Euthanasia

[walford]

Given that there is some confusion over the meaning of this issue that was expressed in the Abortion (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=32879&highlight=) thread, I have created a separate one for euthanasia that has very specific definitions:

Euthanasia Definitions (http://www.euthanasia.com/definitions.html)

* Euthanasia: the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. (The key word here is "intentional". If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia)
* Voluntary euthanasia: When the person who is killed has requested to be killed.
* Non-voluntary: When the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent.
* Involuntary euthanasia: When the person who is killed made an expressed wish to the contrary.
* Assisted suicide: Someone provides an individual with the information, guidance, and means to take his or her own life with the intention that they will be used for this purpose. When it is a doctor who helps another person to kill themselves it is called "physician assisted suicide."
* Euthanasia By Action: Intentionally causing a person's death by performing an action such as by giving a lethal injection.
* Euthanasia By Omission: Intentionally causing death by not providing necessary and ordinary (usual and customary) care or food and water.

What Euthanasia is NOT: There is no euthanasia unless the death is intentionally caused by what was done or not done. Thus, some medical actions that are often labeled "passive euthanasia" are no form of euthanasia, since the intention to take life is lacking. These acts include not commencing treatment that would not provide a benefit to the patient, withdrawing treatment that has been shown to be ineffective, too burdensome or is unwanted, and the giving of high doses of pain-killers that may endanger life, when they have been shown to be necessary. All those are part of good medical practice, endorsed by law, when they are properly carried out.
I have a problem with all of them. Dr. Kevorkian was offing people who were not terminally ill. Some of them were merely suffering from depression because they suffering in various degress from chronic conditions. They should have been given counseling before coming to that point. That is why Dr. Jack rightfully languishes in jail, having been convicted by a jury of his peers.

Knowing a bit about this subject, some people who are suicidal will left-handedly ask others for permission. To have a doctor be in the position of possbly assuring a person that it's all right to kill his/herself arguably violates the Hippocratic Oath.

I can certainly understand the compassion of not wanting someone to be left to suffer needlessly when they no longer have any chance of a productive life. I think that a line has to be drawn when it involves other people participating in that decision and process. Whether a life is worth living must be left to the person themself alone.

That is my opinion. Rather than attack me for mine, please let us know what yours is and why. This need not be a flame-fest. I think most of us are good compassionate people who want what's best.

[TheKiwi]

What do I think about euthanasia?

I think we should worry about our own kids first.

(Old Kiwi joke)

euthanasia = Youth in Asia.

rofl

[Falco]

None of the above are acceptable in my opinion.

[EasyC]

I actually did an oral presentation for this...my answer is yes it should be allowed, why the fuk not?

[walford]

I actually did an oral presentation for this...my answer is yes it should be allowed, why the fuk not?Even against the persons wishes? Where do you draw the line?

[EasyC]

If i know someone is fuked (beyond help) im going to let them go, buddy alot of factors here to discuss. Some people for example have the idea of a continued life after death, and they dont feel the same fear of death as I do so they probably arent worred about being forcefully put to rest, I dont know about this life after death crap, so in my view I wouldnt really give a **** if I couldnt be helped and the doctors had to pull the plug. Then perhaps the topic of God's intervention (there's a proper word for that, I cant remember it though), could be brought up, I've heard alot of stories about God coming to people in visions when their lying on the hospital bed, unconscience, then they would suddenly wake up, and their body would miraculously recover quite well. Its a very difficult topic, but i got an A for my oral, so im happy.

[MARINO]

Instead of having a poor guy linked to different machines, jut let him die into a natural way.

[achilles]

I actually did an oral presentation for this...my answer is yes it should be allowed, why the fuk not?Even against the persons wishes? Where do you draw the line?

Definitely not against the persons wishes. I think euthanasia is perfectly acceptable and legitimate when the person in question wants to do so for whatever reasons.

Difficulties arise when the person under consideration cannot decide on its own (eg health problems) but there are good reasons for him/her to let go...who is to decide then and under which criteria? Based on what evidence that life from that point on has no meaning? I continuously fail to answet those questions in a satisfactory way :|

[Howie Kaluha]

What do I think about euthanasia?

I think we should worry about our own kids first.

