Euthanasia - what do you think?

I was wondering on people's opinions of this. :) I'm for it, because I feel that if someone is in pain and is likely to die anyway, that they should be able to end their life.

I think it's legal in a state of America and in Switzerland? It was in the Northern Territory (australia) very briefly.

It's legal where I live under some strict conditions. (Netherlands)

I'm all for that legalisation as it is currently too.

Like Altmer, I'm for legalization but under strict conditions. This woman begged for it in France for the longest time because she'd lost all will to live (and the pain was pretty bad), and they wouldn't let her. Someone finally agreed to do it though, good person.

Oh that woman was all over the news here too, horrible situation.

Good grief, what happened to her? It looks so painful. ):

It'd have to be very, very strict with absolutely no scope for the conditions to be lessened, I think.

And to be honest, they probably would be. I don't think someone can look someone who is losing all motor function, can't do a thing freely, is in constant pain and wants to die on thier own terms in the eye and deny them the right to end thier own life, but I'd also be very scared about what it'd mean for the respect of human life if it were legalized more globally.

After all, doctors take the hippoctatic oath and swear to do no harm (or, uh, something to that effect), and while it might be better for the patient that way, it's thier job to make people better, not to provide them with drugs to kill themselves. I don't think it's right to expect people to supply people who want to die with the means with which to do so; I know I wouldn't be comfortable with it.

I have absolutely no idea what point I was trying to make there, but, uh, those are my slightly confused throughts.

ultraviolet said:

Good grief, what happened to her? It looks so painful. ):

Click to expand...

She has a very rare form of cancer, extremely painful.

It'd have to be very, very strict with absolutely no scope for the conditions to be lessened, I think.

Click to expand...

That is a condition for euthanasia in the Netherlands, actually. A patient must be considered terminally ill and they must be able to mentally function properly enough to make the decision. Euthanasia is not an option otherwise.

And to be honest, they probably would be. I don't think someone can look someone who is losing all motor function, can't do a thing freely, is in constant pain and wants to die on thier own terms in the eye and deny them the right to end thier own life, but I'd also be very scared about what it'd mean for the respect of human life if it were legalized more globally.

Click to expand...

I'm not so scared for respect of human life. I don't think many countries show respect for human lives regardless. If you see all the wars being fought, all the pain being inflicted even after all that humanity went through, euthanasia is only a kiddie illness compared to that.

After all, doctors take the hippoctatic oath and swear to do no harm (or, uh, something to that effect), and while it might be better for the patient that way, it's thier job to make people better, not to provide them with drugs to kill themselves. I don't think it's right to expect people to supply people who want to die with the means with which to do so; I know I wouldn't be comfortable with it.

Click to expand...

Like I said, euthanasia is only a consideration for terminally ill patients following a strict protocol. In fact it's not even legal I think, but as long as that specific protocol is follow, doctors are not persecuted.

I have absolutely no idea what point I was trying to make there, but, uh, those are my slightly confused throughts.

Click to expand...

Heh.

@Dannichu: I agree, I think if it was legalized, there'd have to be extreme measures to make sure that it's only used for the terminally ill, and not to become available for the general public or to cut costs in medicine.

If a person wants to take their own life and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF VALUE left in their life, then they should be allowed.

ultraviolet said:

@Dannichu: I agree, I think if it was legalized, there'd have to be extreme measures to make sure that it's only used for the terminally ill, and not to become available for the general public or to cut costs in medicine.

Click to expand...

I don't think this ever was an issue with euthanasia. The only two countries afaik that have legalised this (Netherlands and I think also Belgium), do so according to a strict protocol that explicitly states a patient needs to be terminally ill. Euthanasia is only an option if and only if that condition is fulfilled. I think that if euthanasia is going to be implemented, you must look to the current Dutch model for a proper example.

They should be allowed no matter what. Discouraged, yes, but allowed.

FORCING someone to live... now that's just horrible.

Ok, for all you people interested, here's wiki's perspective on the legal Dutch framework for euthanasia... (cba to look up a Dutch law site)

Termination of Life on Request and Assisted Suicide (Review Procedures) Act took effect on April 1, 2002. It legalizes euthanasia and physician assisted suicide in very specific cases, under very specific circumstances. The law was proposed by Els Borst, the D66 minister of Health. The procedures codified in the law had been a convention of the medical community for over twenty years.

The law allows medical review board to suspend prosecution of doctors who performed euthanasia when each of the following conditions is fulfilled:

the patient's suffering is unbearable with no prospect of improvement
the patient's request for euthanasia must be voluntary and persist over time (the request cannot be granted when under the influence of others, psychological illness or drugs)
the patient must be fully aware of his/her condition, prospects and options
there must be consultation with at least one other independent doctor who needs to confirm the conditions mentioned above
the death must be carried out in a medically appropriate fashion by the doctor or patient, in which case the doctor must be present
the patient is at least 12 years old (patients between 12 and 16 years of age require the consent of their parents)
The doctor must also report the cause of death to the municipal coroner in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Burial and Cremation Act. A regional review committee assesses whether a case of termination of life on request or assisted suicide complies with the due care criteria. Depending on its findings, the case will either be closed or, if the conditions are not met brought to the attention of the Public Prosecutor. Finally, the legislation offers an explicit recognition of the validity of a written declaration of will of the patient regarding euthanasia (a "euthanasia directive"). Such declarations can be used when a patient is in a coma or otherwise unable to state whether they want euthanasia or not.

