To Die, To Sleep... to jail for anyone that helps - by Queue
fett on 16/8/2009 at 15:15
Quote Posted by Vasquez
When it's a person who's terminally ill and in horrible pain, with no hope of recovery, begging for help to end his/her life, anyone who helps is INHUMANE, a murderer.
BUT LIFE IS SACRED. Especially the lives of white republican folks who know better than you about the sacredness of life.
TafferLing on 17/8/2009 at 11:00
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Of course he could not kill himself so the case was slightly different, but you know what I mean.
Why do you put so much weight on the ability to kill oneself?
I'd like to die in a hospital with as little pain as possible just like I'd appreciate my appendicectomy made by skilled doctors and not by my mum with a rambo knife and a nylon thread.
SubJeff on 17/8/2009 at 14:36
Because suicide is not illegal. If you can and do kill youself no crime has been commited. If someone helps you kill youself, or actually kills you they have/may have commited a crime.
TafferLing on 18/8/2009 at 08:13
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Because suicide is not illegal. If you can and do kill youself no crime has been commited. If someone helps you kill youself, or actually kills you they have/may have commited a crime.
If you really want be anal about it replace "my mum" with "myself". Do you enjoy self appendicectomies?
I was replying to your thinking that if a terminally ill cancer patient is able to squeeze a gun in his mouth then he shouldn't bother the doctors with his inane requests.
SubJeff on 18/8/2009 at 08:43
This appendicectomy business is a crazy tangent. I don't see how you are logically linking euthanasia and appendicectomy.
Are you suggesting that both are or should be medical procedures and should therefore be carried out by medical personnel? Because I don't necessarily agree. There is no potential crime in performing an appendicetomy (unless you stuff it up), but there is in killing someone.
SD - this week's BMJ has an article (and an editorial on the article) that discusses, amongst other things, the use of euthanasia in a country were it and physician assisted suicide are legal. Its not the best but if you can get your hands on a copy you might find it interesting. Most of the conclusions are supportive of the pro-euthanasia camp.
Thirith on 18/8/2009 at 10:48
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
This appendicectomy business is a crazy tangent. I don't see how you are logically linking euthanasia and appendicectomy.
If I understand correctly, he's coming at it from this angle: if done the wrong way, euthanasia could mean a hell of a lot of suffering on the part of the person dying. Say someone administers the drugs the wrong way and Granny doesn't go to sleep peacefully but will be in agony for what will feel like a very long time before she finally dies. Regulating euthanasia (and having it administered by a professional) makes this much less likely to happen. At least that's what I guess the appendectomy point was about.
This thread has made me realise one thing: even though the terms
euthanasia and
assisted suicide use the same word in German, there is a difference. SE, if I understood your posts correctly, much of your position is down to this difference - is that right?
gunsmoke on 18/8/2009 at 10:53
My uncle had cancer and collapsed one day (he was only 36 btw). He was whisked away to the hospital. After about a day, they came in with a stainless steel tray with several loaded syringes (sans needles). They didn't say a word, just proceeded to introduce them to his system via his IV. He was dead in moments. They didn't ask the family. Apparently, it is a common occurrence in the US to overdose hopelessly terminal patients with Morphine, as I have talked to at least 4 other people that have similar stories.
SubJeff on 18/8/2009 at 11:59
Well in the UK we have (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_double_effect) the doctrine of double effect, which allows for similar actions. How often it happens I don't know. I certainly don't know of any cases professionally, though a colleague told me this happened with her grandmother (who also had cancer)
Quote Posted by Thirith
If I understand correctly, he's coming at it from this angle: if done the wrong way, euthanasia could mean a hell of a lot of suffering on the part of the person dying.
I'm going to be a monstrous pedant here and say no it can't by definition. :pEuthanasia basically means having a good death sans suffering.
But I take the point.
The analogy is still a little weak though, because of the criminal aspect.
Quote:
This thread has made me realise one thing: even though the terms
euthanasia and
assisted suicide use the same word in German, there is a difference. SE, if I understood your posts correctly, much of your position is down to this difference - is that right?
Whilst they are different (euthanasia is the doctor
doing it, whilst assisted suicide is giving the information and even the methods - e.g. drugs -without actually doing the injection/turning on the syringe driver etc) as far as I am concerned these things are equivalent because in both cases the doctor doing the deed has facilitated death and may face a criminal charge.
The only issue here is people who are not in pain who wish to end their life.
If a cancer patient is in terrible pain in hospital and they refuse life-prolonging treatment they will still receive pain relief. This will be ramped up as much as is needed to stop suffering so people end up on diamorphine pumps here in the UK (I'm told diamorphine is a no-no in much of Europe but I don't really know). If the refusal for life prolonging treatment doesn't kill you higher and higher doses of opiate will. This is not too dissimilar to what people would be requesting if euthanasia were legalised anyway.
TafferLing on 19/8/2009 at 06:45
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I'm going to be a monstrous pedant here and say no it can't by definition. :pEuthanasia basically means having a good death sans suffering.
But I take the point.
The analogy is still a little weak though, because of the criminal aspect.
Oh, you monstrous pedant!:p
Sorry, I wrote those two posts in a hurry, I didn't have time to clear up my thoughts.
And you're correct, the criminal aspect isn't considered much because I offered the POV of a patient! It was a simple "would I like an assisted death or a painful homemade suicide with relatives finding the corpse?"
It's all originated from your post "I agree that a good death is very important. Its the chronic sufferers who would also argue that they would like to end it all that are more problematic, like the recent case we had here or a paralysed 20+ year old who left the country to die.
Of course he could not kill himself so the case was slightly different, but you know what I mean."
Which rubbed me the wrong way I guess...
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
If a cancer patient is in terrible pain in hospital and they refuse life-prolonging treatment they will still receive pain relief. This will be ramped up as much as is needed to stop suffering so people end up on diamorphine pumps here in the UK (I'm told diamorphine is a no-no in much of Europe but I don't really know). If the refusal for life prolonging treatment doesn't kill you higher and higher doses of opiate will. This is not too dissimilar to what people would be requesting if euthanasia were legalised anyway.
This happens in Italy too(I don't know about the diamorphine), but sometimes a politician wakes up the wrong way and a doctor gets royally screwed. There's no regulation about it.:tsktsk:
