Euthanasia

[hazeh]

Indeed, I was only really referring to the US for that, lol. And I don't mean ' families pay money? KILL EVERYONE'. I'm saying that the family should have a say in whether or not to pull the cord if the person in question cannot have a say for themselves. The family members know them better than anyone, I just don't think it should be something decided that can or cannot be a choice by a doctor.

 

As for in pretty much every other country, I suppose let them live if there's a chance of them surviving but they still cannot decide for themselves.

I believe this also, but at the same time, I think the patient can sign over their medical decisions to any person they trust most and not necessarily just someone of their family, in case there are issues present with people within their family.

[Zovesta]

^ Valid point. There is no one I trust anywhere near as much as my mother, aunt, or sister, but should quite literally any of my other family members get the chance, they'd probably decide that whatever pisses off my mom and aunt the most would be best.

[Shienvien]

I believe this also, but at the same time, I think the patient can sign over their medical decisions to any person they trust most and not necessarily just someone of their family, in case there are issues present with people within their family.

If it only were possible, I would immediately go sign a paper stating that the right to make medical decisions over me belongs to not a member of my family, but rather to any good friend.

 

And this is not because the people of my family have issues, but because they do not know me the best (they know me terribly, in fact, regardless of having been around during my entire childhood, and it hasn't improved now that I've lived apart of them for a decade), and because I know their beliefs in this field are radically different from mine, and am not at all certain they'd take what I've told them about my opinions into consideration.

[TikindiDragon]

If it only were possible, I would immediately go sign a paper stating that the right to make medical decisions over me belongs to not a member of my family, but rather to any good friend.

 

And this is not because the people of my family have issues, but because they do not know me the best (they know me terribly, in fact, regardless of having been around during my entire childhood, and it hasn't improved now that I've lived apart of them for a decade), and because I know their beliefs in this field are radically different from mine, and am not at all certain they'd take what I've told them about my opinions into consideration.

As far as I'm aware you actually can do that. It's a tad early in my morning, but I think you can get something similar to enduring power of attourney for medical decisions. Can't remember what it's called though.

[Fortune86]

I'm personally in favour of euthanasia, but it all depends on the situation. When I was doing religous studies at school and covered this topic we were shown two videos.

 

The first was about a woman caring for her daughter (about five years old in the film) who due to her condition (can't remember what is was) basically wasn't there. She had no sense of self and was little more than a doll. If left on her own she didn't move, cry or look at anything. No one was home. She couldn't dress herself, eat (fed via a machine) or recognised anything or anyone around her. Just sat and stared.

 

Her mother insisted that she was a gift from God and that she would continue to look after her for as long as she lived. She never expected her daughter to get better. When asked about her plans should her daughter out live her, she didn't answer.

 

The second film was about a family whose son was left in a coma after an accident. They continued to treat him like a member of the family, even taking him on trips out, despite doctors insisting that there was no hope.

 

After seven or eight years, he woke up.

 

One of the worrying factors about modern medicine is that sometimes, the doctors are wrong. Nobody wants to give up on their loved ones. People cling to the hope that their comatose son will wake up, or that their cancer ridden mother's treatment will suddenly start to work. Nobody wants to pull the plug if there is a chance that maybe tomorrow, they'll get better.

 

((Re-reading my post I see that I may have somewhat have lost my point somewhere, but I'm going to post anyway in the off chance someone can see what I mean.))

[Moeru]

Frankly, the only thing anybody actually "owns" is one's own life, and the ultimate choice of continuing or ending it must absolutely be left to the owner.

 

If you are in your right mind and choose to die, that is absolutely not 'wrong'.

 

I don't want to ever see my friends (or anyone) suffer depression or emotional persecution and choose to kill themselves, of course I would try to find them as many alternatives to death as possible in every instance, but ultimately it is NOT my decision what anybody does with their own body.

[Kestra15]

As far as I'm aware you actually can do that. It's a tad early in my morning, but I think you can get something similar to enduring power of attourney for medical decisions. Can't remember what it's called though.

Lasting Power of Attorney, and you also have Advanced Directives/Advanced Decisions/Living Wills (depending on what you know them to be). LPAs can be most anyone you chose.

[Fuzzbucket]

'No sign of brain activity', for instance, is an irreversible condition - the individual as a person is essentially already dead. Also depends which parts and how extensively are damaged, if we speak about generic brain damage, not utter lack of brain activity. Some parts are 'more essential' than the others.

Annoyingly, not so. I knew someone who was apparently devoid of all brain activity for FIFTEEN YEARS - based on ECGs and stuff - but who was otherwise "OK" and in hospital just being tube fed and hydrated.

 

At the end of that time, he came round., Not only that - he was able to give details of a sexual assault by a nurse - who immediately admitted it - saying, in effect, that they didn't think it would have mattered in the circumstances - and resigned on the spot...

