|
Post by moonlight on Dec 13, 2008 15:08:54 GMT -6
This week Sky News has broadcast the assisted suicide of a man in the infamous Dignitas Clinic in Zurich.
Though they are considered terminal ill, there is a big question whether anyone has the right to actively assist them to die. On a broadcast on TV they reported a story of a mentally ill young man who too was assisted taking his own life in that clinic. He was miserable with his personal life. Not a case of a terminal ill. And these humanist swiss physicians helped him to terminate his own life.
In Belgium and Holland there are laws enabling anyone to actively terminate a human's life by his own request.
Unbelievable!
Even in Texas, that has the most busiest death chamber, its illegal to terminate the life of a mentally ill. But in Switzerland its completely legal.
And these Europeans have the nerve criticizing the U.S for its capital punishment system.
|
|
forgesfire
Old Hand
The masses of humanity have always had to suffer
Posts: 546
|
Post by forgesfire on Dec 13, 2008 15:43:24 GMT -6
I think it's unfair to pair up all antis' into one category. (such as all people who would agree with the assisted suicide of a non-terminally ill patient)
|
|
forgesfire
Old Hand
The masses of humanity have always had to suffer
Posts: 546
|
Post by forgesfire on Dec 13, 2008 15:54:42 GMT -6
I think you should really stop attacking people who have disagreements with you and keep your opinions to yourself. I believe this has been said before, but your attitude is rather bloodthirsty. I also don't understand why you bring politics into this. I find it offensive that you seem to connect all liberals with communists. I personally think you are an angry person, who in a sense has an emotional state similar to that as a criminal. You should look in to getting some counseling.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Dec 13, 2008 16:18:22 GMT -6
I think it's unfair to pair up all antis' into one category. (such as all people who would agree with the assisted suicide of a non-terminally ill patient) I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Dec 13, 2008 16:28:46 GMT -6
I also don't understand why you bring politics into this. Huh? Where did he mention politics?
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 13, 2008 16:30:32 GMT -6
This week Sky News has broadcast the assisted suicide of a man in the infamous Dignitas Clinic in Zurich. Though they are considered terminal ill, there is a big question whether anyone has the right to actively assist them to die. On a broadcast on TV they reported a story of a mentally ill young man who too was assisted taking his own life in that clinic. He was miserable with his personal life. Not a case of a terminal ill. And these humanist swiss physicians helped him to terminate his own life. In Belgium and Holland there are laws enabling anyone to actively terminate a human's life by his own request. Unbelievable! Even in Texas, that has the most busiest death chamber, its illegal to terminate the life of a mentally ill. But in Switzerland its completely legal. And these Europeans have the nerve criticizing the U.S for its capital punishment system. You named three countries and say that these Europeans have the nerve criticizing the US for capital punishment. First: It's the EU that criticizes the US. Switzerland is not a member of the EU. Second: The Netherlands and Belgium are very liberal with "helping" someone to die. They don't reflect the opinions of all Europeans. I am very much against helping mentally ill people to die because depressions etc can be treated. When it comes to severe illnesses which lead to a very painful death I'm not sure about it. On the one hand I understand that people want to die on the other it could be a step in a very wrong direction so that one day insurances will say "No, we don't want to spend money on your treatment. If your pain is so bad why don't you get the death shake? We might pay for that!".
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Dec 13, 2008 17:21:00 GMT -6
I think you should really stop attacking people who have disagreements with you and keep your opinions to yourself. I believe this has been said before, but your attitude is rather bloodthirsty. I also don't understand why you bring politics into this. I find it offensive that you seem to connect all liberals with communists. I personally think you are an angry person, who in a sense has an emotional state similar to that as a criminal. You should look in to getting some counseling. And you are doing exactly what leftards and communists do to people they have disagreements with: Falsely claiming they are mentally and/or emotionally ill. They did it with Bush and his administration, they are doing it now to Blago because they want to distance themselves from him, and they did it in the USSR to dissidents by locking them away in mental institutions. There's a connection for ya'.