(Old Kiwi joke)

euthanasia = Youth in Asia.

rofl

:lol:

[Cassiar]

Calling b.scheller! Calling b.scheller. This thread is for you!

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

As I said in the abortion topic.

Euthanasia should be made legal. Should a person remain on life support when another person who is going to live miss out on that hospital bed?

IE a person has a terminal cancer. The only way he continues to live is remain on life support.

A person has was involved in a massive car accident. He will live as long as he is on life support as long as it takes to get him into surgery to remove repair the blocked artery which has stopped the heart.

In no country is there adequete hospital beds, life support systems. If a person with a terminal illnes whishes to die they should be allowed.

Of course counselling sessions, physcologist reports, what gain family members can gain etc should be inlcuded before a final decision is made by the Minister of Health for the respective Country/State/Province.

Ask youself this. Would you prefer to see a loved on suffer extreme pain to enable them to live for another 12 months or would you prefer to see them pass away peacefully?

The passing of a relative is never easy.

[walford]

Euthanasia should be made legal. Should a person remain on life support when another person who is going to live miss out on that hospital bed?Take a look at the definitions at the top of this thread.

OK, which type of mercy killing do you prefer? Do you advocate popping someone off if they have explicitly said that they wish to live, no matter how f*cked up you might think that it its for them to remain alive?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

But isent it always common practice in the military to leave the ones that are going to die and help those that have more of a chance?

It should be up to the individual and in case of the individual being incapacited it should be in the hands of the relevant Minister for Health to determine wether a person lives or not after all evidence has been presented on the pro's and cons.

I disagree with mercy killings purely to free up a hospital bed. All I am saying is that the option should be looked at as there MAY be another person who has every chance at a full recovery if they are put on life support to enable surgery or treatment to be carried out.

[Sayeret]

Instead of having a poor guy linked to different machines, jut let him die into a natural way.

Agreed, not being able to do anything yet still being alive would be about the worst thing that could happen.

[walford]

But isent it always common practice in the military to leave the ones that are going to die and help those that have more of a chance?
OK you're in favor of 'by omission' and 'passive' mercy-killing.

* Euthanasia By Omission: Intentionally causing death by not providing necessary and ordinary (usual and customary) care or food and water.

What Euthanasia is NOT: There is no euthanasia unless the death is intentionally caused by what was done or not done. Thus, some medical actions that are often labeled "passive euthanasia" are no form of euthanasia, since the intention to take life is lacking. These acts include not commencing treatment that would not provide a benefit to the patient, withdrawing treatment that has been shown to be ineffective, too burdensome or is unwanted, and the giving of high doses of pain-killers that may endanger life, when they have been shown to be necessary. All those are part of good medical practice, endorsed by law, when they are properly carried out.

It should be up to the individual and in case of the individual being incapacited it should be in the hands of the relevant Minister for Health to determine wether a person lives or not after all evidence has been presented on the pro's and cons.

I disagree with mercy killings purely to free up a hospital bed. All I am saying is that the option should be looked at as there MAY be another person who has every chance at a full recovery if they are put on life support to enable surgery or treatment to be carried out.
Many of us would not feel comfortable with a government official deciding if we live or die, especially in a government-run [rationed] health care system [which is all the more reason to keep that out of the US]. That would create an economic incentive to off people not deemed to be capable of produce more revenue than they would consume by keeping them alive.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

No

A universal health care system would be the ideal system. A pay as you use health care system is the one that has major problems in that they are usually owned to make a profit and not a service.

IT would be advantages for a privatly owned hospital to keep a person alive as long as possible becuase they would make more money from the Family/health insurance provider.

Look what i'm proposing is that a decision can only be reached when all the facts have been presented.

[Virus]

I watched a Law and Order:SVU episode that was on this topic, it involved a baby they found in a cooler in the water, turns out the mother put the baby to sleep because it had an uncureable disease, Tay-sachs disease its called, and the baby would have died a horrible death by the age of 5.....its kind of lengthy to get into, but she killed the child because she didnt want it to suffer for all those years, only to die anyways....


I think that mercy killing is acceptable...because it isnt something done with hate or malice, it is something done with love.

[NeedsABetterName]

All of em are just plain wrong.

[Virus]

I bet a lot of people would think different if they knew that their newborn child was going to be in agony for the rest of her short life, AND knowing that there was no cure for it.

