RE: Euthanasia

RE: Euthanasia (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

SubbieOnWheels -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 6:58:08 AM)
This is a very hard question for me. I am a Christian, but I believe that my abhorance of suffering is based in my Christian faith. Jesus suffered - he suffered for us - therefore he took away the need for us to suffer. The belief that we are glorified by suffering is of later origin. It is part of my faith that when God is ready for me, He will take me. I would not ask for euthanazia for myself, although I do have a living will. My feelings on the subject would lead me NOT to actively assist another with suicide. However, my feelings of letting each person find his/her own path of life would lead me to allow others to make their own choice, without trying to force them into my own way of thinking.

LadyEllen -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 7:53:34 AM)
The problem though SoW, is this perpetual question of "why do good people suffer?" when God has the power for them not to suffer, and all suffering is meant to have been finished on the Cross. The Church seems to answer that one with the notion that suffering is the nature of life and of our time on this Earth, and that we must undergo it. Thus it becomes easy to dismiss suffering as something which nothing can be - and more importantly should be, done about. E

MissMorrigan -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 8:35:56 AM)
Good and bad, I can understand, Rule. God and Satan, those to me, aren't anything tangible that should have any place or influence in decisions I make, or allow to affect me - the latter if I can help it. It is beyond me, how anyone of any kind of faith can watch people ravaged with such a virus and yet persuade them, taking advantage of their culture and lack of education, to take a path that will ensure their demise, not only that, but spread that virus to many other people. It's one of those areas where man decides, ultimately, what occurs and again uses a religion to further those beliefs and why I think religious influence should have a very limited platform in terms of cultural systems, perhaps none at all. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan I read somewhere that a catholic priest was deterring men in Africa from using condoms b/c he said they were 'the devil's tool' HIV is a biological weapon of mass destruction and the Catholic church is doing its utmost for this weapon to make as many victims as possible. Satan and his minions are in charge of the Catholic church - as well as of most other religions.

DesFIP -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 9:03:10 AM)
One of the problems is that when someone does plead for this, if you treat the pain and depression, then they no longer want to die. So if they can be relieved of the pain, then the desire for death is obviously one that is not true. I remember my late father in law, in the last months, angry because no one would end it for him. Yet, his wife left the whole bottle of heavy pain meds next to him, with water. He could easily have picked it up and swallowed them. Yet he didn't. Should a doctor have been willing to do to him what he was not willing to do for himself?

LadyEllen -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 9:26:18 AM)
DesFIP - indeed, perhaps the problem is the lack of (and across most of the UK at least, absence of) adequate palliative care specialists? One thing which does annoy me even so though, is the ridiculous notion of saying to someone who is dying and in severe pain that "you have had the maximum dose" of pain medication - what does it matter? Theyre dying and the physician is worried about what - liver damage? That many cancer patients dying at home and in hospitals actually die from morphine overdose should be noted though - I am informed that nursing staff do turn the dose up to ensure they slip away peacefully when the time comes, though its not something thats acknowledged as such. And the other thing which annoys me is the tendency for hospitals to continue trying to cure dying people with medicines which have become unnecessary and the side effects of which make the experience of dying so much more unpleasant. There is such a lack of palliative care specialists that this happens all the time and achieves nothing but distress for the patient and their family. This occurs it seems to me because of a misunderstanding of the duty of care staff have - they seem to believe that if they stop trying to cure then they are being negligent; clearly they are not, but I'd bet now that some idiot in management would have them into disciplinary procedures if they stopped treating to cure and started treating to relieve. E

MissMorrigan -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 9:35:00 AM)
Lady Ellen, do you think that's a case of few people wanting to specialise in palliative care, or perhaps a lack of health care resources which makes that a rarity?

LadyEllen -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 9:52:58 AM)
There was a palliative care specialist on that programme Esther Rantzen made about dying with dignity - it was a while back, but I seem to remember his view was that few take an interest in it, as most doctors are motivated by the idea of making people better, rather than dealing with death which they see as a failure of their profession. I think that if thats going to be the case then really every doctor should be trained in palliative care - a lot of a little may outweigh a little of a lot? E

Rule -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 10:37:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen The problem though SoW, is this perpetual question of "why do good people suffer?" when God has the power for them not to suffer The Divine does not have such a power. The Divine is reactive, acting upon request and according to consequences of such requests - i.e. precedential requests. It does not act of its own volition.

Rule -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 10:40:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan God and Satan, those to me, aren't anything tangible The incarnations of the gods are very much tangible, MissMorrigan, unlike the intangible Divine. No doubt you have passed several of them recently on the street, in public transportation or in a shopping centre. quote: ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan It is beyond me, how anyone of any kind of faith can watch people ravaged with such a virus and yet persuade them, taking advantage of their culture and lack of education, to take a path that will ensure their demise, not only that, but spread that virus to many other people. Evil people that have infiltrated those religions, Miss Morrigan. They are without faith and merely pretend to have faith. Psychopaths will always be attracted to positions of power - and are best suited to fill such positions.

