Should Physician Assisted Suicide be Legal for everyone?

[JAR]

Should Physician Assisted Suicide be Legal for everyone?

I know people will call me a sick bast#rd, but I say yes. I think it should be a government run program that's free for anyone to do. I think society will benefit by it greatly. After a while there will be less poverty, crime and death by illness. The percentage of the population that is happy will skyrocket. Also, the unhappy people won't be around to corrupt the minds of happy people.

I think there should be an exception though to who can use it. I think parents who are raising children shouldn't be able to use it. That's because their children need them for monetary support.

Many people will talk about how they lost loved ones due to physician assisted suicide. They need to get over it and stop being selfish and realize that its not their right to keep a person alive.

One person I knew said there is a slippery slope. He argued that too many people will do it and it will cause society to collapse. I have a counter-argument though.

For hundreds of years, suicide was considered a courageous act among the Romans. Despite this the Romans did not go extinct. The Japanese had a love of suicide. The Japanese did not go extinct.

[Denise]

Don't you think that most physicians will have a problem with violating their oath? I assume you are asking them to help a person that is not terminally ill, or chronically ill commit suicide?

[Whoracle]

It's your life, do whatever you want with it.

[MRC_Hans]

The way you have put it, my answer is no. A physiscian should always strive to heal. When I consult a physician, I must be able to be confident of that. Suicide is an "easy" way out, and I don't want to suspect my physician of choosing the "easy" way out, just like I dont want her to amputate if there is any way to save a limb.

Terminally ill people is another discussion.

Hans

[Trollbane]

Originally posted by JAR
The percentage of the population that is happy will skyrocket. Also, the unhappy people won't be around to corrupt the minds of happy people.


Huh? Do you mind clarifying this a bit, since I just cant see how for example the relatives and friends of those who committed suicide magically end up happy as can be and neither I see how unhappy people somehow corrupt happy people.

[corplinx]

Why do people want doctors doing this? The free market should dictate that some entrepreneur will open an assisted suicide business.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by Whoracle
It's your life, do whatever you want with it.

I agree, but do not subvert the medical community by asking physicians to take part.

I can see it now...graduating medical students struggling with the choice of specializing in cancer or AIDS research, or euthanasia...

[max]

If you all saw my mother, you would agree to euthanasia.
She is 88 and has had Alzheimer's disease for the past thirteen years. Six years ago we had no choice but to place her in a residential home for the elderly, where I have to say they look after their patients brilliantly.
My mother has not recognised me for the past two years and now she has a memory of about 30 seconds.
In fact she has become just an eating machine as that is all she can do and only does that because they feed her. She has no quality of life and is costing a thousand pounds a month to keep her in the home. In those circumstances, I would want to die. I think the worst thing is, she has to wear nappies (diapers) and a young male 'helper' changes these. I think that is awful and can't understand why a youth would want to do this.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by max
I think the worst thing is, she has to wear nappies (diapers) and a young male 'helper' changes these. I think that is awful and can't understand why a youth would want to do this.

Compassion? I can't imagine it's the wage.

Anyway, assisted suicide is a huge ethical and legal quagmire; I think an extension of the living will would be acceptable, particular in cases where a person's condition is untreatable, terminal, and will cause significant deprivation of their quality of life and dignity, but this should be heavily regulated and monitored to prevent abuse.

Has anyone heard of Dr Harold Shipman (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2652375.stm)?

[max]

Yes Dr Shipman is infamous here in UK. That was one horrific episode. He has still not admitted that he murdered all the old folks. he was murdering perfectly healthy people though, but making sure they willed their property/money to him. He just didn't like old folks for some morbid reason

[MRC_Hans]

She has no quality of life and is costing a thousand pounds a month to keep her in the home. In those circumstances, I would want to die.

1) Nobody but she can decide if she has some quality of life. You are probably right, but it is not for you to decide.

2) We are a rich society. Cost is irrelevant.

3) You are not her.