[walford]

No A universal health care system would be the ideal system. A pay as you use health care system is the one that has major problems in that they are usually owned to make a profit and not a service.I would rather my health care be provided by people who are motivated by profit than the would be the case in a political monopoly. I seem to hear more about mercy killings going on where heath care is rationed than is the case here.

[ZaakM433]

No A universal health care system would be the ideal system. A pay as you use health care system is the one that has major problems in that they are usually owned to make a profit and not a service.I would rather my health care be provided by people who are motivated by profit than the would be the case in a political monopoly. I seem to hear more about mercy killings going on where heath care is rationed than is the case here.

Thanks for making the point wilford. Few people are motivated by the ideal of service. This is one of the reasons while universal health care will never attain the quality of its more capitolistic breathren. Capitolism works, learn to use it well.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

The good thing about A health care system like Austraila's is that no matter the wealth of a person they can expect the same level of treatment.

A system in which only the rich can expect the best from of care is that flawed it's not funny.

[walford]

Do we need to start a socialized medicine thread?

[ZaakM433]

The good thing about A health care system like Austraila's is that no matter the wealth of a person they can expect the same level of treatment.

A system in which only the rich can expect the best from of care is that flawed it's not funny.

So we take healthcare down to the lowest common denominator?

Medical care can be a life or death situation. Its serious. Stop playing your little idealistic games.

Ill stop now, we dont need a socialized medicine thread. Already had plenty of them. Arguing on the internet...

[b.scheller]

Yes, a free universal medicare can be a good thing but the force it has on the economy is quite disastrous. Canada's debt has been growing due to the fiscal irresponsibility of both the Liberal government of Trudeau and the Torry government of Mulroney. Never the less, it was Paul Martin who began the move towards creating an economy which was not doomed to fail and bounce on loans it could not repay. Yes the medicare system got screwed in Canada and now is behind in many of its technologies on average but otherwise I don't think that a two-tier system or a privatized system would help.

[[AFSOC]]

id wanna honor the person's request...

[walford]

]id wanna honor the person's request...Which one?

* Voluntary euthanasia: When the person who is killed has requested to be killed.
* Involuntary euthanasia: When the person who is killed made an expressed wish to the contrary.

[Nawlins]

I watched a Law and Order:SVU episode that was on this topic, it involved a baby they found in a cooler in the water, turns out the mother put the baby to sleep because it had an uncureable disease, Tay-sachs disease its called, and the baby would have died a horrible death by the age of 5.....its kind of lengthy to get into, but she killed the child because she didnt want it to suffer for all those years, only to die anyways....


I think that mercy killing is acceptable...because it isnt something done with hate or malice, it is something done with love.

Yeah, it was on night before last, I saw it too. I love that show.

The only thing I think is acceptable is if a person expressly states that they don't want extraordinary measures used to extend their life. However, breathing, food and water are not extraordinary measures. I'm really opposed to euthanasia in all forms... a DNR allows a person to die, euthanasia is killing. That's the difference as I see it.

[Freibier]

I voted "Assisted suicide - provides means for person to kill self"
Should I ever be diagnosed with a terminal disease that will let me die slowly and painfully, I hope there will be someone helping me kill myself.

[Herrmannek]

I voted "Assisted suicide - provides means for person to kill self"
Should I ever be diagnosed with a terminal disease that will let me die slowly and painfully, I hope there will be someone helping me kill myself.
Its next myth..even you are terminaly ill with current state of the art painkillers and methods you don't "die in pains"...

[king_nothing100]

I voted for them, don't want to be a veggie in my last years dribbling away hooked up to all sorts, waiting to die, when you can unplugg 'em and die.

[Sabre]

I wrote a really good post....

...then I lost it by clicking a link. :(

I'm not too bothered now because Children of Bodom are on the radio now. :D

Basically, I think that people are getting confused by 'Sci-Fi' horror ideas of 'enforced euthanasia' and the actual current debate on assisted suicide.

'Enforced Euthanasia' is called MURDER. There is no other legal term for intentionally taking someone's life against their will.

As everyone on this thread finds the concept of 'enforced euthanasia' deeply disturbing, it is safe to say that...

