1
   

Do you think...?

 
 
Portal Star
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jan, 2004 11:58 pm
why would it have to be a lethal injection? A person who has just been diagnosed with cancer is fully capable of offing themselves. It seems unfair to put the burden on someone else when one would be capable of killing themselves.

Being that cancer is survivable, I would ride it out. And, if you had the deplorable condition of knowing you were going to die - wouldn't that be an opportunity to do things you were previously afraid to do? You wouldn't have to worry about your body at all - you could go to a bad part of town, go skydiving, do heroin, have sex with strangers, go on a mysterious archeological dig in a foreign country, tie yourself to somthing for some cause... I don't think there is much out there scarier than death.
0 Replies
 
SqUeAkz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 01:26 am
Basiclly because i wouldnt want to kill myself if i had cancer, would you?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 08:49 am
SqUeAkz wrote:
Basiclly because i wouldnt want to kill myself if i had cancer, would you?



Like Phoenix, I had cancer -- non-Hodgkin's lymphoma -- and came perilously close to dying. At one point, my weight was down to 114 lbs. and I looked like an extra from the movie Schindler's List.


Fact was though, I was not in any pain -- and my spirits remained high.

If things had gone on to the point where severe pain came into the picture -- and I determined that there was no hope for reversal (or that it would not be worth the trouble) -- I would have killed myself.

No one is suggesting everyone should kill themselves over cancer or any other kind of situation -- but a person certainly should have the RIGHT to do so.

And except for the fact that we are still a relatively primitive, superstitious animal with a significant percentage of us still in fear of the wrath of a mysterious boogeyman god -- we would allow people knowledgeable about chemicals to aid others in search of a reasonably painless, certain suicide.

That day may come.
0 Replies
 
Laptoploon
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 09:53 am
Friend of mine died of cancer. He was given a month to live but lasted less than a fortnight.

He was too ill and in too much pain to do any of the "once in a lifetime" actions mentioned above.

I've no idea how it must feel to know you have so little time but I would top myself in a heartbeat rather than die the way he did.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 10:17 am
I draw the line with Yukio Mishima, but, even then, it was his choice and his life.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 10:18 am
Frank, you know I share the whole boogeyman god thing, but I do think there is more to it than that. People are worried about abuses, regulation, etc.

Also, that article about "Miswanting" in the NYT Magazine that made such a big impression on me has a bearing here -- what people think they WILL want and what they actually want when the time comes can be very, very different things. I have known and worked with many severely disabled people who thought, before they became disabled, that they would kill themselves if they ever got to that point. But they were functioning, productive, fulfilled people.

That said, I do think the choice should be available to those who really need it, and that there are such people.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 10:49 am
sozobe wrote:
Also, that article about "Miswanting" in the NYT Magazine that made such a big impression on me has a bearing here -- what people think they WILL want and what they actually want when the time comes can be very, very different things. I have known and worked with many severely disabled people who thought, before they became disabled, that they would kill themselves if they ever got to that point. But they were functioning, productive, fulfilled people.


Amen. In fact, the only reason I came back to post was because Squeakz wrote: "Basiclly because i wouldnt want to kill myself if i had cancer, would you?"

Every indication is that until the decision time comes -- nobody knows what he or she will or will not do.

Quote:
That said, I do think the choice should be available to those who really need it, and that there are such people.


I agree with that, too.


Quote:
Frank, you know I share the whole boogeyman god thing, but I do think there is more to it than that. People are worried about abuses, regulation, etc.


Yeah...but...I think the "god doesn't want people to kill themselves" or "it is a sin" plays a much more important role in opposition to "assisted suicides", for instance.

People truly worried about "abuses and regulations" will argue for how the enabling legislation could be written -- how to keep any abuses down to an absolute minimum -- or perhaps to eliminate them.

People opposed because they see it as "going against god" -- don't want the law written no matter how cleverly crafted.

Or at least, that is my opinion.

We're on the same side on this one, Sozobe. Sorry about the "boogeyman" comment, but there are times when I simply must present it that way.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 11:43 am
truth
I agree with what the last few posts have expressed. My only point was that each individual should have the right to die. They should be offered counselling to help them make sure that they are doing the right thing--as THEY see it.
I've always said, as a joke, that if I had a terminal illness I would fly to Mexico City and eat all the delicious foods sold by street vendors--food that almost killed me once, and which was actually good enough to die for--but I'm sure that even if I were serious, I would not want to take such risks if I were very symptomatic, and it would take a lot of pain and disablement for me do decide to check out. As long as I could read a work of good literature, take in great art, enjoy dellicious food and wine, etc. etc. I'd stick around. The problem is a logistical one: by the time I'm that symptomatic I may not be able to off myself wlithout help. That's why I think we should have the right to obtain that help. Society qua goverment should be involved. And that's not an argument for socialism; it's an argument for civilization.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 11:51 am
Well said, JL.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 12:04 pm
truth
Osso, Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 12:23 pm
Portal Star
My best friend died of cancer and she didn't have the energy enough to get out of bed most of the time, so there is no way she could have done any of the things you mentioned. She had saved up a bunch of pain pills for when the time came that she couldn't take the pain anymore. Her plan was to get someone to bring her to the beach near her house and leave her alone. Then she was going to take all those pills she had saved up and die the way she wanted to die. She wanted to spend her last days at home and wanted nothing to do with dying in the hospital. Unfortunately, social services got involved and had her sign papers she didn't understand as she was on strong pain medication. The papers she signed made hospice her legal guardian and she was told that hospice would make her end comfortable. She then decided to go to hospice after constant badgering from social service and that's where she died a very painful death. She suffered terribly at the end because they lied to her. She had a plan and I just wish I had been with her to make sure no one interfered. She told me day by day what she was going through, so this subject really hits home with me.
0 Replies
 