About the nappy changing: If she has 30 seconds of memory, it cant bother her much (or at least for long). I can assure you that it does not worry the male helper; as a professional, he can do that without problems, just like a female helper or nurse can treat a male patient even around private parts.

My stand on euthanasia is that only the patient can decide. If the patient is unable to decide, so be it. You can never give anybody else that responsibility.

Another matter is intensive pain treatment, or withdrawal of useless life support for terminal patients in the final phase.

Hans

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by max
If you all saw my mother, you would agree to euthanasia.
She is 88 and has had Alzheimer's disease for the past thirteen years. Six years ago we had no choice but to place her in a residential home for the elderly, where I have to say they look after their patients brilliantly.
My mother has not recognised me for the past two years and now she has a memory of about 30 seconds.
In fact she has become just an eating machine as that is all she can do and only does that because they feed her. She has no quality of life and is costing a thousand pounds a month to keep her in the home. In those circumstances, I would want to die. I think the worst thing is, she has to wear nappies (diapers) and a young male 'helper' changes these. I think that is awful and can't understand why a youth would want to do this.

I sympathize with you and your family, but personalizing the issue will not change my position on doctor assisted suicide.

[Skeptical Greg]

No.

While the concept is noble, the potential for abuse is enormous..

Similar to capital punishment.

[max]

Hans
No I wouldn't decide for her. but I would like to see changes whereby one can sign documents whilst still compus mentus, to the effect that if I ever contracted Alzheimer's and there is still no cure, I would want euthanasia. That goes for any other diseases which would of course be listed in the 'will' We don't allow animals to suffer.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by corplinx
Why do people want doctors doing this? The free market should dictate that some entrepreneur will open an assisted suicide business.

No kidding. Why eat up valuable medical resources just to tie a plastic bag around some depressed idiot's head? Hell, I know homeless people who'd do that for you, just for a pack of cigarettes.

Whattaya gonna do, worry about malpractice insurance? Fuhgeddabowdit. Just keep an axe in the closet for those tough-to-close cases. No muss, no fuss.

It seems to me that the psychological MO behind physician-assisted suicide is the legitimzation of it, just like pot smokers who have no problem getting high want to legitimize their drug of choice.

You can get pot anyplace. You can kill yourself any time. The reality is that there is no real "right" to fight for. What legalization proponents crave (in both cases, IMO) is legitimacy for technically illegitmate acts. And I think granting it is a mistake.

Your life is that miserable? You're that ill? Can't take it anymore? Then take an elevator to the 20th floor and open a window.

Do it yourself. It's unfair to expect society to understand your weakness. And if you're REALLY that far gone, society's condemnation won't matter to you and you'll do it anyway. Problem solved.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Jocko


No kidding. Why eat up valuable medical resources just to tie a plastic bag around some depressed idiot's head? Hell, I know homeless people who'd do that for you, just for a pack of cigarettes.

Whattaya gonna do, worry about malpractice insurance? Fuhgeddabowdit. Just keep an axe in the closet for those tough-to-close cases. No muss, no fuss.

It seems to me that the psychological MO behind physician-assisted suicide is the legitimzation of it, just like pot smokers who have no problem getting high want to legitimize their drug of choice.

You can get pot anyplace. You can kill yourself any time. The reality is that there is no real "right" to fight for. What legalization proponents crave (in both cases, IMO) is legitimacy for technically illegitmate acts. And I think granting it is a mistake.

Your life is that miserable? You're that ill? Can't take it anymore? Then take an elevator to the 20th floor and open a window.

Do it yourself. It's unfair to expect society to understand your weakness. And if you're REALLY that far gone, society's condemnation won't matter to you and you'll do it anyway. Problem solved.

Though I suspect a degree of hyperbole in your words, you might want to consider your last two comments in light of the Diane Pretty (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1983457.stm) case.

[Victor Danilchenko]

There are plenty of cases where the person is physically unable to terminate their own life. Those are the people who truly need euthanasia laws.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by Victor Danilchenko
There are plenty of cases where the person is physically unable to terminate their own life. Those are the people who truly need euthanasia laws.