 

No sign of brain activity isn't - AFAIK - the same as brain stem death.

 

I still want bumping off ! (And yes, in an LPA you can name anyone and it has legal force that relatives cannot override. I recently needed to know this as my mother had so offended ALL her relatives I thought I was going to have to find a friend to act as second string to me.)

Edited January 22, 2013 by fuzzbucket

[Iside]

In Italy active euthanasia (even if with the consent of the patient) is illegal, and so is assisted suicide.

And also passive euthanasia is very not well thought.

 

Every now and then there are news story which make people speak of it. Last I remember was a couple of years ago, when a men asked to switch off the machines that were keeping his daughter alive. She was in a persistent coma since when she had had a car accident 20 years before.

 

First a judge accepted his request, then the Parliament stated that was against law, then another tribunal rejected the Parliament's statement, then the hospital refused the switch off the machines... the whole story ended only months later when the machines were finally switched off and the woman died.

 

Personally I support euthanasia. I think it is everyone's right to decide if they wanted to be kept live at all costs - even when it can't really be called life (when you have no brain activities and you would be death without the aid of machines) or when you are terminally ill with no chances of being better and suffering of terrible pains - or if they wanted to die in a natural and serene way.

[Dubious]

I have first hand experience with this and it is my belief that each person's life is their own. Forcing someone else to live in pain and agony, emotional and/or physical is actually very selfish. Keeping them here for our benefit, so we don't get upset, is just not right.

 

My friend was married to a man who is 20 years older then her. She is an outgoing social 'bunny', love parties and has loads of friends. Always doing something. He developed Parkinsons Disease and for the past ten years she has remained at home looking after him while he alternated between being wheelchair bound and being able to walk himself. His condition steadily deteriorating. He told her that he didn't want to live anymore, he wanted to die.

 

At first she dismissed this, but after almost a year she finally came around to accept that he was serious. His quality of life was terrible, being limited to a wheel chair and steadily loosing more and more control of his body. She took him to Switzerland and after consultations with doctors, he was allowed to be euthanised and the whole proceedure was done and was very peaceful. He was completely coherant right to the end and never once wavered in his desire to leave this life.

 

She made it back from Switzerland and in addition to having to deal with her grief, she also became the target of haters in the community. Labeled a murderer for 'killing her husband'. We stood up by her and defended her, because you know what...the fact is that it was HIS decision, right through to the end. We understood that part of his decision was made because he no longer wished to be a burden on his young wife and that decision was made with love and was his right to make. He didn't have a future and he didn't want to take her's from her. He knew his disease was killing him slowly and painfully and that he had at most five years left. Why live through that agony.

 

Anyway, point is that everyone's life is their own. We have the compassion to put down animals we love when they are in pain, yet we consider it so wrong to afford the same compassion to our fellow human beings who are in agony. That doesn't even make sense.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Dubious

[TheGrox]

Not reading the whole thread, and not wanting to go too deep into such a topic as this, I will just say;

 

I think it's a person's right to die just as it is their right to live. They shouldn't be forced to live in pain just because laws won't allow them to die.

[Tinks.Mess]

Personally I think voluntary euthanasia should be made legal, although it would have to be highly regulated (I come from the UK). If people are in pain or just don't want to live anymore because of the degraded quality of life then they should be allowed to end it.

 

I agree 100%, we consider it humane if we put down a pet who has a terminal illness which causes them pain and suffering yet we expect our loved ones to suffer as long as possible. How does that make sense? I'm not sure what states in the US you were refering to which allow euthanasia except in the instance of brain death but other than that we make our loved ones suffer as long as possible.

 

You can have a living will and have it posted with your hospital however I can tell you haveing worked in the medical field it only takes 1 member of the family to object and your wishes will be over ruled.

 

I think that each individual should have a say as to what happens to them and I believe that organ donation should be the normal unless specified otherwise, it is sad to me that we have people dieing daily when we waste so many.

 

Just my opinion.

[StormWizard212]

I am definitely pro euthanasia. It's my life and if it gets to the stage where just living is utter agony, then I want to have the choice. That doesn't necessarily mean that I'd choose euthanasia, but I'd still want to have the choice available to me anyway. The same goes for any loved ones who I saw going through that kind of unending pain.

 

Frankly, if someone wants to die, they're going to find a means to anyway. Having it regulated and overseen by a doctor is better for everyone involved than someone attempting to escape it themselves.

 

Like others have said though, I do think that it would need to be very heavily regulated. Pain in itself is not a valid reason, for example. Not that I'd know, but I hear childbirth is very painful, to put it mildly. But that is a kind of pain that has a very clear end and obviously isn't a situation where euthanasia would be an option.

 

But in cases of terminal illness, where every day is a painful struggle and there's no chance that it'll ever subside, then I think those people have the right to choose their own fate. If it was myself or a loved one, I'd want us to have that choice.

