1
   

Euthanasia/ Assisted Suicide (Revised Title)

 
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Sat 2 Apr, 2005 10:29 pm
Gelisgesti wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:

people that spread disinformation underr the guise of being knowledgable.


It's disgusting isn't it? These people make me sick as well. If ignorance is the greatest crime, then what these people do should warrent the death penalty.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 12:25 am
Some stats Geli might find interesting:
http://www.cureresearch.com/p/parkinsons_disease/basics.htm

When the doctor says somebody has died of Parkinsons and/or complications of Parkinsons, and I've watched that same person go from a healthy adult to one that is pretty well incapacitated, I tend to believe the doctor. Especially when the cause of death is written on the death certificate.

Nevertheless though I know you do not want the disease, Geli, I am glad that you are in the majority of those who can be effectively treated and I wish for you nothing but the best. I do know a couple of other people who have had the disease for years and do pretty well. My brother-in-law and my other friend did not respond to treatment and it progressed very quickly. Now if the information I have been given is wrong, so be it. But I can only go with what I have read and what I have been told.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 01:47 am
Foxfyre wrote:

I tend to believe the doctor.



You believe the doctors in this case, but not the Schiavo case?
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 02:33 am
I definitely think a person over 18 years old has the rite to decide when they are going to die under any circumstances, but as far as receiving assistance, it should only be when the person is terminally ill and has put something in writing.

But, I don't consider removing a feeding tube Euthanasia. I think the family should be able to make that decision even if the person has nothing in writing and can't communicate. Euthanasia is only when a drug is administered by a doctor to end a life. Removal of the feeding tube allows the person to die of natural causes so it's not suicide.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 03:00 am
roverroad wrote:
I definitely think a person over 18 years old has the rite to decide when they are going to die under any circumstances, but as far as receiving assistance, it should only be when the person is terminally ill and has put something in writing.

But, I don't consider removing a feeding tube Euthanasia. I think the family should be able to make that decision even if the person has nothing in writing and can't communicate. Euthanasia is only when a drug is administered by a doctor to end a life. Removal of the feeding tube allows the person to die of natural causes so it's not suicide.

How about not cleaning the room or the patient for months so he/she gets an infection and dies? That's not your doing, because you aren't actually doing anything. Locking the door and letting a dozen chimpanzees run wild in the room while you're at lunch isn't euthanasia either, because all you're doing is having some food and reading the paper.
0 Replies
 
roverroad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 03:49 am
I think Sanitation laws would prevent the cleaning scenario. As far as locking chimps in a room, Animal rites activists would be all over you Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 06:00 am
Quote:
If we're going to say that people who are brain dead are "alive" how does that effect organ donation?


Boomerang- I know that I have mentioned this elsewhere, but technology has put us in a bit of a pickle. In the case of organ donation, it could get pretty sticky.

I think that there needs to be a definition of when HUMAN life ends. Sure, a brain dead person on artificial life support is technically "alive", but is it a human life? Is a person in a PVS, who has a working brain stem, with a beating heart, and breathing lungs a human being, or merely a shell?

As technology becomes more and more sophisticated, I believe that society will have to grapple with these looking at new definitions of what it means to be human. Personally, I think that we have waited too long. We must deal with this problem NOW!
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 07:20 am
maporsche writes
Quote:
You believe the doctors in this case, but not the Schiavo case?


The doctors in the Schiavo case did not say she was brain dead. Some diagnosed PVS. Others did not. Based on some doctor's opinion that she was capable of some responsiveness, based on her priest's testimony that she closed her eyes when he held her hand and prayed for her and then opened her eyes when he said Amen, based on her parents, siblings, and nurses' belief that she was capable of some degree of feeling and awareness, I think there is room for lots of questions. And I will never be convinced that she was 'allowed to die'. I will always believe she was intentionally killed and that she was killed in a most inhumane manner.

I don't know where the truth is regarding what Terri Schiavo could or could not feel, what she could or could not respond to. I do know that when there is question, if we err, we are well advised to err on the side of life. And Phoenix is right, these questions need to be dealt with now.
.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 07:49 am
Roverroad writes
Quote:
Removal of the feeding tube allows the person to die of natural causes


This will be one of the first questions I think we will need to address. Considering all the people with various kinds of illnesses and handicaps who are unable to feed themselves without some kind of assistance, I do not imagine any one will agree they should all not be fed and should be allowed to 'die of natural causes'. And among those who cannot communicate their wishes--the very young and immature, the very old suffering from dementia, the paralyzed, the comatose, the profoundly retarded etc. etc. etc.--who should decide who will be fed and who will die of 'natural causes'?