Do you have any problem with the medical community (namely doctors) being given that duty/responsibility?

[c0rbin]

I say yes with some caveats (sp?).

The process needs to be thourough.

Family Lawyer, will, state approval, doctor administered.

I think the person must give up their body to science/organ doning if viable.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Kodiak


Do you have any problem with the medical community (namely doctors) being given that duty/responsibility?

I have no problem with this, but the medical community might. WRT terminal illness, doctors will prescribe dosages of morphine in excess of what they'd give to other patients and even dosages of a size which may hasten death, for the purpose of pain relief. But prescribe fatal doses solely for the purpose of causing death would cause an ethical and moral problem.

[Victor Danilchenko]

Kodiak

Do you have any problem with the medical community (namely doctors) being given that duty/responsibility?No, I don't, assuming appropriate legal safeguards are in place. I am not sure they would want it, though, and I wouldn't advocate forcing the medical profession to accept such a responsibility.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by c0rbin

I think the person must give up their body to science/organ doning if viable.


This might be a problem....

However, stipulating that their organs would ' not ' be available, might be a safeguard..

[Fade]

Let's talk about Belle a moment.

Belle was 81 years old when she died. She had gone through two cancer therapies in her life, had her breasts as well most of her plumbing removed. She had 0 mobility in her legs, and very little mobility in her arms and neck. She couldn't see very well, but she could still hear. One day she fell out of bed and broke her hip, her arm, and fractured a vertebrae. Belle's life was already incredibly painful, but now it was unbearably so. Belle was given drugs to cover the pain, but it never took it away completely. Belle lived 2 years in this condition. She reportedly cried every single day, and often asked that she be killed.

Let's talk about Oscar a moment.

Oscar was only 63 when he died. He suffered from brain cancer. His life was perpetual agony. He still had to undergo Chemo-Therapy, which simply multiplied that fact. One day, the cancer in his brain took away his hearing. He simply woke up deaf. Oscar was a musician. Now, even his last comfort was beyond his reach. No more could he do the only thing in the world that he was capable of doing that made him happy. As he lost his mind, and everything that was important to him, he asked for death. Well, he died 9 months later.

Let's talk about Wilma a moment.

Wilma was 92 when she died, but she couldn't have told you that herself. Wilma was little more than a vegetable, a condition which had onset when she was only 70 years old. For 22 years, the mind that she had used to it's fullest was taken away from her. She was a mathemetician. Her life revolved around numbers. She loved them. She revelled in their beauty, their simplicity. But, they were taken away from her. She said that she didn't want to lose her mind, that there was no point in living without her mind! At the very end of her life, she no longer showed signs of even being human. She didn't recognize anyone, or anything. 22 years.


Tell me again why these people shouldn't have the right to ask for death?

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Fade
Tell me again why these people shouldn't have the right to ask for death?

They did ask for death, every day it seems. Why don't you open a euthanasia service that caters to this demand?

[Tmy]

Its OK for Vets to put down animals all the time. Why not humans.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tmy
Its OK for Vets to put down animals all the time. Why not humans.

(a stupid question deserves a stupid answer)

Because Vets specialize in animals. :p

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Tony


(a stupid question deserves a stupid answer)

Because Vets specialize in animals. :p

Geez I walked right into that one.




I pulled the plug on my Granma when she was terminal. My only regret was that I waited so long. Its fien to pull the plug on peopel who living off machines, is that so far away from helping wh suicide.?

Its the religious kooks tying up the process. They have suicide hangups so they force the belief on all of us.

[Linda]

I voted no on this poll, because I can think of instances where suicide would not be appropriate. However I do approve doctor assisted suicide or euthansia in certain cases.
Four years ago my 79 year old father had surgery to clear a blocked artery in his leg. Nine days after returning home from the hospital his foot started turning black and he started having trouble breathing. We discovered in the emergency room that yes, his leg had become infected, but worse, his chronic leukemia, which to that point had never caused him any problems, had flared up with a vengence and he was in a blast crisis. His white blood count was so high his blood had literally turned to sludge, and he was in congestive heart failure.

