Hi everyone,

I just saw the topic "Should suicide Be Legal?" and I imediatly associated Suicide to euthanasia. Basicaly is the same: "a person that want to die".

There is 1 main difference. If I sucide, I do it alone, so that I take the resoponsibility of my actions. And in the euthanasia I ask some one else to do it for me.

I want to give another example: Imagine a person is suffering a lot... then this person have an accident. Now the doctors do as much as they can to save his life, and the succedes. 2 days after this person sucide. the doctors, did they something wrong?

Waht I want to say is: Have a person the right to Die? If yes, is it only if he do it by him self?

I personaly think that we don't have posibility to give our self the life, because we have no right to do that. And If we don't have the right to give life we don't have the right to take the life.

I consider that suicide is the same as to kill, so it should be illegal.

For the same reason the euthanasia have to be illegal, but for 2 reasons more: euthanasia is not simply to kill him self is to do so but also asking someone to kill. This is much worse then sucide.

10x
bye

 

 

 

Reply

IMHO, or from what I have known, euthanasia can be done without the consent of the person involved. It is sometimes the family of the person being responsible of taking the right action in request for a "Mercy Kill".

It is sometimes use to patients not recovering from a coma after a few months or years. Basically, I think they made it legal since killing criminals were considered mercy killing.

But if I have the authority, Euthanasia should be banned because it is unjust and it still has the word "kill" in it and added a word, "mercy", so it may look not as bad as than it really is.

 

 

 

Reply

Ethics, what qualifies ethics in prolonging suffering? In the pursuit to qualify these ethics, from what resource are they attributed to.

If one has implement euthanasia “humanely” to stop a dogs “suffering” why can these ethics not be applied to man.

What distinction is there in suffering?

The other justifiable killing of people is war or the death penalty, a Pandora’s Box that is widely accepted and legislatively controlled, (a term used lightly).

Why do people cling to every vestige of possible life whether healthy or not, this entire issue if properly legislated could have been avoided because people would have right to die and not have to illicit subterfuge in order to die.

If this man is guilty of murder proven that she did not wish to die then his crime is murder, if not then let us not judge him for euthanasia. We have no right to dictate the right to live or die.

Reply

I don't like the idea of death, I'm sure most people don't, but I think its unfair to force people to suffer just because it makes us uncomfortable. As Sentress said, we euthanize animals in pain, but we don't extend the same level of kindness to our own species... it seems to me to be a very selfless thing, to do something so difficult for someone, especially if you barely know them (as it is with most doctors and their patients). Unlike other killings, euthanasia/mercy-killing is about killing for the sake of the person dying, which is unlike any other sort of killing. Murder is about satisfying the murderer, hunters kill for food and trophies, executioners kill to avenge the victim and/or protect the public, and so on.

The only problem that I see with euthanasia is the possibility that, instead of euthanizing a person in pain, the person who did it actually murdered them. The difference to me is simple; if the person gives consent, either directly, or through a living will, then it would be okay. (For those of you who don't know, a living will is just a set of directions on how you'd want your medical care to proceed if you were in certain situations and unable to communicate, for example if you went into a coma or became brain-dead.) If we made euthanasia legal, the court systems would not only have to prove that a suspect killed someone, but also that they did not have permission to do so. This could be a serious problem, but I think that this could be reduced by having a bit of paperwork. By requiring the "euthanizer" to prove that they have permission (living will, signed permission from the patient, with witnesses, etc) before going through with it.

Reply

I definitely feel that it's up to the individual. If someone is really sick and in pain and wants it.....why not give it to them? I know that may sound a bit harsh....but it's their life. If they want to give it up and end the pain then I feel that's up to them. I agree that they should have some proof about them wanting it to be done....but if the pain is too much I don't see a reason why not.

I've never had to deal with a situation like that and I hope I never have to. But all I know is that i've been in bed....in pain for days....weeks.....months even, and I want to end it. I feel it should be my choice.

Reply

There's a few situations here that's relevant to euthanasia. It's pretty subjective and debatable.

1. A is 25 years old. He was injured in a motor cycle accident nine months ago and has been in a coma ever since. The doctors do not expect him to recover but they cannot be sure. His parents want the life support machine to be switched off, which will result in his death.

2. In her mid thirties, B has a disease which has resulted in paralysis from the neck down. She is an intelligent woman, able to think and discuss her case. She firmly believes that it is her right to die, since she is totally dependent on other people and there is no prospect of this situation changing. In other words, let her die instead of troubling other people.

3. C is 65 years old. He has a terminal illness: doctors estimate that he has about 6 months left to live but of course this is only approximate. He feels he should be allowed to die now since he has little time left anyway and the time that he has will bring only pain and suffering.

