request euthanasia .... more requests for euthanasia came from families than from patients themselves.\" [emphasis added] p. 93
Speaking about how doctors make decisions to implement euthanasia, even when the patient does not request it himself,
\"The Dutch courts have implicitly encouraged physicians to make such value decisions. Originally the courts interpreted force majeure as applying if virtually anyone in the doctor\'s situation would have acted as he did, essentially saying that basic human decency and compassion compelled such action. Subsequently the courts have interepreted it as applying if merely any other member of the medical profession would have acted as did the doctor, which is quite a different standard. Jos Welie, an ethicist formerly at the University of Nijmegen, points out that this ruling elevates physicians to a superior moral status, making their judgments on life and death always just.\" [emphasis added] p. 94
That is an extremely relevant observation, when considering so-called safeguards some suggest to put in place to prevent abuse of euthanasia and/or physician assisted suicide. A physician advocate of euthanasia, when working with a prospective euthanasia candidate, could refer the patient to a known physician supporter of euthanasia for a second opinion, and both being advocates of euthanasia, would of course come to the conclusion that euthanasia was appropriate, even if many other physicians would strongly disagree. This type of reasoning has resulted in the medical killings of depressed patients, chronically ill and others.
\"Dr. Richard Fenigsen, ... was a strong critic of involuntary euthanasia, which he considers to be widespread. [in the Netherlands] ...his contentions concerning the prevalence of involuntary euthanasia, ... were supported by the Remmelink Report.\" p. 100
\"Chris Rutenfrans, a strong secular critic of euthanasia in the Netherlands, has a doctorate in law and criminology. Together with Caterina Dessaur, writer and professor of criminology at the University of Nijmegen, he had written a book suggesting the ambivalence of most requests for euthanasia, stressing the coercion of the patient that often accompanied the decision to perform it, and indicating how frequently it took place without the consent of patients.\" [emphasis added] p. 106
Excellent palliative care provided in hospice settings, either in the home or a facility is the preferred and truly compassionate way to provide a death with dignity. Pain relief modalities must be taught more in medical and nursing schools and put into practice using the latest medications and treatments for pain and relief of other distressing symptoms.
Shawn I\'m sorry to say that just quoting/capturing a webpage from the Hospicepatients alliance Here and quoting it here isn\'t going to convince me in an argument, especially when the texts quoted about the Remmelick Report are refering to the report written in 1991 and not the Third version in 2003.
Far better an argument would have been to link to THIS PAGE which gives better Pro and Con viewpoints on an exceptionally emotive issue.
This is not an issue where there is a clear cut \"one size fits all\" solution.
Each case, each patient facing a terminal illness, whether one that will force them to live to suffer in extreme pain such as some Cancers or one that removes the ability of the body to function and leaves the brain active such as Motor Nurone Disease, has to be assessed individually and according to each patients needs and desires.
What is paramount about the whole argument is THE RIGHT of an individual TO CHOOSE.
If that choice is to go with Pallative care and treatment, then I would support that individuals rights and wishes.
Equally should the choice be to VOLUNTARILY to end their life to prevent further suffering, then that choice I also support.
This as an arguement cannot be totally resolved within a soci-political system which on one hand emphasises and defines personal rights and yet on the other hand denies the most personal and unique right.
Far better an argument would have been to link to THIS PAGE which gives better Pro and Con viewpoints on an exceptionally emotive issue.
This is not an issue where there is a clear cut \"one size fits all\" solution.
Each case, each patient facing a terminal illness, whether one that will force them to live to suffer in extreme pain such as some Cancers or one that removes the ability of the body to function and leaves the brain active such as Motor Nurone Disease, has to be assessed individually and according to each patients needs and desires.
What is paramount about the whole argument is THE RIGHT of an individual TO CHOOSE.
If that choice is to go with Pallative care and treatment, then I would support that individuals rights and wishes.
Equally should the choice be to VOLUNTARILY to end their life to prevent further suffering, then that choice I also support.