LadyEllen -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 10:46:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen The problem though SoW, is this perpetual question of "why do good people suffer?" when God has the power for them not to suffer The Divine does not have such a power. The Divine is reactive, acting upon request and according to consequences of such requests - i.e. precedential requests. It does not act of its own volition. But we have to discuss this in the frame of reference of what most misunderstand to be the case, Rule E

SubbieOnWheels -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 11:30:30 AM)
FR re palliative vs. curative A similar mindset is seen in the case of amputation. Many amputees I know went through years of operation after operation, in nearly constant pain, and unable to walk. When they changed doctors, or their doctors finally admitted "defeat", and the leg was amputated, the quality of the patient's life improved dramatically. It seem that to many doctors, amputation equals failure. If only more doctors would realize that quality is in many cases more preferable than quantity (length of life).

Termyn8or -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 11:44:28 AM)
Since we are on some of the religious aspects of this, which makes it NOT a hijack :-) I would point out something before going on. I do not agree that the idea that suffering was redeeming in some way came after, I think it came before. There are quite a few figures of note in the Old Testament that are such because of extreme trials and tribulations. Some Christians believe that the New Testament was a total rewrite, and it is all that matters. Others give heedance to the Old Testament and could rightly say that Jesus himself did not discard the old testaments. But Christians are not the only people in the world, but I have found one thing that is common in many religions, that suffering is good. Even to die for the Emperor. Religion is the basic attempt to explain away why people should make sacrifices for others, which would otherwise be unjustified in most cases. More on religion some other time, you took it there not me. But religion is certainly part of the subject. However, back on track, I think each and every person of the legal age of majority should be given a questionaire the very first time, and every time they see a doctor after the age of majority or emancipation. This outlines their wishes and is not quite public record, but health care professionals are required to abide by it. A declaration of intent, a choice of when to die. It should be by Law that this Document is adhered to. I believe Oregon has had two popular votes on the subject, and THE PEOPLE voted for legalising euthenasia, and both times the feds struck it down in the courts. This is unconstitutional but let's not go there now. I believe another state had a similar measure pass the muster of the populace but I am sure the feds struck that down as well. I don't remember which other state, but I am sure about Oregon. So that will answer any questions about the US government's attitude about it. Only they are allowed to kill us. Doesn't anybody wonder why there are laws against suicide ? Doesn't the fact that they exist tell you something ? They are totally unenforcable, unless the punishment is burial or cremation. What is the penalty for suicide ? How many years ? If you cannot inflict a punishment for violation of a law, why make it in the first place ? Give that a thought over a bowl of Cheerios, or better yet, a beer. But now I go on the other side, but still suport euthenasia, but only with those statements signed and notarized. EVERY TIME SOMEONE GOES TO A DOCTOR, defining their wishes. I know a guy, friend, who died twice and was revived. He was younger then and had said "Don't ever let me live laying there on those tubes and all that" and things to that effect for some time. Well his marriage went sour and without saying what kind of people, well, he suspects that his car accident was planned. He was a young buck and always sped through this one section of road. It was a nice stretch, open road, and he would be a speed demon. Probably 80 MPH. When it went sour with his ex, after what I've heard it is not inconcievable that she and or her family conspired to kill him, it was one of them with which he got into the accident. They knew where he drove, the knew when. He says it is possible but he can't prove it. His olady hated him, I still don't know why, but she had another guy, that may have had somethng to do with it. He suspects, highly, but proof will never be. The accident left him with a gearshift going through his torso. As he laid there in the hospital his "Wife" was constantly saying "Pull the plug". That is remove the tubes and let him die. It was his own family that put a stop to it. His heart had stopped twice, but it was beating now. His family knew of her motive to get rid of him, but the doctors did not. The irony of it is, as much as I think these statements should exist, if he had one at the time he would be dead. At that age I'm sure almost all of us would say no to laying there in a coma. In fact in him they had to induce the coma. He was quite strong and did try to pull out the tubes, and they had to restrain him. He would never stop struggiling. In that case they were right, he made a just about full recovery. Except for the bad back he is in pretty good shape. So he himself was wrong in trying to end it all there. So maybe there should be different forms for different situations. For example an eighteen year old who is in good health should not be given the "Do not resuccitate" option when going in for a checkup. For surgery there is a different form. And different forms for different ages. Someone would have to figure this all out, and I don't think it would be easy. This is a complex subject indeed, and don't accuse me of making it more complex. I merely pointed out some more of the complexities that already exist. My friend values his life now, even though he seemingly didn't at one time. Perhaps the prognosis is the key, but then can you trust that ? Again, too many questions and too few answers. T