They couldn't treat the leukemia due to the infection, and they couldn't treat the infection due to the leukemia. After two days on a respirator, he indicated he wanted to be allowed to let go. His mind was clear, he had gone to great pains to indicate to us while still healthy that he never wanted to go onto life support if there was no hope. In fact he had made me promise him years beforehand if he were to be in this situation and the doctors wouldn't help, that I should do it. It was clear he wasn't going to survive his illness.

Luckily our doctor, who had treated my dad for many years, and was aware of his wishes and had a DNR order as well as his living will, authorized a morphine drip. He died peacefully with his family at his side. I hope I can have a similar experience when it's my time to go.

[LW]

Originally posted by corplinx


Why don't you open a euthanasia service that caters to this demand?

One good reason might be that he would very quickly end up in a jail for a very long time.

[jj]

Originally posted by max
Hans
No I wouldn't decide for her. but I would like to see changes whereby one can sign documents whilst still compus mentus, to the effect that if I ever contracted Alzheimer's and there is still no cure, I would want euthanasia. That goes for any other diseases which would of course be listed in the 'will' We don't allow animals to suffer.

Basically, for once I agree with Max. If the brain is gone, I'm gone.

Presently in the USA, you can not entirely enforce your own desires in these matters.

[c0rbin]

However, stipulating that their organs would ' not ' be available, might be a safeguard..

Do you mean that people might be quick to suggest assisted suicide so they can sell their organs or bodies?

It would be a problem if the patient had a heart issue, committed suicide, and then donated his/her heart--like replacing a broken light bulb with a more broken light bulb.

In any case, though, a med student would probably appreciate the chance to hack at a cadaver.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by c0rbin

In any case, though, a med student would probably appreciate the chance to hack at a cadaver. I really don't see the legalization of assisted suicide greatly increasing the number of corpses available for medical students.

[Tricky]

I think it should be legal for everyone and mandatory for a "select group".

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by Tricky
I think it should be legal for everyone and mandatory for a "select group".

It needed to be said.

:) :)

[EdwardG]

Surely this is too a difficult issue for which to formulate one rule for all.

On the one hand I detest the idea that any authority could interfere with what I feel to be my absolute right to make such a personal decision.

On the other hand I accept that one day my competence might have diminished to the point that I am not able to make an informed and appropriate decision - for example if I was to dement due to age or accident.

If I was demented I would like to think that I would be prevented from harming myself.

And of course some might say that making a decision to die is itself evidence of incompetence.

[c0rbin]

I really don't see the legalization of assisted suicide greatly increasing the number of corpses available for medical students.

If it were a mandatory stipulation it might.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by c0rbin


If it were a mandatory stipulation it might.
O.K... I can't resist..


Yeah', I think mandatory assisted suicide, would increse the body count a bit...:D

[c0rbin]

Okay, I'm laughing too.

Here was my point, as dumb as it is that I feel the need to detail it on this topic of conjecture.

My opinion was that if a state were to allow for assisted suicide that one of the "taxes" would be that you must donate your body to science.

Now. Moving on.:)

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by c0rbin
Okay, I'm laughing too.

Here was my point, as dumb as it is that I feel the need to detail it on this topic of conjecture.

My opinion was that if a state were to allow for assisted suicide that one of the "taxes" would be that you must donate your body to science.

Now. Moving on.:)

I see nothing wrong with your suggestion... I think this is a bit (teeny bit) like pre-legal abortion days..

People who want it done badly enough, are going to make it happen.. They may or may not get caught.

Legalizing it, would mean it would happen a lot more often and increase the likelyhood that it might be missapplied.

I think living wills and DNR mandates are the best way to handle it for now.. Just my opinion...

