Jump to content

Should assisted suicide by doctors be legal for terminally ill patients? If so, under what conditions should this happen?


bgabay

Recommended Posts

I have a few rules though if you are going to participate:

 

NO CURSING

 

RESPECT OTHER'S IDEAS

 

NO FIGHTS

 

I can't wait to see what you guys say!

 

 

These are all general forum rules, but nice of you to remind people what discussion should look like :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

 

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

 

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

Edited by The Gr8 M80
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

I couldn't agree more. From a personal experience, I once had someone in family get terminally ill - they were in great pain and were suffering every living hour. They were paralysed and were only able to BLINK - the only way they were able to communicate. what they wanted didn't matter much, since doctors were obligated to keep them alive (and I have nothing against that - I want to be a doctor myself and I would appreciate that too).

I just feel like in some cases people should have the option to go. Why would they want to suffer both mentally and physically when they could ease their pain which( I'm assuming since it's a very bad case) is unbearable? Mentally ill people often choose suicide - it's a great sorrow to the family, yet i fully understand that too.

I think the main problem (would probably be the same for me) is that doctors swore to help others and not cause any harm - the mental blockade and the idea of "I (essentially) killed that person" is what many would struggle to overcome. Even if the person agreed to it. Just think for yourself - wouldn't it feel at least surreal?

It's honestly a very hard topic to discuss since many things can be so unsure. Good idea though :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

I couldn't agree more. From a personal experience, I once had someone in family get terminally ill - they were in great pain and were suffering every living hour. They were paralysed and were only able to BLINK - the only way they were able to communicate. what they wanted didn't matter much, since doctors were obligated to keep them alive (and I have nothing against that - I want to be a doctor myself and I would appreciate that too).

I just feel like in some cases people should have the option to go. Why would they want to suffer both mentally and physically when they could ease their pain which( I'm assuming since it's a very bad case) is unbearable? Mentally ill people often choose suicide - it's a great sorrow to the family, yet i fully understand that too.

I think the main problem (would probably be the same for me) is that doctors swore to help others and not cause any harm - the mental blockade and the idea of "I (essentially) killed that person" is what many would struggle to overcome. Even if the person agreed to it. Just think for yourself - wouldn't it feel at least surreal?

It's honestly a very hard topic to discuss since many things can be so unsure. Good idea though :)

 

I agree with your statement, I too have had family members who died from terminal illness and were kept alive despite being in pain. I'm inclined to believe that anyone who is at least against allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill patients are so out of their own selfishness, not thinking what is best for another person but because they don't want to lose someone. I really don't see why someone would be against it being allowed otherwise.

 

Now on the topic of if doctors should be forced to do it or not, I do think they should be required to help in situations where someone is terminally ill because they've done everything that can be done at that point to save someone's life and I'd say it is their duty to ease the suffering in what way the can. In other cases I'd say forcing it might be a bit extreme however and it might be better to let those willing help in stead.

Edited by The Gr8 M80
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

I couldn't agree more. From a personal experience, I once had someone in family get terminally ill - they were in great pain and were suffering every living hour. They were paralysed and were only able to BLINK - the only way they were able to communicate. what they wanted didn't matter much, since doctors were obligated to keep them alive (and I have nothing against that - I want to be a doctor myself and I would appreciate that too).

I just feel like in some cases people should have the option to go. Why would they want to suffer both mentally and physically when they could ease their pain which( I'm assuming since it's a very bad case) is unbearable? Mentally ill people often choose suicide - it's a great sorrow to the family, yet i fully understand that too.

I think the main problem (would probably be the same for me) is that doctors swore to help others and not cause any harm - the mental blockade and the idea of "I (essentially) killed that person" is what many would struggle to overcome. Even if the person agreed to it. Just think for yourself - wouldn't it feel at least surreal?

