Should euthanasia be legalized?

Medical doctors in the USA take an oath "to do no harm".

At issue relative to the posted question, is the definition of harm.

I would propose that "harm" is entirely defined by the perception of the person in question in this case.

I think it should be permitted provided an individual is determined by a board of competent medical authority to be terminally ill and not expected to survive beyond a set time period (6 months? a year?), the person in question wishes it and is mentally competent to make that decision and has been provided full counseling on what is involved by a medical authority that is independent of the process otherwise.

Harm! It depends what you consider is the greater harm. To allow a person to live in pain and discomfort and be subjected to a lingering death. Or to die peacefully and with dignity

Which generates the greater harm?

Life or death?

I think Fishin' has a pretty good "bead" on this one and has saved me the time of typing a lengthy reply by stating my position quite clearly and concisely.

It's irrelevant. If I stick pins in your neck against your will I'd be arrested for assult. If you willingly ask me to do it I'd be an acupuncturist and you'd pay me for the service.

Are they both "harm"?

It should be legal but it should be carefully administered. There's degrees that someone is cognizant that could have something to do with it -- people are taken off of life support legally. It is a suicide so it makes it very difficult for people to accept something which has always seemed to be more of a tragedy than suffering through a terminal illness. This is one thing I'd have to see a consensus of doctors agree on and then the government can act based on that. I doubt any of us will see this happen in our lifetime in the U.S. What other countries have laws permitting it?

The issue is how is harm defined by the MD in charge of the patient.

If the oath is to "do no harm", than the MD must determine in his/her own mind, which is the greater harm. Is it more harmful to the patient to live or to die by direction of the practicing MD.

It should never be legalized in the USA and it never will be.

It's questions like this that make me think it's too bad we don't all live in villages where some sort of council of elders has the greatest say -- where the intervention of well-meaning but impersonal courts of law didn't threaten to turn a humane action into an inhumane one. Unfortunately, there's no available arbiter with the authority to make decisions on euthanasia outside of the rule of law.

I hesitantly say that yes, I think euthanasia should be legal, because I think it is a humane practice (when requested by the patient in question!). At the same time, bringing it into the public sphere subjects it to all sorts of necessary hoops and red tape, and of course opens up the possibility that some individuals will find ways to abuse such a system to, say, get to their inheritance before it's spent on medical care.

Lightwiz --

I'm pretty sure it's legal -- or at least allowed -- in the Netherlands. My gf's stepfather had talked about going there when he was diagnosed with cancer. Anyone know the present status of the law in Oregon?

NH, I doubt that you could support the blanket statement that it will never be legalized in the US--never being, as it were, much too long a time period for you to accurately foresee. However, i will give you that it is unlikely in the foreseeable future. The strident minority who continue to make a major issue of abortion would have a field day with that one. Fishin' kinda spoiled everyone's fun by comin' in here with such a cogent and succinct statement. Were it ever to be considered for legislation, the mechanics of the process would become the major issue.

Strange as it may seem at times life. I watched my father-in-law die a lingering death and all anyone could say when he finally passed was thank God. What do you think the greater harm was in that instance?

Is life ( in any form ) better than death?

Who really knows. Has anyone returned from the dead to describe what it's like to be dead?

When patients and family request death from an MD, it's usually because either the family perceives the patient is in severe pain, or the patient states that the pain is unbearable.

Issue:Is it necessary to allow a patient to suffer in pain?

No. The patient can be medicated to the point of no pain, and still be a viable individual.

Consider this: Do families want the patient to die, so that they the family are relieved of their emotional suffering?

To me it's like telling someone they can't commit suicide. I, for one, don't advocate killing someone who has not requested it; if the patient is unable to express a desire to die or there is no living will sufficiently clear to instruct a course of action in a given situation, a "normal" course of treatment should be adhered to.

If, however, someone is able to say, "I want to die," but is physically unable to carry this out, then the means should be provided. (Of course, here I would also suggest a number of caveats, including that the state of mind of the patient be evaluated.) Similarly, if an individual is has specified that if such-and-such should happen to put them down their wishes should be respected. In the latter example I think the wishes of the family should be able to come into play to contradict the death wish to a certain extent, but otherwise should be honored.

Such a decision should NEVER (in my humble, of course) be undertaken by a doctor. If a patient refuses treatment, as Christian Scientists and Scientologists do, should the doctor ignore their wishes and treat them so as not to violate the word (if not the spirit) of the Hippocratic oath)? I don't mean to suggest that the two scenarios are equivalent, just that they have some similarities that I think shed some light on the situation.

(Incidentally, the last example comes up because someone the gf works with is a Christian Scientist and last year had a dental problem that was easily treatable but very nearly killed her because she is not allowed treatment, and a number of people who know her expressed a desire to force her to undergo treatment.)

Does that really matter. Is there a heaven,hell,God or nothing at all nobody knows. We will have to die to find out and of course we all will,die that is. The question is should death under certain conditions be given a little nudge.

One must ask whether God has intended life to have a purpose. If life has a purpose and that purpose has been pre-determined by God, what human has any right to interfer with the will of God?

When the patient dies naturally, that act has fulfilled the will of God.

I guess my concern is that I would like to have the option. Our family is not rich, but through planning, we have been able to meet our basic needs and still be able to do some traveling. The prospect of robbing my family of our investments/savings in order to keep me alive is frightening.