|
|
|
Post by brumsongs on Dec 13, 2008 18:00:58 GMT -6
I think it's unfair to pair up all antis' into one category. (such as all people who would agree with the assisted suicide of a non-terminally ill patient) I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill. I have a living will and doctors who will enact it for me. There is no moral equivalency between this and the DP. If I can't play my Gibson J200 I'm giving it to my son and I'm out of here. The DP takes a life, assisted suicide gives one up, you might as well compare someone stealing your Dallas Cowboys shirt to giving it to a thrift store. BTW Moonlight is to dumb to "imply" anything, it's take or leave it with him- and I quite respect that.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Dec 13, 2008 20:38:28 GMT -6
I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill. I have a living will and doctors who will enact it for me. There is no moral equivalency between this and the DP. If I can't play my Gibson J200 I'm giving it to my son and I'm out of here. The DP takes a life, assisted suicide gives one up, you might as well compare someone stealing your Dallas Cowboys shirt to giving it to a thrift store. BTW Moonlight is to dumb to "imply" anything, it's take or leave it with him- and I quite respect that. My husband and I have living wills, too. That doesn't mean I want a doctor to kill me if I become depressed and ask him to. It means I don't want to be kept alive on machines in a comatose state for years. Assisted suicide is actively participating in the killing of a human being. I'm not opposed to it for terminally ill people, but I'm totally against it for people who are not terminally ill.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Dec 13, 2008 20:52:42 GMT -6
I have a living will and doctors who will enact it for me. There is no moral equivalency between this and the DP. If I can't play my Gibson J200 I'm giving it to my son and I'm out of here. The DP takes a life, assisted suicide gives one up, you might as well compare someone stealing your Dallas Cowboys shirt to giving it to a thrift store. BTW Moonlight is to dumb to "imply" anything, it's take or leave it with him- and I quite respect that. My husband and I have living wills, too. That doesn't mean I want a doctor to kill me if I become depressed and ask him to. It means I don't want to be kept alive on machines in a comatose state for years. Assisted suicide is actively participating in the killing of a human being. I'm not opposed to it for terminally ill people, but I'm totally against it for people who are not terminally ill. I agree with you. I'm only for assisted suicide for those who are terminally ill and are suffering. My great aunt suffered from parkinsons. I didn't see her all the time, but when I did, I saw her go from the managable stage to the point where she detiorated to nothing. She was ready to die, she wanted to die. She had even stopped eating.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 14, 2008 4:24:25 GMT -6
The euthanasia debate would be unnecessary if hospitals and other institutions had a good palliative ward. Some hospitals over here set you into a coma upon request if you're terminally ill and cannot stand the annihilating pain or fear suffocation or some other very painful and frightening death. I think that's a good compromise because the doctors won't have to break their oath by killing you (even if it were legal) and the patient doesn't have to stand the pain and fear. I guess this is possible in the US as well and if it were used widely everywhere there wouldn't be need for euthanasia. The problem with the whole deabte is that we all know it might concern us more than we wish and everytime I talk about that with people it really depresses me. You feel like in an lose-lose-situation because you're trapped between two values - mercy and the sanctity of life - and both are equally important. That would be solved with good palliative wards.
|
|
|
Post by moonlight on Dec 14, 2008 11:30:00 GMT -6
I think you should really stop attacking people who have disagreements with you and keep your opinions to yourself. I believe this has been said before, but your attitude is rather bloodthirsty. I also don't understand why you bring politics into this. I find it offensive that you seem to connect all liberals with communists. I personally think you are an angry person, who in a sense has an emotional state similar to that as a criminal. You should look in to getting some counseling. And you are doing exactly what leftards and communists do to people they have disagreements with: Falsely claiming they are mentally and/or emotionally ill. They did it with Bush and his administration, they are doing it now to Blago because they want to distance themselves from him, and they did it in the USSR to dissidents by locking them away in mental institutions. There's a connection for ya'. I'll second every word you said Mike5.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Dec 14, 2008 12:06:23 GMT -6
The euthanasia debate would be unnecessary if hospitals and other institutions had a good palliative ward. Some hospitals over here set you into a coma upon request if you're terminally ill and cannot stand the annihilating pain or fear suffocation or some other very painful and frightening death. I think that's a good compromise because the doctors won't have to break their oath by killing you (even if it were legal) and the patient doesn't have to stand the pain and fear. I guess this is possible in the US as well and if it were used widely everywhere there wouldn't be need for euthanasia. The problem with the whole deabte is that we all know it might concern us more than we wish and everytime I talk about that with people it really depresses me. You feel like in an lose-lose-situation because you're trapped between two values - mercy and the sanctity of life - and both are equally important. That would be solved with good palliative wards. The person who is terminally ill is going to die anyway, so I don't understand--if it is their wish to die and not suffer--why they don't allow it. I know I wouldn't want to suffer any longer then I would have to if I couldn't fight off the disease.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Dec 14, 2008 12:13:55 GMT -6
The person who is terminally ill is going to die anyway, so I don't understand--if it is their wish to die and not suffer--why they don't allow it. I know I wouldn't want to suffer any longer then I would have to if I couldn't fight off the disease. Concur. If your life doesn't belong to you, what does?