ownedgirlie -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 12:17:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesFIP One of the problems is that when someone does plead for this, if you treat the pain and depression, then they no longer want to die. So if they can be relieved of the pain, then the desire for death is obviously one that is not true. I remember my late father in law, in the last months, angry because no one would end it for him. Yet, his wife left the whole bottle of heavy pain meds next to him, with water. He could easily have picked it up and swallowed them. Yet he didn't. Should a doctor have been willing to do to him what he was not willing to do for himself? In some cases even the pain can not be treated. Watching my father literally scream in agony, coiled into a ball of pain so excrutiating no amount of liquid morphine (all we had at home) or decadron would ease, certainly changed my mind on euthanasia. When your previously 6'1, 220 father (now scrunched over and 165) cries his eyes out to you, holding your arms and begging you (by way of screaming) to "Make it stop!!!!" you want to do all you can to end that kind of misery. So we admitted him, and they hooked him up to a morphine drip, and two days later he was gone. I would have done anything to have saved him from that last week of agony. I since did a report on Euthanasia (for school) and determined that in cases where an illness is terminal and irreversible, in its final stages, and severe pain can not be adequately avoided, I support the practice.

NorthernGent -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 12:22:42 PM)
I'm a supporter; ultimately, self-determination is more important than a system being open to abuse. The democratic process is open to abuse. Chasing individual business iniatives is open to abuse. Everything is open to abuse. The euthanasia principle is sound; it simply needs some controls in place to minimise the risk of abuse.

MissMorrigan -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 1:24:28 PM)
When I was younger and interested in following a nursing career, part of training was that a nurse had to work for a period in each branch of nursing to gain the practical experience necessary to equip prior to them going onto jobs. Is that no longer the case, perhaps you could ask your friend? It must be especially traumatic for nurses working with the terminally ill, whether they be adults or children, so can understand a person's reluctance to specialise in palliative care. To be honest, I couldn't do it, not long-term, I had to tend enough persons dying during my nursing home/private hospital days to the point I burned out pretty quickly after a few years and had to change my job, then the guilt hit me for what I then felt was 'abandoning' people that needed me, as if I was the only person doing that job! Nurses, on the whole, have a pretty thankless job, it's no longer considered vocational for one to become a nurse, which is a shame, as it takes a special kind of person to deal with that level of human suffering and maintain a healthy balance. It's likely why those working in the medical field have the highest/quickest burn out rate than any other career. It would be especially helpful if, when each nurse did their training, they were 'rotated' to ensure a more even keel. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen There was a palliative care specialist on that programme Esther Rantzen made about dying with dignity - it was a while back, but I seem to remember his view was that few take an interest in it, as most doctors are motivated by the idea of making people better, rather than dealing with death which they see as a failure of their profession. I think that if thats going to be the case then really every doctor should be trained in palliative care - a lot of a little may outweigh a little of a lot? E

domiguy -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 1:30:45 PM)
I don't think it is fair to ask a family member to assist you in your demise. However, if you have the ability to kill yourself then knock yourself out. It would be nice to be able to terminate your existence in the instance of senility, dementia or alzheimers...It would require the assistance of some medical personell. I'm all for it... We are much more concerned about the quantity in lieu of the quality of life. Also, when a woman is no longer to suck a dick....Just might be the time to leave her out on the ice floe. It would have to be considered a mercy killing...In that she had obviously outlived her usefulness and was living in continual pain as well as embarassment. Go with God..You old poop.

youngsubgeoff -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 1:35:56 PM)
I beleive that euthanasia, when someone is in severe pain, should be allowed if they request it. I know if I ended up in a permanent vegatative state or even brainded, with little to no hope of recovery, Id like to just have someone pull the plug. Thats not life to me. That is simply a human shell. However, I think that if someone wants to die because they are depressed, they should not be assisted in dying. That person needs help. They need someone to listen, not stick a needle in theyre arm and send them off. Just my thoughts.

Lumus -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 1:40:25 PM)
For terminal/incurable ailments, where the person is not mentally incapacitated to make said judgement [or wrote out their wishes before becoming incapacitated], I see no reason to refuse euthanasia. It seems equally silly to make suicide illegal...since you can only arrest the people who botch the job, and for what purpose? They already feel bad for botching the job.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 4:43:04 PM)
quote: (4) is again an outdated and outmanouevered ethic in the light of the developments of modern medicine and could just as easily be interpreted to support euthanasia as it is often interpreted to forbid it. The Hippocratic Oath is hardly outdated. With regards to questions of euthanasia, it is exactly right. Doctors should not be in the practice of deciding when life should be ended. Quite simply, the physician should have no voice in such a debate. Euthanasia is not a question of medical ethics, but of social ethics. The Hippocratic Oath, properly followed, puts physicians on the sidelines of that discussion, which is where they belong.

Rule -> RE: Euthanasia (2/28/2008 4:47:55 PM)
I agree. There are soldiers and psychopaths that are eminently suited to kill people. That is no task, or rather an antithetical task for physicians - unless they are psychopaths maybe, like Harold Shipman.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875