[Rachel72]

If this can be applied to animals, if it's the only option, yes

[sparkle10184]

Prolonged suffering with no chance of a positive outcome is cruel. This pertains to ANY species, including humans.

[auroshen]

I'm pro-voluntary euthanasia, of course I think it has to be extremely well regulated and that a lot of laws and restrictions should be written for it. But it definitely should be legal. Why would you make someone suffer like that?

[Cireth]

As a member of the mentally ill community (depression) I am 100% against Euthanasia.

 

These things always start off with the best of intentions but they turn into a slippery slope. I don't think anyone should be allowed to suffer and people who are terminally ill and in a great deal of pain should be given proper palliative care.

 

Proper palliative care relieves their pain and doesn't worry about the possible life-shortening effects of pain relieving drugs. This is what is needed. Palliative care in the UK is pretty much unavailable to most people. We need every hospital to include a hospice section.

 

I know people who volunteer in hospices and they say that unlike the common perception hospices are not places of despair they are places of hope and comfort.

 

Dying painfully is scary but killing is not compassion. I will oppose Euthanasia and support Palliative care reform in the UK always.

 

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Socialist.

 

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

 

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

 

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

 

Martin Niemöller.

 

When your head is next on the block I hope I'm still here to speak for you.

 

I am also WHOLLY opposed to the LCP. A good idea in practice it has been widely abused in implementation.

 

From Wikipedia:

 

"The pathway was developed to aid members of a multi-disciplinary team in matters relating to continuing medical treatment, discontinuation of treatment and comfort measures during the last days and hours of a patient's life. The Liverpool Care Pathway is organized into sections ensuring that evaluation and care is continuous and consistent.

 

It was not intended to replace the skill and expertise of health professionals.

 

In the first stage of the pathway a multi-professional team caring for the patient is supposed to agree that all reversible causes for the patient's conditions have been considered and that the patient is in fact "dying". The assessment then makes suggestions for what palliative care options to consider and whether non-essential treatments and medications should be discontinued.[4]

 

In practice, the implementation of this guideline was found to be lacking. Many decisions are taken in ward settings without the oversight of an experienced doctor of medicine. In almost half of the cases neither patients nor family were informed or consulted that it was decided to place the patient on the LCP.[5]"

 

I can find people the news articles if they want.

 

Death by "withdrawal of support" meaning death by starvation and dehydration is torture plain and simple.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Cireth

[Kestra15]

Death by "withdrawal of support" meaning death by starvation and dehydration is torture plain and simple.

Then you've misunderstood the LCP. It was never about withdrawing food and water.

[sparkle10184]

I swear, someone has used the "slippery slope" argument against everything ever in existence. It means nothing to me anymore because it has been so overused.

Gay marriage? Slippery slope.

Abortion? Slippery slope.

Sterilization? Slippery slope.

Medical marijuana? Slippery slope.

Euthanasia? Slippery slope.

One thing being legalized does not automatically mean something else will be legalized. Not everything is a chain reaction.

If I'm laying in a hospital bed on life support, unable to talk or move or do anything, with no hope of recovery, I want someone to pull the plug. I don't want to lay there wasting away, taking up valuable space and resources.

[Shienvien]

Doctors are *bad* at determining "no hope of recovery". I know several people whose relatives were advised to pull the plug, and know of even more who are still here despite the diagnosis. In one case, the plug *was* pulled, but apparently they just happened to not fade off in a couple of hours as expected. That person is very much a functional member of society and glad to be still alive. Also refuses to even speak with (or of) his family after they essentially tried to murder him.

 

If it is one person out of five (which was an estimate made by actual medical professional I spoke with) with a chance of recovery, then it is far too much. If a person isn't braindead, then they are alive, simple as that.

[sparkle10184]

Doctors are *bad* at determining "no hope of recovery". I know several people whose relatives were advised to pull the plug, and know of even more who are still here despite the diagnosis. In one case, the plug *was* pulled, but apparently they just happened to not fade off in a couple of hours as expected. That person is very much a functional member of society and glad to be still alive. Also refuses to even speak with (or of) his family after they essentially tried to murder him.

 

If it is one person out of five (which was an estimate made by actual medical professional I spoke with) with a chance of recovery, then it is far too much. If a person isn't braindead, then they are alive, simple as that.

If I'm brain dead, definitely pull the plug. If I have a terminal illness with a very very slim chance of recovery involving a lot of pain or agony, pull the plug. There are always those rare occurrences where the patient "comes back to life" (for lack of a better term), but if it's an actual terminal illness I see no point in keeping me alive.

Eh, I don't see that as murder...

[Lumikkja]

We euthanize our pets when they have diseases that they can no longer cope with, conditions that leave them in nothing but pain, when their lifespans have been narrowed down to a few months.