|
|
|
Post by me1 on Dec 14, 2008 12:18:29 GMT -6
I think it's unfair to pair up all antis' into one category. (such as all people who would agree with the assisted suicide of a non-terminally ill patient) I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill. Maybe because the person being killed has ASKED to be put to death. Lisa, i'm sorry but your post is rather silly.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 14, 2008 12:34:49 GMT -6
The person who is terminally ill is going to die anyway, so I don't understand--if it is their wish to die and not suffer--why they don't allow it. I know I wouldn't want to suffer any longer then I would have to if I couldn't fight off the disease. Concur. If your life doesn't belong to you, what does? I'm not one of those who believe your life is owned by God so you're not allowed to off yourself. I don't want to prohibit suicide and I don't want to prohibit assisted suicide (it is legal where I live) but I don't want others to be allowed to kill somebody even upon request. I understand that it is wanted by many and maybe I would want it as well in a certain situation but it is a step into a wrong direction where human life is something that can be scheduled by others and where people judge what's still a status worthwhile to live in and what's not. I admit that over here the debate is coined by the memorial of the Nazi euthanasia program and there's an automatic reflex against all this although it is not comparable. But people fear that it could come to this again if you open the door just a little bit into this direction and I think there's something true about it.
|
|
|
Post by me1 on Dec 14, 2008 12:42:33 GMT -6
There is nothing wrong with assisted suicide but it MUST be done at a registered clinic. Otherwise you would have people bumping people off and claiming they asked them to help then die.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Dec 14, 2008 12:47:23 GMT -6
Concur. If your life doesn't belong to you, what does? I'm not one of those who believe your life is owned by God so you're not allowed to off yourself. I don't want to prohibit suicide and I don't want to prohibit assisted suicide (it is legal where I live) but I don't want others to be allowed to kill somebody even upon request. I understand that it is wanted by many and maybe I would want it as well in a certain situation but it is a step into a wrong direction where human life is something that can be scheduled by others and where people judge what's still a status worthwhile to live in and what's not. I admit that over here the debate is coined by the memorial of the Nazi euthanasia program and there's an automatic reflex against all this although it is not comparable. But people fear that it could come to this again if you open the door just a little bit into this direction and I think there's something true about it. I understand what you are saying. It would be like the doctors are playing God. I am only for assisted suicide if it is used for the terminally ill, who are on their death bed to begin with. People with end-stage MS, ALS, Parkinsons, Huntingtons--are only suffering. I think we've come along way since the Nazi-era. The majority of the people know that systematically killing is wrong. Those death camps killed healthy people. It's kind of like the DP. People could have used it to kill everyone who committed a crime from murder to robbery, but since there are boundaries, it isn't going to happen. The same thing with assisted suicide. If the terminally ill person can write a living will requesting that once they hit end-stage to die, I don't think it can be miss-interrupreted. I also think that doctors today, for those who are terminally ill, up morphine gradually so they die of an overdose.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Dec 14, 2008 12:53:51 GMT -6
I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill. Maybe because the person being killed has ASKED to be put to death. Lisa, i'm sorry but your post is rather silly. Andy, I think Lisa meant that Anti's who call the DP "barbaric", don't think that assisted suicide of healthy, non-criminal, people is "barbaric". Which is hypocritical, because like you said, the person getting assisted suicide "asked to die", just like the person on DR "asked to die" by killing someone, knowing their punishment would be the DP. Both have the same concept. It's just those, Pro-criminals (I wouldn't call the Anti's, because they really aren't), think killing a human being is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Dec 14, 2008 13:04:30 GMT -6
I don't think that's what Moonlight was implying. People can believe that assisted suicide and capital punishment are both barbaric, of course. What seems hypocritical IMO is that since I've been on this board (2 years), not one European anti who calls capital punishment "barbaric" has bothered to mention that it's perfectly legal in Switzerland to assist in the suicide of physically healthy people who have committed no crimes and pose no threat to society whatsoever. I knew that assisted suicide was legal in some European countries, but honestly, I thought it was reserved for the terminally ill. Maybe because the person being killed has ASKED to be put to death. Lisa, i'm sorry but your post is rather silly. If a person is depressed enough to want to commit suicide, he can always achieve that end without involving others. People who are mentally ill (depression is a mental illness, and is often temporary) are in no position to make legal decisions, especially one of this magnitude. I've heard of mentally ill individuals being prevented from managing their own financial affairs, even though it's their money and they asked to. I assume this is to prevent them from making bad decisions and thereby harming themselves. Btw, if you ever again call one of my posts "silly" when it isn't, I'll start digging up hundreds of yours that actually are.
|
|
|
Post by me1 on Dec 14, 2008 13:51:18 GMT -6
Thats your entitlement i suppose. As long as it's in the relevant thread.