4. D is 81 years old and lives with her son. She is disabled and needs a lot of help. She feels that she is a burden to her family and has nothing left to contribute. Rather than rely on her family, she would like to end her life.

The above are facts, and not a made up.

I've always respect one's decision because they're in control of their body and what they want to do with it is up to them. I personally feel no pity towards drug addicts and I never cared about them, including smokers. Same goes to patients. If they wanna die, so be it. Seeing your love one dying while you're on her hospital bedside and watching them suffering through their whole life will still stab your feelings.

Reply

I believe that God created us. Because of this, I also believe that God is the only One who can rightfully decide when we die and how.

Hospice care is a great way for many people to manage pain. A lot of hospice patients are lucid and very comfortable the last months, days of their lives. I believe that this is good. The patients who are comfortable and able to think clearly can plan out their final wishes, visit with friends and family, etc. - things that they couldn't do very well, if they could do them at all, if they were still in serious pain.

I believe that people should try pain management and hospice care before they make a final decision (as in: death). I'm not for torturing people. No way. But if someone can be comfortable...well, why not?

Assisted suicide is a slippery slope that I do not want to try. Mankind naturally progresses from one thing to the next: the next thing is usually worse and eventually what we end up doing is downright evil.

Here's what I see happening:

Assisted suicide is made legal. There's a ton of paperwork involved, but a person who wants to die can legally have a doctor or family member administer lethal amounts of drugs. At this point, only patients who can speak for themselves - sign the paperwork or clearly indicate that they're ready to die - can request assisted suicide.

Next: a family member wants to end a terminally-ill relative's suffering. That relative, however, is in a coma. There is no living will or other directive. If assisted suicide is okay for people who can speak for themselves, then perhaps it should also be okay for terminally-ill, comatose patients who can't make the call.

And then: Well, now, this baby has Down's Syndrome. Won't ever lead a normal life. Abortion is already legal, as is assisted suicide, so why not go ahead and pump this kid full of lethal drugs? Mom and Dad won't have to suffer. The kid won't have to suffer.

What next? Old people aren't productive anymore. Many of them are sick - they're drains on the social welfare system. Why not kill them too? We already warehouse them in pathetic, horrifying nursing homes run by crooked staff and abusive employees.

I'm not saying that these things would DEFINITELY happen if assisted suicide were legal. But it would not take a whole lot to go from one idea to the next.

Reply

I can see this topic turning into a BIG debate. Unfortunately, religious people are rather vocal in this area so I would expect a lot of hijacking on their part to occur.

Anyway, I believe in the sanctity of life. Not in a religious way, just that *all* life is precious. That said, I also believe in a quality of life. It is nothing but cruel and torturous to expect a living being to endure endless hours of pain and misery because you believe that god owns their soul and not them. I've seen religious people adamantly against euthanasia and yet when they end up with some illness that causes them unbearable pain, cry out that they want to die and to end the pain.
It's easy to sit on your high horse and say that it is wrong and pass judgement on other people, essentially saying that you condone a life of torturous and excruciating pain.
Try it for yourself sometime and then tell me you're still against it.

Reply

Think about it: you have a choice; live out the last few weeks of your life in unbearable pain - perhaps the pain will be so great you will even slip into a coma - or be done with it now. Either way, you're going to die, but if you die sooner then you don't have to live through the pain. The way I see it, the only reason why euthenasia is not legal is so as to stop the people still healthy having to make difficult choices and do difficult things. Sure, some people say that it could be used as a front for murder. But let's be honest here, thats rubbish. A doctor will know roughly how long a person with any given illness is likely to last because, you know, that's doctors do. If you go shoot some bloke with a broken wrist it's obviously not euthenasia.

The idea of euthenasia is inherently selfless and many people are too selfish to make that kind of a decision. I know it would be a difficult decision to make, but what about organ donation? If this person dying a couple of weeks early, which they would either sleep or scream through anyway, saves a life or two lives, surely that's worth it.

Reply

Before ,I start off...gess wee all know...
There is always much bebate on this.Like most cases neither does the debate provide a serious solution,it always gathers different views from all the corners.However, the same could be sought if the debate got us near a sloution.

I have one argument, if there is serious case.Where the involved is totally unsupportable, something like we have reached the end of the tunnel, with no way back.What is the point of keeping such a persson alive...we would be certainly humane, if at all we did.But, at the end of the day..it will just go to the drain.All the effort, involving so many people is wasted. Thus, i guess it should be legal after thorugh investigation by a highly dedicated bench.

However, suicide is the greatest crime,Never should anyone be given a choice about it.
Its always NO.It is dumb,dumbest action ever.

Although in both cases , the involved victim wants the same end result.
The situations are different.That makes my above said points thoughtfull.

Reply