Doctor Assisted Suicide

There's a problem in a society that has devalued life. When you have the murder of unborn children, euthanizing the elderly, it's only logical that the next step is "assisted" suicide.
 
I'm all for doctor assisted suicide. My family did it to my grandfather after leukemia ate away his brain and all that was left was a vegetable that could hardly speak, that didn't even recognise his own family and that **** his pants all day.
My grandfather was a good man and seeing his dignity taken away from him like that was just too much for my family to bear. What use is life if you're not aware of the fact that you're living?

When my time comes I expect my family to do the same thing to me.


EDIT:
I made a mistake, in my country doctor assisted suicide and euthanasia are one and the same, but I realise now that you're not talking about euthanasia of the elderly but rather suicide in general.

Well, if someone wants to waste himself, why not? It's their life and not someone elses, so it's their choice. If a doctor is present to perform the suicide then I'm all for it. It beats scraping someone of the pavement or off the front of a train.
 
I'm for it. Oregon currently allows assisted suicide in medical instances where quality of life is the issue, I believe the only US state to legally do so, but fundies are attempting to deny that right using federal drug laws. The federal stance is that a physician should not be able to prescribe federally controlled drugs to take life. Big brother at work.

Those against assisted suicide have obviously never gone through the horrible experience of a loved one being destroyed by the final stages of cancer or other debilitating diseases. Some of that reality in their lives would provide them with a far different viewpoint.
 
I don't have any problem with doctor-assisted suicide - but I would prefer not to leave the decision about my demise to the caprice of any doctor. I see no reason why I should not have access to self medication that would lead to a quick and humane death at a time of my choice.

I don't want to hang on when all hope of recovery has gone, and I don't want to resort to self destruction by means of a messy physical assault. Give me the tablets and I will finish the job.
 
We (myself and wife) have formal medical directives to pull the plug at veg state for that possibility, a state law allowing assisted suicide for hopeless medical conditions and personal promises to each other that if all else fails procurement of the necessary drugs by any means.
 
I am fine with it as long as it has clearly been determined by the individual to die - either because they are lucid enough to speak for themselves and sign a waiver or beause of an advanced directive.

Bassman - nobody is advocating terminating somebody's life against their will (once born). That is murder. Get off your high horse and do try an understand the pro-choice view-point. I understand why people are pro-life. There has to be a better way to speak to this than emotionally charged BS bickering. And that goes for me too.

People aren't pro-choice because they don't care you know.
 
I am for doctor-assisted suicide, as long as there are some measures in place to prevent any misuse. By misuse, I would imply such things as doctors openly or subtly convincing patients that they should undergo doctor-assisted suicide in conditions when the patient would not take such a decision on their own. Also, there are situations where the person may be suffering and want to die, but where other solutions exist which can eleviate their pain and cause them to change their minRAB. Basically, I simply advocate that the use of doctor-assisted suicide has to be approached carefully.

Otherwise, if the patient is suffering and there is no hope, I believe that a person's life is ultimately their own and they have a right to choose to end it. I can well imagine many situations where the patient is either conscious and suffering, or permanently in a vegitative state, where doctor-assisted suicide is the only humane option.
 
You have the advantage of living in a comparatively enlightened state where, I assume, the meddlesome fundies will not get their way on this matter of life and death ?

I have thought of writing a "testament" to the effect that in the event of a massive heart attack or stroke, I do not wish to be resuscitated, and that all plugs are to be pulled if I'm on life support with no reasonable chance of recovery. Such a testament would have no force in law and though my wife would try to insist on my wishes being carried out, I can't count on the medics to listen to her or to pay any attention to my instructions if I was still rational enough to give them myself.
 
Here in the United States, there is a document called "Advance Directives," also known as Living Wills. You can provide directions to doctors or hospitals as to your wishes in certain circumstances. Your spouse should have a copy and/or your personal physician or hospital or HMO.

Most do honor these documents. I don't think they have to if they have objections to certain situations.

Oregon's law requires the patient to be mentally competent at the time of the request for the medication, requires a terminal illness with death within 6 months estimated diagnosed by a physician and verified by a second physician.

The doctor can then prescribe medicate in lethal quantities. It does not have to be taken right away. Patient can decide to wait a while for instance.

I think it is a good idea. The thing is to watch for depression on the part of the patient.
 
In Oregon the 'pull the plug' is titled a medical directive, attached to the last will and testament. A primary representative (spouse in the case of marriage or civil union) with first and second alternate representatives having descending legal responsibility. My lawyer told me the primary reason for the medical directive is to relieve hospitals, etc. of possible liability as they will not make that decision. Without it, the vegetative state individual exhausts personal assets and then becomes a public ward.

The will legally controls the medical directive and revocable/irrevocable trust(s). We were advised to put a 'bomb' in our wills and trust stating that any beneficiary or potential beneficiary who contested any point in the documents, including the medical directives, forfeited all bequests and legal claims against the estate. The process also included mental examination by our lawyer sitting with two other individuals six months and one year after to record mental competency.

The US is expanding our lawyer population at the cost of scientific and engineering talent, a pathetic trade.
 
Its a very touchy topic but i would have to agree with it. There is no point in having a person live in a bad life and not being able to put any say in it. As long as it has been wrote in contract or any other agreement theres no reason why not.
 
This is my point of view. If I had a disease (cancer for example) in which I knew I had about 6 months to live, I would rather just go ahead and live those 6 months (that could be more.) Of course, I have ideas of wanting to "go out in a blaze of glory." I don't mean egnighted. I would want to go ahead and do something useful (what ever I could) until the day I die. But I don't like the idea of (in a non-vegitible state) going into a doctors or hospital knowing for a fact that I am going to die that day. Humans are not meant to know the exact date of their death until the second it happens.
Now for a person who is already brain dead (kept alive with a plugged up machine) then it neeRAB to be discussed with the family. If their is any chance (at all) of survival, then I would say hold off as long as you can.
But, then, no one has the right to be forced to live a certain way. But for psycological reasons for the ones left alive, (some people who continue to feel guilt over the pulling of the plug) I would suggest waiting until everything else has been exhausted and the doctor suggest that it's the best thing for them.
I may have missed somthing but that's my point of view on the matter.
 
Problem is, a lot of people cannot do that. They are bed ridden, their bodies slowly dissolving around them. They aren't entirely brain dead, but they can no longer participate in the majority of lifes activities. For many people, this situation is too much to bear, and they decide to end their own lives. Sometimes, they need help to do this, and I feel that this help should be provided.

I know that if I were in a situation like that, I'd prefer to die.

Watch Million Dollar Baby, and then post your thoughts on Clint Eastwood's actions.
 
Euthanasia, Assisted suicide, or hanging yourself should all be prefectly acceptable. To me it is a fundamental right over your own body. If you don't want to live, fine... you certaintly didn't have a choice in whether or not to be born. If you are in pain, or just miserable in general or even petty reasons such as you don't like the fact that your girlfriend dumped you, it is your right to decide what happens to your body. If a person is living with cancer why should they be forced to endure the last few years of their life vomitting, living in constant pain and spending every waking hour in a hospital that their familys cant afford? It is disgusting to me that right-to-lifers would love nothing more than to have every person forced to bear children, and forced to live on feeding tubes and ventilators, forced to live in agonous torture, than to let them die in peace.
 
Back
Top