flowgo Asked June 2015
What are your thoughts on euthanasia in the medical field assisted suicide?
Follow
Share
Read More Close
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
209 Answers
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Popular Questions
Related Questions
- What's the difference between assisted suicide and end-of-life sedation?
- Has anyone had this happen, EVER? My Mother passed on June 2. My husband, daughter and I did not make it in time to say final goodbyes.
- Does dreaming of/experiencing a sense of dying in your sleep indicate impending death?
- Only a few days left of my Mom's life I think. How do I deal with this?
Ask a Question
All she ever wanted to do was to work with blind deaf children but H&S risk assessments done by people who were neither blind nor deaf said she would be unsafe walking around (like she didnt have to walk around EVER on a daily basis!!!!)
CM you are right rehab centres have largely gone but the gp doesnt now want her to have a hoist he wants to make her use her legs more to get the muscle mass back (not sure how that helps when she is on the floor)
Right now dealing with a UTI (hers not mine) so we are on the verge of la la land although now I keep the rapid strips and test her urine I KNOW when her leucocyte levels soar so can get some help sharpish.
My Niece's husband, had been battling debilitating Cancer for four years, with metastasis to his lungs and nearly every large bone in his body, including his skull, spine, pelvis arms and legs bones. He was a large man, and could no longer bear any weight or walk, and had in fact only just broken two bones right aboove his ankle, rendering him bed bound. He was in horrific pain all over his body, and suffered immense daily headaches frome the lesions putting pressure on his brain, and death was imminent, but like with most cancers, you do know it will get much worse, but you don't know when the suffering will end. He was suffering, and chose DWD as a way to end his own suffering, and that of his family, who was observing his decline, and suffering in their own right, as the husband/father they once knew, was shrinking into himself both physically and mentally, lulled under by the heavy narcotics he had to take, in order to control the pain.
Once he had made the informed decision to end his life, the burden he faced of having to continue wasting away in pain was lifted, and his spirits actually improved, knowing that he had the control of his own destiny.
DWD is legal in the state of Washington, and after meeting with the DWD organization, he had indepth counselling, 2 independent Dr's approval besides his own Oncologist, and the steps were set in place for the 4 week waiting period. At no time did he ever waver from his decision.
The most difficult aspect of the entire situation, was explaining to his Mother and his children, why he had come to this decision, and now, 2+ months after he has passed, they are doing better, and have come to be supportive of the decision he made for the entire family. In hindsight (as many of us who have watched our Loved ones suffer with debilitating deseases), they had all been morning his loss for a long time, and know he would have only suffered even more than he already had been.
My Nephew ended his life in mid February, it was quiet, peaceful, and after he self administred the medication coctail, he simply went to sleep, and never woke up, with his entire family supportive, and by his side.
After having witnessed his decision, I am in complete understanding and agreement with the DWD laws and why someone would wish to take control and end their life this way.
To me it seems rediculous that some government or someone else's beliefs should hold any control over how I chose to die.
What could be more of a personal decission than that?
How does an individual's decission to stop suffering, wasting, fearing a terrible end have anything to do with the beliefs of others.
People on this forum are supportive and caring. Some are also quick to assume everyone else shares their religious beliefs and beliefs about an afterlife. Including that there is some deity that demands we suffer our way to the end of life, or we will be denied a particular afterlife.
That's fine for them. But guess what? We do not all believe this.
There are billions of humans on this earth, and beliefs about what happens when we die are beyond counting.
So what I'm trying to say is that to be human is to suffer and to die.
We will all have to do both. And none of us really knows what happens next. None of us.
So ponder your true beliefs, including those nagging doubts, and and decide for youself. But not for me, I'll do that for myself, thank you.
Patsy, the belief in "Gods Will" causes untold suffering of the elderly and terminally ill. We are told god loves us, is merciful, but will roast us for eternity and we should extend the suffering of impending death because it's gods will. We are not dogs, but dogs get better end of life treatment via euthanasia.
Mally...Trump just got on the scene?! Better check your calendar.
But one thing people forget the Hippocratic oath, 'to prolong life' was made in an age of limited medical knowledge so there was no messing 'with nature'. Now we can keep a comatose person alive for years and it is this intervention I have an issue with. Why prolong life just because you can? Surely its about quality of life not quantity of life?.
And because, so of the system has an agenda in wanting to extend a persons life, and the family is not able to accept death, it is no wonder the wishes of the dying gets overlooked.
And isn't it daft even if they allowed them to die, they'd just let them starve to death rather than put them out of their misery. No-one wants to make a ruling one way or the other because it sets a precedent, and the masses seem to think once you do this, the government will use it to 'get rid' of this aging group.
We are individuals and as individuals reserve the right to end our life the way we deem fit.
You don't have the right to involve other people in abetting the "unlawful taking of a life with malice aforethought" - a.k.a. murder.
The loophole is in the word "unlawful." That's the bit that states which are sanctioning assisted suicide are working away at: does the prior consent of a person who is no longer able to consent make the ending of his life lawful?
What if he's changed his mind and can't communicate it?
It is unhelpful to look at the issue as if it were ethically straightforward. The law and policy makers prefer to err on the side of caution because there are too many factors that we cannot know, and too great a risk of unintended consequences.
The Hippocratic oath also forbids the surgical treatment of kidney stones: we're quite able to distinguish which parts of it no longer apply. It is retained not as a practical ethical handbook, but as a reminder to clinicians of quite how long their profession has been wrestling with these issues and not to get too cocky and start ditching the most fundamental principles.
And how do we decide at what point we stop treatment? Is it a set age? Do we come up with a formula that weighs quality of life? Would you want to live in a society where you would one day get a call from the nursing home that your loved one has declined and has now reached that threshold?
I think this question can only be answered by the patient or person going through their pain.
I'll also add that Congressmen are easily influenced by the hundreds of lobbyists representing Big Pharma and the medical industry, so getting a federal law passed for medically-assisted suicide will be quite the long shot, if ever. Big Pharma and the medical industry see management of chronic disease as a massive cash cow...Billions upon billions of dollars are generated from treatment of diabetes, cancer, depression, heart disease...