(cool, Skid Row '18 And Life' is on now..."Your crime is time...and it's 18 and life...to go!")

anyway...it's safe to say that in our moderate western democracies, this will never be the case.

Assisted suicide, however, is an issue that needs further discussion. It is an ethical can of worms, it is such an emotive issue. I agree with the intentions behind assisted suicide, but there are so many issues that need to be addressed in every case in order to ensure that all parties involved are protected, not just the patient, but their family/carer and the medical staff in charge of their care. The rights of all involved need to be considered. Most impotantly, loopholes must be closed so that 'Dr. Shipmans' can't abuse their duty of care.

This issue requires much discussion and a solution won't be easy to find, but it can't be ignored simply because of the risks involved.

(Welcome To The Jungle, cool ;) )

As I said before, 'enforced euthanasia' is a horror-concept that is used by the media to sell papers/boost ratings by playing on people's fears of having their trust abused when they are helpless to resist. It is a cheap shot and is entirely unrealistic as a vision of future health care in our society.

[Sabre]

Its next myth..even you are terminaly ill with current state of the art painkillers and methods you don't "die in pains"...

That's not true. People still die in pain, even today. Also, the issue is often quality of life. Such care often involves lengthy, undignified hospital care after which the outcome is still the same...death.

People need to realise that, although medical care has come on leaps and bounds over the last 50 years, there is still a lot the can't be done.

(Motorhead....cool!)

Unfortunately, end of life issues are still as ethically problematic as ever. With new advances in treatment, come new ethical issues concerning their use. It's not black and white, unfortunately.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Yes, a free universal medicare can be a good thing but the force it has on the economy is quite disastrous. Canada's debt has been growing due to the fiscal irresponsibility of both the Liberal government of Trudeau and the Torry government of Mulroney. Never the less, it was Paul Martin who began the move towards creating an economy which was not doomed to fail and bounce on loans it could not repay. Yes the medicare system got screwed in Canada and now is behind in many of its technologies on average but otherwise I don't think that a two-tier system or a privatized system would help.

Australia is slightly different.

We also have a private user pays health system. Plus we pay extortian rate taxes so our public health system remains excellelant.

[walford]

bump

[disabled1]

euthanasia .....isnt that some country in china or something

[EasyC]

euthanasia .....isnt that some country in china or something

ugh...way to bring up an old thread!!! :P

[walford]

euthanasia .....isnt that some country in china or somethingSomebody beat you to it

What do I think about euthanasia? I think we should worry about our own kids first. (Old Kiwi joke)euthanasia = Youth in Asia. rofl
bumped this thread concerning this issue that is at this moment being debated on the House floor.
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=41684&highlight=

[disabled1]

dammit dammit dammit

[James]

Interesting topic, seeing as my old granddad died last week...

Sedation (for comfort) and a "Do not resuscitate/no heroic measures" order are where I draw the line.

[James]

But isent it always common practice in the military to leave the ones that are going to die and help those that have more of a chance?


That's called triage. ALL medical establishments (at least in the U.S.) do that in mass casualty situations, not just the military.

[James]

Do we need to start a socialized medicine thread?

Seoulstriker did one a while back.

No.

[Scagel]

Would I ask to be put down? No.

Should other people be ask to be put down? Up to them.

[walford]

Interesting topic, seeing as my old granddad died last week...My condolences. Never met my g-parents. Hope that you got to have a good relationship with him beforehand.

[Stavka]

Would I ask to be put down? No.


Been reading alot of these comments.

The question isn't "Would you like to be euthanized?", the discussion is "Should people have the right to ask for euthanasia and under what circumstances?".

As for "i'd never ask to be put down", leave that question open for now.
But I can tell you after having taken care of patients going mad with pain and angst, with no hope of relief, I can understand why one would want to voluntarily end ones own life.

[Jani.R]

One thing i can't understand is that why pro-death penalty people are against euthanize?

[walford]

One thing i can't understand is that why pro-death penalty people are against euthanize?One thing I can't understand is how the 'pro-choice' side is against killing the guilty but for killing the innocent.

[Jani.R]

One thing i can't understand is that why pro-death penalty people are against euthanize?One thing I can't understand is how the 'pro-choice' side is against killing the guilty but for killing the innocent.

If the "victim" wants to die (and has an uncurebable sickness), why should we decide whats best for him/her?