 

There was a case recently where I live (I live in the US, where voluntary assisted suicide is legal) about a woman who had a kind of disease that could not be treated, and she had less than six months left to live, followed by a slow and painful death. She chose to live out those months as best she could, and then she opted for self-euthanasia to spare herself that kind of pain. She had no other options, and she wanted to die on her own terms, and I respect that greatly.

 

I've only ever heard of this kind of euthanasia in terms of medical situations, so if someone has a terminal disease and wants to live out the short remainder of their lives, more power to you. If you have a terminal disease that will leave you helpless and in pain, and you want to go with dignity before that happens, I believe that is your choice and in such circumstances, it might be the best choice.

 

It's like another's case I heard of a couple wanting an abortion because their baby had developed wrong in the womb - and by that I mean the fetus was missing bones from its skull and had severe deformities so much that it WOULD NOT survive. Now, in that situation the couple were denied an abortion (this happened in Poland, I believe) and she ended up giving birth through a C-section. The couple spent a week watching their baby die slowly, and that pain could have been prevented. Now, an adult has the legal standing to decide the terms of their life and death.

 

If you know your time is most certainly up, and you want to die before you have to suffer pain and helplessness, and if you don't want to make your family and friends endure that with you, then I believe it is well within a person's human rights to choose to end their own life, on their own terms. I don't believe anyone wants to die - with emotional suicides, they want the pain to end. With medical suicides, well, their time is already up.

 

I say, in those circumstances, if a person makes the most of the time they have left, and then leaves on THEIR OWN TERMS, BY THEIR OWN CHOICE, we shouldn't try to stop them. So yes, I support 100% voluntary medical euthanasia. If someone tries to force or coerce a person into euthanasia against their will... no. Absolutely no. But I don't think we have the right to say 'you have to live through the pain that's waiting for you, because our current medical science cannot change what's going to happen to your body'. They made their decision.

 

Everyone dies in the end. If they die when they are ready, without pain, that is the BEST case scenario.

[Lumikkja]

Legislation that prevents euthanasia (at least in the case of assisted suicide) is just wrong. And the idea of suicide actually being illegal is laughable. If I manage - what will you do - imprison my corpse ???

Just saw this I know my first post was serious, since it's a serious topic, but this is a genius reaction to the idea of illegal suicide. We can argue night and day about what's wrong and right, what's moral and what's humane, but yeah... if someone really, really wants it to end, not much we can do after they succeed.

[Shienvien]

In my case, it boils down to one single thing: is there a person left, of is there not (which also automatically excludes things like abortion - a fetus does not have a brain and cannot think or feel or have personality, and thusly is not a person). If no, then there is nothing to be done; they are dead already and there is no point in keeping the heart beating.

 

If it is a maybe, or it isn't the final stage of a terminal illness that will absolutely kill you anyway (yes, if it is terminal and the person is already "gone", then let the ruling they made before that pass), then things get iffy.

Take accidents, for example. In those scenarios, it seems to happen often that it is not actually even waited until it is actually clear how much final damage was done. (And since it was something unexpected, the individual might not even told others know what they themselves'd prefer.) If it is something that happened a day or two ago, the swelling hasn't gone down yet, et cetera, et cetera, then it is often very hard to estimate what the final outcome would be. Minimally, people should wait and try until at least the situation has gone down and what *can* heal, healed.

With depression, too. Chemical imbalance can be a convincing fiend and a mentally ill person can be thoroughly and absolutely *convinced* that nothing will EVER change and they would never be able to persuade themselves to do something or feel happy. And then they go through therapy, fix their life, or, as the last resort, find the right medication, and ... at one point, it turns out that live is actually quite decent and well worth living when they are currently not depressed.

As for "pain and suffering" - there are those things called painkillers. If the normal ones don't work at all anymore, switching to the harder ones which you don't normally see prescribed due to potential side-effects or addictivity should be justified.

 

As for me, I will gladly let everyone know: as long as I am not completely brain-dead, I am alive, and anyone who dares take advantage of me not being able to speak better get what they deserve for advocating - or worse, committing - murder. I have things to finish, and no matter how slight the chance I might someday be capable of doing even a bit of one of those, anyone who *dares* threaten that chance be damned for good.

[Omega Entity]

Except there comes a point where, in some terminal cases, even the hardest medication doesn't cut it, outside or maybe a drug-induced coma.

 

There's also the consideration that those who are terminal and wish to go on their terms don't want to burden their families. If I get to the point where I'm in (or going to be in) excruciating pain, unable to care for myself, and will unavoidably become a burden to those I love, you bet damn well I'd want to go before it gets to that point. The feelings of guilt at making everyone else's lives miserable, on top of all that, would make life that much more unbearable. And by the time it reached that point, there'd be no escape, and no reprieve for anyone involved.

Edited January 29, 2015 by Omega Entity