It's honestly a very hard topic to discuss since many things can be so unsure. Good idea though :)

 

I agree with your statement, I too have had family members who died from terminal illness and were kept alive despite being in pain. I'm inclined to believe that anyone who is at least against allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill patients are so out of their own selfishness, not thinking what is best for another person but because they don't want to lose someone. I really don't see why someone would be against it being allowed otherwise.

 

Now on the topic of if doctors should be forced to do it or not, I do think they should be required to help in situations where someone is terminally ill because they've done everything that can be done at that point to save someone's life and I'd say it is their duty to ease the suffering in what way the can. In other cases I'd say forcing it might be a bit extreme however and it might be better to let those willing help in stead.

 

I agree with what you all have said. In this case, should we have jobs in which they would assist in the suicide of the terminally ill? Should we have a sociopath do this, so they don't feel regret? Should it be a job of the doctor of the terminally ill? Should it be a funeral home that does this? Or is there some other line of work that should have the assisted suicide of terminally ill within their job requirements?

Edited by bgabay
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

I couldn't agree more. From a personal experience, I once had someone in family get terminally ill - they were in great pain and were suffering every living hour. They were paralysed and were only able to BLINK - the only way they were able to communicate. what they wanted didn't matter much, since doctors were obligated to keep them alive (and I have nothing against that - I want to be a doctor myself and I would appreciate that too).

I just feel like in some cases people should have the option to go. Why would they want to suffer both mentally and physically when they could ease their pain which( I'm assuming since it's a very bad case) is unbearable? Mentally ill people often choose suicide - it's a great sorrow to the family, yet i fully understand that too.

I think the main problem (would probably be the same for me) is that doctors swore to help others and not cause any harm - the mental blockade and the idea of "I (essentially) killed that person" is what many would struggle to overcome. Even if the person agreed to it. Just think for yourself - wouldn't it feel at least surreal?

It's honestly a very hard topic to discuss since many things can be so unsure. Good idea though :)

 

I agree with your statement, I too have had family members who died from terminal illness and were kept alive despite being in pain. I'm inclined to believe that anyone who is at least against allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill patients are so out of their own selfishness, not thinking what is best for another person but because they don't want to lose someone. I really don't see why someone would be against it being allowed otherwise.

 

Now on the topic of if doctors should be forced to do it or not, I do think they should be required to help in situations where someone is terminally ill because they've done everything that can be done at that point to save someone's life and I'd say it is their duty to ease the suffering in what way the can. In other cases I'd say forcing it might be a bit extreme however and it might be better to let those willing help in stead.

 

I agree with what you all have said. In this case, should we have jobs in which they would assist in the suicide of the terminally ill? Should we have a sociopath do this, so they don't feel regret? Should it be a job of the doctor of the terminally ill? Should it be a funeral home that does this? Or is there some other line of work that should have the assisted suicide of terminally ill within their job requirements?

 

 

     While this kind of responsibility may be hard on doctors, in the end it is their job to help patients with their requests. We don't need a new job, doctors should finish their job, no matter how controversial

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I don't see why it shouldn't be. No one gets to choose to be brought into this world so it would at least seem fair to be able to end your life and spare yourself suffering if you're going to die already. We already put down other animals who are in pain even if they're not necessairly dying to save them from suffering so I don't see why we shouldn't allow humans the same mercy.

This may be a controversial thought but I think it should be an option to not just those who are terminally ill but otherwise in great pain, suffering from other incurable diseases, incurable mental conditions or those suffering from suicidal thoughts though only when treatment has failed to help, like I said only if that's what they want though. However in cases like these other ones I wouldn't say it's fair to force doctors to do it either if they are set against it.

When it comes down to it we can and should try to convince individuals not to choose that option but everyone own their own bodies and that means having the right to decide over your own life as well.

I couldn't agree more. From a personal experience, I once had someone in family get terminally ill - they were in great pain and were suffering every living hour. They were paralysed and were only able to BLINK - the only way they were able to communicate. what they wanted didn't matter much, since doctors were obligated to keep them alive (and I have nothing against that - I want to be a doctor myself and I would appreciate that too).