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Dec 14, 2008 14:04:54 GMT -6
The only problem with assisted sucide is that it is still sucide and thus illegal. If a person had a life insurance policy, his or her family members would not recieve it. The only argument for assisted suicide is that by not allowing it, it is essentially discriminating against those who are of unable body to do it on their own, compared to those who are of able body.
|
|
|
Post by me1 on Dec 14, 2008 14:56:12 GMT -6
Andie, suicide was decriminalised absolutely years ago.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 14, 2008 15:00:59 GMT -6
The only problem with assisted sucide is that it is still sucide and thus illegal. If a person had a life insurance policy, his or her family members would not recieve it. The only argument for assisted suicide is that by not allowing it, it is essentially discriminating against those who are of unable body to do it on their own, compared to those who are of able body. You say assisted suicide is illegal in your country; the question then is what you define as assisted suicide. Over here assistance to suicide is not illegal. I give you an example: You can buy a rope and a chair for the suicidal person. You can tie a knot into the rope, attach it to the ceiling and place the chair under it. You can help the suicidal person to step on the chair, lay the noose around the persons' neck and tighten it. You can tell him that he's going to make the absolutely right thing. Up to now everything is perfectly legal. But when you kick the chair, you're charged with homicide or maybe with homicide upon request. The stupid thing is that turning off live saving machines is sometimes called assisted suicide as well. The terminology isn't clear. What are you meaning with it?
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 14, 2008 15:09:46 GMT -6
I understand what you are saying. It would be like the doctors are playing God. I am only for assisted suicide if it is used for the terminally ill, who are on their death bed to begin with. People with end-stage MS, ALS, Parkinsons, Huntingtons--are only suffering. I think we've come along way since the Nazi-era. The majority of the people know that systematically killing is wrong. Those death camps killed healthy people. It's kind of like the DP. People could have used it to kill everyone who committed a crime from murder to robbery, but since there are boundaries, it isn't going to happen. The same thing with assisted suicide. If the terminally ill person can write a living will requesting that once they hit end-stage to die, I don't think it can be miss-interrupreted. I also think that doctors today, for those who are terminally ill, up morphine gradually so they die of an overdose. I understand your point. But what if I told you that in the Netherlands now some people carry documents with them explicitly stating that they want reanimation, respiration machinery etc. It's getting really scary, I think. Over here some people carry documents along with them saying that they don't want all this and I guess it's the right thing to demand that somebody should state the fact that he/she doesn't want to live under all circumstances. This is what I mean when I say that human life loses some value if we allow euthanasia. But - as I said before - I don't know what I would want if I were terminally ill. You named Huntington's which pretty much ends in suffocation. That is horrible and probably I would want to die a better death. Upon request you can get a pain reliever overdose that won't kill you instantly but shortens your life expectancy if it is necessary to take away the pain here, too. That combined with the induced coma is the best possibility in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by mel77 on Dec 14, 2008 15:44:50 GMT -6
Why should anyone not be allowed to decide they want to die?!
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Dec 14, 2008 15:50:15 GMT -6
The only problem with assisted sucide is that it is still sucide and thus illegal. If a person had a life insurance policy, his or her family members would not recieve it. The only argument for assisted suicide is that by not allowing it, it is essentially discriminating against those who are of unable body to do it on their own, compared to those who are of able body. You say assisted suicide is illegal in your country; the question then is what you define as assisted suicide. Over here assistance to suicide is not illegal. I give you an example: You can buy a rope and a chair for the suicidal person. You can tie a knot into the rope, attach it to the ceiling and place the chair under it. You can help the suicidal person to step on the chair, lay the noose around the persons' neck and tighten it. You can tell him that he's going to make the absolutely right thing. Up to now everything is perfectly legal. But when you kick the chair, you're charged with homicide or maybe with homicide upon request. The stupid thing is that turning off live saving machines is sometimes called assisted suicide as well. The terminology isn't clear. What are you meaning with it? In Canada it is illegal to end someone's life even though the other person your helping wants to die. The example you gave, would be considered homicide on the persons part. There was a case, of a woman named Susan (can't remember her last name) who had MS and was to the point where she couldn't live with herself. She had gone to the States to have a doctor kill her peacefully. That is a crime.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Dec 14, 2008 18:13:45 GMT -6
Why should anyone not be allowed to decide they want to die?! I can understand both sides of that arguement. If it became commonplace how long might it be until the elderly and infirm feels unwelcome and feel pressure to ease the burden they might feel they have become to others. Christians have a beelif that in some form or other they may have crosses to carry in life and may legitimately feel that suicide could be an avoidance of that?
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Dec 15, 2008 1:13:12 GMT -6
One of the people who took his life was filmed and this was shown on tv. An extremely moving documentary where it was apparent that this was a decision taken by a person who had ben thinking about this for years. His love for family and wife was overwhelming. Remember it is he himself who ended his own life. He drank a mixture of drugs and turned off the repirator himself.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Dec 15, 2008 3:43:21 GMT -6
I can understand both sides of that arguement. If it became commonplace how long might it be until the elderly and infirm feels unwelcome and feel pressure to ease the burden they might feel they have become to others. Exactly. That's what I fear.
|
|