This as an arguement cannot be totally resolved within a soci-political system which on one hand emphasises and defines personal rights and yet on the other hand denies the most personal and unique right.
freakinacage
Well-known member
the way i see it, it should be the descision of the individual. no one else. and it does empower them, what could empower you more than having control of your own life, having seen many patients and relative fade away slowly, having had that control (of their own health down to the simple things like bodily functions) removed goes against all human rights as far as i am concerned. in a world where we have to give drug addicts drugs because it\'s inhumane for them to go cold turkey in prison, i think it\'s insane that we can let people suffer like this
as long as it\'s properly informed and it\'s the patient\'s choice
as long as it\'s properly informed and it\'s the patient\'s choice
Shawn R. L.
New member
@Dragonsreach - Just presenting another view. I don\'t present that page to force anyone to see things my way. Just to show a side that dosn\'t get heard much.......balance.
Like I said, I watched - up close and personal for years as my mother went through EXCRUCIATING prolonged pain and my dad lost his mind, life and dignity. While I can\'t say I\'m in favor of assisted suicide I would definitely not say anything if someone chose that for a family member who was suffering. Watching my mother at 90 pounds writhe in pain I seriously get the desire to make it end. A bit of a tangential subject, I do believe medicine can at times ghoulishly keep people \'alive\' who are clearly at the end of the road.
Like I said, I watched - up close and personal for years as my mother went through EXCRUCIATING prolonged pain and my dad lost his mind, life and dignity. While I can\'t say I\'m in favor of assisted suicide I would definitely not say anything if someone chose that for a family member who was suffering. Watching my mother at 90 pounds writhe in pain I seriously get the desire to make it end. A bit of a tangential subject, I do believe medicine can at times ghoulishly keep people \'alive\' who are clearly at the end of the road.
S
Shadzar
Guest
This sums up something many people forget in this day in age, as to who has what rights to choose for themselves, and is something everoyne in the world neds to look more closely at, IMHO, and se where in their daily lives they try to take that right away form other, while still claiming they themselves have it for themselves while the others don\'t.
Just too many people in the world today thinking they have the right to deny the above to others for whatever reason or another.
Not really trying to get between the argument/discussion going on here as I said my piece prior, but that one little line of truth needed its own little area to be better seen.
Kinda like old what-his-face.
\"I may not agree with everything you say, but will fight for your right to say it.\"
wiccanpony
Official Freak Bar Witch
??? yes I’m adding fuel to the fire, but this “gentleman\'s” veiws were interesting to me.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1203622/Ill-die-endgame-says-Terry-Pratchett-law-allow-assisted-suicides-UK.html
Now doesn’t he look like Texan Gandalf
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1203622/Ill-die-endgame-says-Terry-Pratchett-law-allow-assisted-suicides-UK.html
Now doesn’t he look like Texan Gandalf
gothicgeek
New member
i gotta say this thread keeps getting more interesting 
one of the problems we face ( in the \"west\" at least) is the rise of the cult of the individual. 40 years ago people followed social mores more rigidly and 100 years ago not following the social norms would make you an outsider in the worst way, mental hospitals were full of rebels, single mothers and non-conformists.
our legal systems are at best victorian and at worst medievil, we will be allowed to request a termination of our lives eventually but dont hold your breath
oh and Mr Pratchett may do alot to bring this subject ( and alzheimers ) into the public eye... thanks for the link
.......
one of the problems we face ( in the \"west\" at least) is the rise of the cult of the individual. 40 years ago people followed social mores more rigidly and 100 years ago not following the social norms would make you an outsider in the worst way, mental hospitals were full of rebels, single mothers and non-conformists.
our legal systems are at best victorian and at worst medievil, we will be allowed to request a termination of our lives eventually but dont hold your breath
oh and Mr Pratchett may do alot to bring this subject ( and alzheimers ) into the public eye... thanks for the link
.......