I just feel like in some cases people should have the option to go. Why would they want to suffer both mentally and physically when they could ease their pain which( I'm assuming since it's a very bad case) is unbearable? Mentally ill people often choose suicide - it's a great sorrow to the family, yet i fully understand that too.

I think the main problem (would probably be the same for me) is that doctors swore to help others and not cause any harm - the mental blockade and the idea of "I (essentially) killed that person" is what many would struggle to overcome. Even if the person agreed to it. Just think for yourself - wouldn't it feel at least surreal?

It's honestly a very hard topic to discuss since many things can be so unsure. Good idea though :)

 

I agree with your statement, I too have had family members who died from terminal illness and were kept alive despite being in pain. I'm inclined to believe that anyone who is at least against allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill patients are so out of their own selfishness, not thinking what is best for another person but because they don't want to lose someone. I really don't see why someone would be against it being allowed otherwise.

 

Now on the topic of if doctors should be forced to do it or not, I do think they should be required to help in situations where someone is terminally ill because they've done everything that can be done at that point to save someone's life and I'd say it is their duty to ease the suffering in what way the can. In other cases I'd say forcing it might be a bit extreme however and it might be better to let those willing help in stead.

 

I agree with what you all have said. In this case, should we have jobs in which they would assist in the suicide of the terminally ill? Should we have a sociopath do this, so they don't feel regret? Should it be a job of the doctor of the terminally ill? Should it be a funeral home that does this? Or is there some other line of work that should have the assisted suicide of terminally ill within their job requirements?

 

 

     While this kind of responsibility may be hard on doctors, in the end it is their job to help patients with their requests. We don't need a new job, doctors should finish their job, no matter how controversial

 

I understand what you are saying, but although the doctors may be responsible, it can but extreme stress and regret on them, eventually even leading to their suicide. So if we create a new line of doctors, maybe known as "mortanthropology" mort-death, anthrop-human, logy-science/study, or something like that. These people could be sociopaths so that they won't regret the suicide and they make money off of something that they don't mind doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be allowed because if people are in a lot of pain from a disease which cannot be treated and they want to die instead of suffering then they should have the right to do say they want to die.

Just my 5 cents.

BongSoldier OUT.

Even though I do agree, this kinda is hard to do. In medicine not everything is always 100% certain, just like the fact that a disease might be deadly.

Sure, this isn't always the case, but I'm sure we have all heard of some "miracles" in which patients survived despite terrible circumstances. Some of them might have given up and would have asked for assisted suicide, causing them to die. It's a rather "grey area" subject since no one could ever be fully right nor wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion protecting lives comes first, so I'm not in favor of euthanasia, and I think it shoudln't be legalized.

But, what if there is a case when someone is in a coma? Then keeping him alive might save his life, but his family may not be able to afford it and thus they may have huge problems. What if keeping him alive leads to his children not being able to go to school?

Wouldn't it make more sense to let him die then, and prevent the others in his family from being affected?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion protecting lives comes first, so I'm not in favor of euthanasia, and I think it shoudln't be legalized.

What if the person is terminally ill and is essentially going to die anyway, would it not be the better option in stead of prolonging their suffering? And why let people suffer if no treatment will make them change their minds? It is their choice.

You may have that opinion and that's fine but I don't think that gives us the right to decide over the lives of others, it's taking away their personal freedom considering it's something that strictly concerns them.

Edited by The Gr8 M80
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion protecting lives comes first, so I'm not in favor of euthanasia, and I think it shoudln't be legalized.

What if the person is terminally ill and is essentially going to die anyway, would it not be the better option in stead of prolonging their suffering? And why let people suffer if no treatment will make them change their minds? It is their choice.

You may have that opinion and that's fine but I don't think that gives us the right to decide over the lives of others, it's taking away their personal freedom considering it's something that strictly concerns them.

Do you also think that suicide is one's choice and people should not be discouraged from committing one? Its entirely fine if you think that way, I'm just curious because that'd be direct implication from what you said about personal freedom.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In my opinion protecting lives comes first, so I'm not in favor of euthanasia, and I think it shoudln't be legalized.