[Thumper]

When I die I want to go in my sleep like my grandpa. Not screaming like his passengers.

Ok, sorry, I got caught up in the humor of the situation.

In my home state, physician assisted suicide os legal. I have always wondered why attempted suicide was illegal. Never made sense to me. But I do think specialist doctors (MD) should be the ones to make the final decision, not PC's.

[Boo]

The problem with Living wills and DNR's is that they can be revoked by a family member.

In my line of work I have encountered numerous individuals that have had Living wills and DNR's that were revoked by immediate family on terminal individuals at the time of imminent death. If I were to honor the wishes of the person and ignore the family I can be sued for failure to act. In the absence of DNR or a Living will resucitation will be attempted. Understand that the legal paperwork must be physically present at that time. It does no good sitting in a bank vault or some other place for safe keeping.

As for Physician assisted suicide, if a healthy individual feels that life has become so unbearable that they wish to remove themselves then they will find a way to do so. It is the individual that uses attempted suicide as a "cry for help" or to seek attention and manipulate others that should NOT be assisted. These people are best served my medical/ mental health intervention. Again if they truly wish to die they will find a way to do so.

The primary rule of the medical profession is "Do no harm".
I question the harm of full CPR on an individual that would not benefit from prolongation of their current state. It is not the neat, orderly procedure we see in movies and TV. It is violent, messy, and chaotic. There are many instances when it is appropriate. The individual in a vegetative state, imminent decline due to a disease process, or without hope of meaningful life (as defined by that individual) it is not appropriate.


Boo

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Denise
Don't you think that most physicians will have a problem with violating their oath? I assume you are asking them to help a person that is not terminally ill, or chronically ill commit suicide?
This of course is the real issue. Certainly doctors cannot and will not violate their oaths. To assist anyone but the ones you cite would do so.
For them the answer to the poll is yes. For anyone else its do it yourself time.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by Diogenes

O.K... I can't resist..


Yeah', I think mandatory assisted suicide, would increse the body count a bit...:D

Might help food shortages though (has no-one done the Soylent Green gag yet?!!) :D

[max]

yesterday I was summonsed to the old folks home where my alzheimer's 88 year old mother resides. She never loved me. but I have accepted this and understand that she never bonded and needed me like a hole in the head during the war and my dad having been killed.
So I went to see what was what and she was in bed crying out with pain and looking comatosed and not a fraction of recognition in her eyes. I immediately felt very sorry for her. A doctor was called and after a detailed examination....all to his credit (he's about 22 years old) he said ...she's got a chest infection and she is dehydrated but what can one expect at this age and with Alzheimer's and what did I expect him to do. Well, I said, I realise that she is 88 and confused but she is in pain and she is dehydrated but we can't just leave her here to slowly die of dehydration and in pain, afterall one would not do that to a pig. he then admitted her to hospital and 24 hours later she is fine, having been on a fluid drip and anti biotic drips.
I just went to visit her and she is happy again regardless of her Alzheimer's she has recovered. The young doctor would gladly have let her die slowly of dehydration in the old folks home and in pain. It was just that I kicked up and would not have that, that she is still living. And like someone at the old folks home said......she may be confused but she is happy in her confusion

[Fade]

Originally posted by corplinx


They did ask for death, every day it seems. Why don't you open a euthanasia service that caters to this demand?

I had forgotten about this thread.

Answer: Because our government decided a long time ago that it had the power to micromanage our personal lives. Our government has the power to make you do anything, and is currently in the process of giving itself even more powerful.

[Checkmite]

The mere idea of "assisted suicide" seems oxymoronic to me.

However...referring to the premature termination of a terminally ill patient, I wouldn't have a problem with it, so long as strict guidelines were followed. For example, physicians who are given the dubious honor of being able to terminate patients should be licensed, rated, or certified in some way. I also think that, for everyone's protection in such a situation, premature terminations should only be performed as permitted by a court order. That way, family members that wish for the euthanesia, and those that don't, can have a chance to speak before an impartial judge.