[walford]

If the "victim" wants to die (and has an uncurebable sickness), why should we decide whats best for him/her?You're only talking about 2 of the 6 options [see the poll]. Where do you stand on the other ones?

There are laws in some places wherein incapacitated people who have previously expressed no opinion can be offed by a panel of doctors over the objections of their families. Dr. Jack was 'assisting' people who were not terminal, but were depressed over living with conditions such as MS.

What is your position on those real-life situations?

[Scagel]

Well my mom has the MS, so if a doctor said him and a panel were going to kill her, I would say F*ck no!

[username]

If a person is in a position such as terminal illness where the condition of their life will only degrade causing much pain and suffering and they do request to end their life. If they are not under duress from external sources and are capable of making ractional decisions then I think it should be allowed for someone to assist them to commit suicide or end their life via means such as painless lethal injection.

[username]

otherwise, no.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Yes. I agree with Euthanasia. BUT

The person must be able to make a rational decision withought being under duress.

And with the exception of property (house, car, boat) Monetery inheritance is forfeited by the next of kin saving funeral expanses. Unless the will states a benefactor of the persons estate that is not an immediate reletive.

[Hawkeye]

All i can say is that I support the laws that consern euthanasia in my country

[Seoulstriker]

Seoulstriker did one a while back.

I might start one in the invite only forum if the eurofascists keep spouting off their garbage.

[Haiw]

Oh yes... BURN THE INFIDEL EURO-FASCISTS HETHENS!!!
:roll:

[molly747]

I've always found it highly ironic that taking your own life (or choosing to have someone aid you in it) is illegal in the US. I mean, isn't the choice of what you want to do with your life a basic human right?

If someone wants to end their life, who am I to tell them what to do?

[MEGR]

Oh yes... BURN THE INFIDEL EURO-FASCISTS HETHENS!!!
:roll:

x2

[CG51]

I've always found it highly ironic that taking your own life (or choosing to have someone aid you in it) is illegal in the US. I mean, isn't the choice of what you want to do with your life a basic human right?

If someone wants to end their life, who am I to tell them what to do?

Depending on whom you ask, it’s your choice if you want to take your own life, or in a woman’s case, take your child’s life…

[walford]

Red and Blue Bioethics (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/welcome.shtml)

...A key factor in the rise of bioethics, Callahan wrote, was the "emergence ideologically of a form of bioethics that dovetailed nicely with the reigning political liberalism of the educated classes in America." Instead of the traditional emphasis on the sanctity of life, bioethics began to stress the quality of life, meaning that many damaged humans, young and old, don't qualify for personhood because their lives have lost value. The nonpersons should be allowed to die and in some cases be killed.

This explains why so few bioethicists have protested what the state and her husband planned for Terri Schiavo, who is severely damaged, but not in pain or dying, not brain-dead, and in no position to protest her own execution on grounds that other people consider it best for her.

Bioethics has hardened into an activist ideology that pervades the medical world, the schools and government. This explains why Leon Kass, a moderate conservative who heads the president's committee on bioethics, is under such fierce attack and why Princeton University picked Peter Singer as its first scholar in bioethics. Singer thinks parents should be able to kill disabled newborns...

[James]

Interesting topic, seeing as my old granddad died last week...My condolences. Never met my g-parents. Hope that you got to have a good relationship with him beforehand.

Thanks. He was a solid guy.

[EffJi]

I've always found it highly ironic that taking your own life (or choosing to have someone aid you in it) is illegal in the US. I mean, isn't the choice of what you want to do with your life a basic human right?

If someone wants to end their life, who am I to tell them what to do?

Is suicide illegal? What's the penatly? Death?

Anyways, if someone wants to die then they should be allowed to. Trying to get people to help you get killed is another thing altogether though. You shouldn't try and convince people to kill you, that's just wrong. Especially if that someone is a family member or someone otherwise close to you.

[walford]

It's not about a penalty. Suicide being illegal permits the authorities to intervene. It makes it so that some asshole who decides to gather a crowd people around to watch him kill himself can be legally stopped by onlookers if possible.

Thus people who survive suicide 'attempts' can be involuntarily committed until it is determined that such individuals will no longer be a threat to self and others.

We don't want to live in a world where people can legally kill themselves. Think about it.