What if the person is terminally ill and is essentially going to die anyway, would it not be the better option in stead of prolonging their suffering? And why let people suffer if no treatment will make them change their minds? It is their choice.

You may have that opinion and that's fine but I don't think that gives us the right to decide over the lives of others, it's taking away their personal freedom considering it's something that strictly concerns them.

Do you also think that suicide is one's choice and people should not be discouraged from committing one? Its entirely fine if you think that way, I'm just curious because that'd be direct implication from what you said about personal freedom.

 

Refer to what was said before this. I'm saying it should be legal in cases where the person is going to die anyway so the doctor in that case would only be doing everything they can to prolong their suffering by letting them go on (unless that's what the person wants but that is rarely the case) or if the person has severe uncurable mental conditions, diseases or suffering from very severe depression, treatment has been tried to combat this but it hasn't worked. Sure that's not giving them the direct personal freedom to commit one whenever they choose but it's giving them a way out if they truly do feel that way because you can obviously suffer from suicidal thoughts but be cured of those thoughts, if anything I know because I'm an example of that myself and it's something that can affect perfectly normal healthy people at some point in life. There are however people who are not and live nearly their entire lives in treatment essentially costing government resources feeling that going on with life is constant living hell, in particular mentally ill people which I know because I've seen myself and have family members who work with them. In that case I think they should be granted their wish and be able to go peacefully.

Edited by The Gr8 M80
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

In my opinion protecting lives comes first, so I'm not in favor of euthanasia, and I think it shoudln't be legalized.

What if the person is terminally ill and is essentially going to die anyway, would it not be the better option in stead of prolonging their suffering? And why let people suffer if no treatment will make them change their minds? It is their choice.

You may have that opinion and that's fine but I don't think that gives us the right to decide over the lives of others, it's taking away their personal freedom considering it's something that strictly concerns them.

Do you also think that suicide is one's choice and people should not be discouraged from committing one? Its entirely fine if you think that way, I'm just curious because that'd be direct implication from what you said about personal freedom.

 

Refer to what was said before this. I'm saying it should be legal in cases where the person is going to die anyway so the doctor in that case would only be doing everything they can to prolong their suffering by letting them go on (unless that's what the person wants but that is rarely the case) or if the person has severe uncurable mental conditions, diseases or suffering from very severe depression, treatment has been tried to combat this but it hasn't worked. Sure that's not giving them the direct personal freedom to commit one whenever they choose but it's giving them a way out if they truly do feel that way because you can obviously suffer from suicidal thoughts but be cured of those thoughts, if anything I know because I'm an example of that myself and it's something that can affect perfectly normal healthy people at some point in life. There are however people who are not and live nearly their entire lives in treatment essentially costing government resources feeling that going on with life is constant living hell, in particular mentally ill people which I know because I've seen myself and have family members who work with them. In that case I think they should be granted their wish and be able to go peacefully.

 

From personal experience, I know what it feels like to have a terminally ill family member. My grandfather has dementia and is in the 3rd stage, or the final stage. It's hard to deal with the stress of knowing that any day he could go. In cases like these, wouldn't it be at least a slight bit ethical to end the suffering of someone like my grandfather. It's not that I would want him to go, but it might be better to end his suffering. Shouldn't assisted suicide be allowed for people like this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another really tricky thing is the patient's family.

 

Who decides the patient's life? If they are unable to make their decision (mentally disabled, physically unable etc), then is it ethical for the patient's family to choose assisted suicide for the patient? This is when a good intention can be used as a double-edged sword. Who knows if the family is using this as a way to kill the patient for family property/will/etc.?

 

Who decides that the patient is suffering? Once we start to put people's lives in others' free control, it gets dangerous and hard to control. 

