Debateful

It should be assumed a person wants to live unless they explicitely give instructions before hand. I have told my wife..if ever I am incapacitated and on life support that pulling the plug is what I want them to do.

Shivo was a tough case as it had people in her family on both sides. My wife is an RN working Pediatric ICU and often family decides together to allow the person to pass on. Life is not life simply because you can force air into a lung.

If an individual wants to choose to die, because remaining alive is too difficult, it is the humane thing to do to let them end their lives in a calm and painless manner. The comment about how humans treat animals is interesting, we do put down animals if we deem them to be suffering, and we do insist that humans eek out every bit of life they can, weather they want to or not.
I am even for letting people commit suicide if they want to. It's not like there is a lack of people on this planet. If some idiot wants to die, let them, makes more space for us folks that appreciate being alive.

kermit Wrote:I am even for letting people commit suicide if they want to. It's not like there is a lack of people on this planet. If some idiot wants to die, let them, makes more space for us folks that appreciate being alive.

Your compassion for others truly is outstanding there, kermit. I especially love how you refer to suicidal people as "idiots". What you fail to understand is that those people aren't thinking straight. Whatever the problem may be that has brought them to this breaking point, they need serious help. It's not their fault, they didn't ask for whatever circumstances to get to them so much, and no, they cannot control something like that.

A mental health crisis is just like any other medical crisis, especially in the sense that every patient has the right to appropriate treatment. Part of getting that is the intervention, or prevention of the act by emergency services personnel.

If we did what you said, and just stepped back and let people kill themselves, a few of my very dear friends wouldn't be alive today. Had the police and fire department not gotten involved, they'd be dead right now, or severely injured. But because they got the help they needed, their lives are back on track, and life has been going significantly more smoothly for them. For the most part, all 3 of them are enjoying life now.


Now, in terms of euthanasia for a terminally ill patient, my only problem with that is where legal technicalities come into the mix. What about the mentally incompetent terminally ill patient? What about minors who are terminally ill, who don't want to die, despite being eligible for euthanasia, and their parents consenting to it? My point is that we're getting into a very ugly area, in terms of the law, that needs to be thoroughly examined before going anywhere near permitting it.

Well, I agree with you, Labrocca. I have in my will specific instructions to pull the plug on me if there is no hope and all I will be is a brain-dead being who needs her diaper changed and fed through a tube.
No, thanks. That is not life to me. If I cannot enjoy life consciously and mentally that is NOT life to me.
Hell, I have never been a burden to anyone and I'll be damned if I'll EVER be a burden.
Purrs,
Pookie

Jacob Wrote:Back in 2005, there was a lot going around about whehter or not Terri Schiavo should have been taken off the breathing tubes. For those that don't know, Euthanasia is assisted suicide. In a sense, the doctor goes in and will take a person off of their vital machines and they will pass away. So, is this right or wrong? Furthermore, should a doctor who has taken the Hippocratic Oath offer to ease someone's suffering by assisted suicide? Is it medicine or is it murder?

Euthanasia is another of those emotional issues. I think that many people who state their opinions on the subject do so in thinking of other people, and not themselves. It's easy to hear on the news about yet another campaign to allow euthanasia, and for people to have an opinion on it, but I don't think we actually sit back and think about how we ourselves would feel if we were terminally ill, and in pain.
I am of the belief that we all have the right to control our own bodies. If I was suffering a terminal illness, and was in constant pain, who has the right to tell me I should continue living, when living would be pointless?
Many people who are against euthanasia seem to think that a dose of morphine and counselling will make someone enjoy life more, and forget their pain. What people don't realise, though, is that not all pain can be managed - not even the strongest drugs can alliviate someones physical pain at times.
I think opponents of euthanasia need to take a step back and consider whether they would want to continue living in pain each day. I like to think they would change their minds on the issue if they experienced the degree of pain of those suffering terminal illness.

Terri Schiavio's case was one in which everyone had an opinion, and much of what was said about her medical conditition was incorrect. For one, she was not aware of her own existance - her movements and 'smiles' were simply reflexes, as her brain no longer had the capacity to send messages to her limbs and face with the instruction of movement. It is possible she was able to hear and see some things, although not in the way that we hear and see.
One issue that was much talked about was the issue of whether Terri could feel pain. Opponents of her euthanasia claimed she could feel pain, but she simply didn't have the capacity to even recognise pain. Her autopsy revealed her cerebral cortex to be damaged beyond all recognition - meaning, she would never have recovered. It also proved that Terri's brain was completely unaware of any pain. She may have responded to touch, but not to pain. This means that when her feeding tube was removed, she felt no pain, despite the fact her body was being slowly starved of water and nutrients. I do not doubt that she may have looked in tremendous pain, but the reality is that there was no pain, as Terri was not even aware of her own existance.

Sharon den Adel Wrote:Her autopsy revealed her cerebral cortex to be damaged beyond all recognition - meaning, she would never have recovered. It also proved that Terri's brain was completely unaware of any pain. She may have responded to touch, but not to pain. This means that when her feeding tube was removed, she felt no pain, despite the fact her body was being slowly starved of water and nutrients. I do not doubt that she may have looked in tremendous pain, but the reality is that there was no pain, as Terri was not even aware of her own existance.

Well, I'm certainly glad that she was in no pain, but what if the autopsy revealed that she had been aware of the pain? I simply don't think euthanasia should be done that way; it should be as quick and painless as possible.

Spirit Wrote:Well, I'm certainly glad that she was in no pain, but what if the autopsy revealed that she had been aware of the pain? I simply don't think euthanasia should be done that way; it should be as quick and painless as possible.

Oh, I do agree. If the autopsy had revealed she felt pain, it wouldn't change my views on her euthanasia, rather it would make me wish there was an easier, and less painful way to do it.
Euthanasia should be as quick and painless as possible, it should not be a drawn out process.