Individual
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 11:19 pm
If someone had a horribly debilitating and painful disease and was on so much medication that they could not possibly be sober, if they asked for you to kill them would you wait for them to get sober before letting them make such an important decision or would you rather not see them go through any more pain and just kill them even though they might not know the consequences of their actions?
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Feb, 2004 11:34 pm
truth
No, I would not kill them without their sober consent. And I may not do it anyway because of the legal consequences. I am not as brave as Dr. Kervorkian. But I think they should be able to get the necessary help from medically/psychologically trained people who would respect their sober and properly informed wishes. Euthanasia should only be performed officially. That means it must be an expression of governmental policy. That's the only way it can be done without someone going to jail because of their compassion.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2004 06:07 am
Re: truth
JLNobody wrote:
No, I would not kill them without their sober consent. And I may not do it anyway because of the legal consequences. I am not as brave as Dr. Kervorkian. But I think they should be able to get the necessary help from medically/psychologically trained people who would respect their sober and properly informed wishes. Euthanasia should only be performed officially. That means it must be an expression of governmental policy. That's the only way it can be done without someone going to jail because of their compassion.


Excellent reply, JL -- and definitely the one I would give also.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Feb, 2004 06:16 am
Agree, JL. At this point in time, it would be political suicide for any official to start a movement backing assisted suicide/euthanasia. A majority of people are still motivated by religious strictures that would deprive people the right to choose their own destiny. Those folks make it their political business to make sure that their "take" on life is foisted on the rest of us who don't believe as they do!
0 Replies
 
Adamanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Feb, 2004 08:01 pm
Montana wrote:
Portal Star
My best friend died of cancer and she didn't have the energy enough to get out of bed most of the time, so there is no way she could have done any of the things you mentioned. She had saved up a bunch of pain pills for when the time came that she couldn't take the pain anymore. Her plan was to get someone to bring her to the beach near her house and leave her alone. Then she was going to take all those pills she had saved up and die the way she wanted to die. She wanted to spend her last days at home and wanted nothing to do with dying in the hospital. Unfortunately, social services got involved and had her sign papers she didn't understand as she was on strong pain medication. The papers she signed made hospice her legal guardian and she was told that hospice would make her end comfortable. She then decided to go to hospice after constant badgering from social service and that's where she died a very painful death. She suffered terribly at the end because they lied to her. She had a plan and I just wish I had been with her to make sure no one interfered. She told me day by day what she was going through, so this subject really hits home with me.


That is just horrible. Makes me sick that this women suffered so the hospice could make money on her being there. This is why my fiancé and I have wills that our families know about that clearly state our wishes. We will do everything possible to make sure that this type of thing never happens to us.

I think I should have the right to determine my own fate in this regard however as others have stated, unless you get lucky in the medical care and support that you get (ie large dosages of morphine etc) it is much more likely that one would be forced to suffer needlessly. As Phoenix stated, there are very few politicians and law makers that would take on this issue not to mention that the extreme power of organized religion would never allow it.

We really have a long way to go as a society.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Feb, 2004 03:49 pm
truth
I agree, Adamanta. Nietzsche once said that it is very cruel to take a man's life, but it is more cruel to take his death. I'm sure he was referring to the types of situations discussed here. I am so pleased to have an intimate doctor friend who will help me (if he outlives me) die with dignity. I've even chosen the chair in my study for that purpose.
0 Replies
 
Aldistar
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Feb, 2004 08:31 pm
Hmmmm...I certainly believe a person should have the right to choose whether they want to linger on or get it over with. When it is a certainty that death is coming soon and nothing but pain to look forward too why would you want to stay? All religious views aside, what would stop you? People argue that you would be abandoning your family, but who's family would wish their loved one to live on in pain just so that they could say they were there? I am not a proponent of suicide, people who kill themselves because their boy/girlfriends break up with them, I feel these people kind of take the easy way out (sorry if this offends anyone, but it is my opinion). I do believe there comes a point when it stops being considered suicide and starts to viewed as a release or even a charitable act. I do kind of lean towards the direction that if you do want to end the pain sooner than later it should be up to you to do it. Don't burden somebody else with the relieving of your suffering. I see pain as a very personal thing, your pain is your own and no one can ever experience what you feel inside yourself. I would not ever offer that up to someone else to deal with, I would do it on my own.
0 Replies
 
SqUeAkz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2004 03:19 pm
I agree Smile
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2004 03:27 pm
Portal Star wrote:
why would it have to be a lethal injection? A person who has just been diagnosed with cancer is fully capable of offing themselves. It seems unfair to put the burden on someone else when one would be capable of killing themselves.

Being that cancer is survivable, I would ride it out. And, if you had the deplorable condition of knowing you were going to die - wouldn't that be an opportunity to do things you were previously afraid to do? You wouldn't have to worry about your body at all - you could go to a bad part of town, go skydiving, do heroin, have sex with strangers, go on a mysterious archeological dig in a foreign country, tie yourself to somthing for some cause... I don't think there is much out there scarier than death.


I have to take some issue with this, Portal Star. Not all cancer is survivable, to state that is naive. Also, as someone who watched their grandmother die of cancer that was diagnosed too late to be treatable, her already failing body was committed to hospital to die, comforted only by a morphine drip. In her final days, she was delirious, and calling out for god to take her. If she had possessed the strength to kill herself, she would have. She wasn't given the option to ponder life's unexplored options. So, yes, I am in favour of the right to die.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Do you think...?
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/09/2024 at 05:32:33