 

I personally think assisted suicide should not be allowed. I am not against some of the really good arguments for the sake of the patient, but there are actually so many problems that could arise from this policy that it's not worth the risk. I cannot imagine how much assisted suicide can be abused. We're dealing with human lives here, I'd say just be careful. Of course, unless if there is some kind of way that can make an absolute objective judgment on the extent of pain that the patient is going through, I mean even then it's really the patient's decision. Just because we assume no one likes suffering, does't mean we can make an assumption on if the patient wants to keep on living or pass away. What if they are willing to endure the pain and living another day being able to see their loved ones visit them makes them happy? It's just such a difficult issue.

 

Thank you for opening the topic, op.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another really tricky thing is the patient's family.

 

Who decides the patient's life? If they are unable to make their decision (mentally disabled, physically unable etc), then is it ethical for the patient's family to choose assisted suicide for the patient? This is when a good intention can be used as a double-edged sword. Who knows if the family is using this as a way to kill the patient for family property/will/etc.?

 

Who decides that the patient is suffering? Once we start to put people's lives in others' free control, it gets dangerous and hard to control. 

 

I personally think assisted suicide should not be allowed. I am not against some of the really good arguments for the sake of the patient, but there are actually so many problems that could arise from this policy that it's not worth the risk. I cannot imagine how much assisted suicide can be abused. We're dealing with human lives here, I'd say just be careful. Of course, unless if there is some kind of way that can make an absolute objective judgment on the extent of pain that the patient is going through, I mean even then it's really the patient's decision. Just because we assume no one likes suffering, does't mean we can make an assumption on if the patient wants to keep on living or pass away. What if they are willing to endure the pain and living another day being able to see their loved ones visit them makes them happy? It's just such a difficult issue.

 

Thank you for opening the topic, op.

I'm referring to situations where the patient himself/herself has stated what they want in which case there's no doubt. The family shouldn't really have much influence in the matter unless they have to pay for the treatment. One can leave their wish in a will for situations like this though not many do, and I think if it is for sure known that the person is going to die, they're suffering and the person is completely unable to say something for themselves a decision can be made. Because if they can't do that then they're not going to be able to spend time with their loved ones either.

 

I understand your line of thinking here but I don't see why it's reason for assisted suicide being entirely disallowed even when it is known that the patient himself/herself wants it, if the problem is just other people abusing it, then clear limits can be established.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In principle I think that assisted suicide should be legal. Everybody should have a right to die just as they have a right to live. Being certain that somebody is in the right state of mind and is making a decision which is a long term decision is difficult, but just because it is difficult I don't think it means we're entitled as a society to prevent every single person from dying in their own country and amongst their family in a manner of their own choosing.

 

Very strict safeguards would be needed, but if somebody is a competent adult making a firm and uncoerced decision, and they are aware of the alternatives (having been offered the very best in palliative treatment and aware of how comfortable it could be for them), then I think it is the right thing to do. It makes a hell of a lot more sense than prosecuting everyone who assists a loved one to die. After all, we allow people to make every single other decision about their own lives. We allow people to refuse life saving treatment if they are competent. We 'allow' people to commit suicide at their own hand. In the USA the state still kills people in prisons. It seems to me a tremendous hypocrisy that where somebody has chosen this in their right mind and it could alleviate suffering, THAT is when everybody throws their hands up and goes 'oh no'.

 

I think it would have to be a legal, multi-stage process under strict supervision at every step. However we should do our utmost to make it possible. Public opinion (in the UK) is actually pro-euthanasia but every time it is discussed in parliament it gets rejected pretty quickly, which always surprises me. And in the interim, people have to go to Switzerland if they wish to end their lives. Accompanying family members are still forced to sit in the grey legal area, in that nobody has ever yet been prosecuted for going with them - but technically they could be prosecuted, which is in my opinion a terrible burden to hang over their heads. Again, the courts here refuse to make a clear ruling but just turn a blind eye for now.

 

With regard to doctors then there is a precedent - doctors can already opt out of providing abortion, for instance, if they are uncomfortable with it. However there is a duty for them to refer on to a colleague who can do these things. I imagine this would be very similar.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...