Euthanasia remains a criminal offense in cases not meeting the law's specific conditions, with the exception of several situations that are not subject to the restrictions of the law at all, because they are considered normal medical practice:

stopping or not starting a medically useless (futile) treatment
stopping or not starting a treatment at the patient's request
speeding up death as a side-effect of treatment necessary for alleviating serious suffering
Euthanasia of children under the age of 12 remains technically illegal; however, Dr. Eduard Verhagen has documented several cases and, together with colleagues and prosecutors, has developed a protocol to be followed in those cases. Prosecutors will refrain from pressing charges if this Groningen protocol is followed.


Those are the legal conditions for euthanasia. I think this is exactly what Dannichu and others are trying to espouse and I think this is the model any country wishing to implement euthanasia is shooting for or at least something similar.

Teh Ebil Snorlax said:

If a person wants to take their own life and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF VALUE left in their life, then they should be allowed.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it's not stopping them from taking their own life, it's about allowing them to allow someone else to take thier own life, and there's a big difference.

Altmer said:

I don't think this ever was an issue with euthanasia. The only two countries afaik that have legalised this (Netherlands and I think also Belgium), do so according to a strict protocol that explicitly states a patient needs to be terminally ill. Euthanasia is only an option if and only if that condition is fulfilled. I think that if euthanasia is going to be implemented, you must look to the current Dutch model for a proper example.

Click to expand...

I agree, and if it was introduced and remained as the Duch model you posted states, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Thing is, society changes; while abortion was originally legalized in most countries as it still is in the RoI (only if the mother's life was in danger), it's now possible to more or less get one on demand provded you do it early enough in most countries.
I just can't help but feel that that's how it'd be eventually if it were legalized more globally, and I'm not sure if it'd be worth the risk.

It depends I would agree with it if the person asks for it, is an adult, and is terminally ill. I would NOT agree with suppling drugs to people who are just losers and want to kill themselves because their to damn impatient for their life to get better. And I actually don't support someone under the age of eighteen to choose to die or whatnot. I might be OK if the legal guardian decides however in certain situations.

If a person is suffering and is not going to get better, they should have the right to end their own life. Not otherwise. I... forget the term for this, but I also think people should create a document beforehand stating whether or not they want their life to continue in such circumstances, in case they do end up sick and are not of sound mind or are unable to respond.

Euthanasia should be allowed beneath certain conditions. I honestly would wish that someone would kill me if I had a condition that would slowly render me useless, and eventually kill me, and even more if the disease didn't kill me, even if there was a small chance of me recovering as the chance of recovery for conditions like that are so small, that there's nearly no point in waiting to see.

I especially feel sorry for this woman, Diane Pretty, as she placed all faith in her government, yet they let her down. She was unable to even take her own life because of her condition. I'd hate to be in that position, with a full mental capacity, but with the body withering away around me. There is no point in living, if there's nothing left to live for.

If someone wants to die, let them. It's their body, not yours.

Harlequin said:

If someone wants to die, let them. It's their body, not yours.

Click to expand...

Yes, but euthanasia isn't about letting someone die - it's about letting someone allow someone else to kill them. Otherwise the thead title'd be "Suicide", not (another word for) "Asissted suicide".

That's true, and it's a good point, but in the case that someone is unable to kill themselves [such as that woman with motor neurone disease or whatever it's called] then she should be allowed to be killed, too.

It's really her choice although there should be limits on what exactly constitutes euthanasia and who should be allowed to be euthanised.

Dannichu said:

It'd have to be very, very strict with absolutely no scope for the conditions to be lessened, I think.

And to be honest, they probably would be. I don't think someone can look someone who is losing all motor function, can't do a thing freely, is in constant pain and wants to die on thier own terms in the eye and deny them the right to end their own life, but I'd also be very scared about what it'd mean for the respect of human life if it were legalized more globally.

After all, doctors take the Hippocratic Oath and swear to do no harm (or, uh, something to that effect), and while it might be better for the patient that way, it's thier job to make people better, not to provide them with drugs to kill themselves. I don't think it's right to expect people to supply people who want to die with the means with which to do so; I know I wouldn't be comfortable with it.

I have absolutely no idea what point I was trying to make there, but, uh, those are my slightly confused throughts.

Click to expand...

^This. Euthanasia should ONLY be allowed in extreme circumstances... provided that either:

a) the recipient requests it, with a declaration by a certified psychiatrist of their sanity.

or

b) an audiovisual recording of the recipient (WITH the psychiatrist's declaration at the time of recording) saying that they would prefer euthanasia in these circumstances, if they are unable to say such, is provided by an immediate family member.

If you have ANY chance of recovery, you shouldn't be permitted even then.