It is a dangerous slippery slope when we consider nutrition and hydration as medical treatment in the same way that we consider insulin or pace makers or thyroid supplements as medical treatment. If it would be criminal to starve or dehydrate a healthy person to death, we have to think long and hard about killing the most helpless among us in the same manner.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 07:54 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Some stats Geli might find interesting:
http://www.cureresearch.com/p/parkinsons_disease/basics.htm

When the doctor says somebody has died of Parkinsons and/or complications of Parkinsons, and I've watched that same person go from a healthy adult to one that is pretty well incapacitated, I tend to believe the doctor. Especially when the cause of death is written on the death certificate.

Nevertheless though I know you do not want the disease, Geli, I am glad that you are in the majority of those who can be effectively treated and I wish for you nothing but the best. I do know a couple of other people who have had the disease for years and do pretty well. My brother-in-law and my other friend did not respond to treatment and it progressed very quickly. Now if the information I have been given is wrong, so be it. But I can only go with what I have read and what I have been told.

You just do not understand that of which you speak. Just as in Terri's dilemma where those arround her and indeed the rest of the world were suffering more than she .... due to an understandable ignorance.
The term 'Doctor' is very ambiguous. You wouldn't go to a podiatrist for chest pain, or a heart doctor for a bunion. This is far removed from the lay public but need not be.. Anyone that recieves a diagnosis of such import should be counciled to have a second opinion by a specialist.
Look for Terri's autopsy report to read;'cause of death, renal failure with PVS confirmed... but not listed as the primary.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 08:39 am
Geli writes
Quote:
You just do not understand that of which you speak


You may be right as all I have to go on is what I have been told and what I have read, the the possibility or even probability of error is always possible. Did you follow the link I provided? Are the statistics wrong? I have a couple of medical conditions that defy the 'norm' and I have learned as much as I can about them and have learned to live with them. Neither will likely kill me any more than your illness is likely to kill you; yet people have died from one of the conditions I have. I believe that were it not for the illness they had, neither my brother in law nor my friend would have died when they did.

But anyway, I continue to believe when there is life there is hope. The cure for Parkinsons or any of myriad chronic, currently 'uncurable' diseases will be forthcoming at some point. Of that I am certain. I am of the Stephen Hawkings club: when there is life there is hope, and that puts me squarely in the opposition to euthenasia group.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 08:44 am
Uncle
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 3 Apr, 2005 08:45 am
LOL, gotta love ya Geli. Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Apr, 2005 12:30 am
Maybe of interest here, too:

Quote:
Swiss suicide clinic sees number of British clients rise by 700 per cent

By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent
04 April 2005


The number of Britons signing up to the Swiss suicide clinic Dignitas has soared by 700 per cent in the past two years, with 30 of them ending their lives with the charity's help.

The findings from the charity based in Zurich are higher than previously thought and come as peers prepare today to consider the laws on mercy killing in the UK. They show that more than 630 people from Britain have joined Dignitas - which offers assistance to the chronically ill who wish to commit suicide - since Reg Crew was helped to end his life there two years ago. Of those, 30 have travelled to Switzerland, where mercy killing is legal.

Not all of those who have died at Dignitas have been terminally ill. Most were facing prolonged death and suffering from degenerative neurological disorders. The confidential figures analysed by James Plaskitt, a Labour MP and chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Compassion in Dying, shows that an increasing number of patients with severe degenerative illnesses were signing up with Dignitas because voluntary euthanasia is illegal in Britain.

Helping a terminally ill person to end their lives is a serious offence that can bring charges of manslaughter or murder and unless the law is changed in the UK, experts predict a huge increase in so-called "death tourism".

Within four years there are expected to be 1,865 British members of the clinic, which helps people die by administering a lethal dose of barbiturates; 100 of those are expected to travel to Switzerland to die. The figures, based on confidential information from Dignitas, will put new pressure on the Government to review the law.

Today's report by a special House of Lords committee set up to examine whether doctors should be given the power to help terminally ill people end their lives will consider plans put forward by the crossbench peer Lord Joffe. He wants Britain to introduce a system like the one in the US state of Oregon, where doctors can help people who are certified as terminally ill and within six months of dying to end their lives.

A spokesman for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society said: "A negative report on Monday from the Lords will fuel an increase in death tourism."

In 2003, Reg Crew, 74, became the second British man to travel to Zurich to commit suicide, the first to do so publicly. Mrs Z, a woman suffering from an incurable brain disease, was not stopped by the courts in December last year from travelling to Switzerland. There was an inquest after Bob and Jenny Stokes, who were seriously but not terminally ill, committed suicide there.

Lesley Close travelled to Zurich to be with her brother, John, who suffered from motor neurone disease, when he died. Ms Close, who has also seen the Dignitas figures, said yesterday: "If you had seen my brother ... He couldn't speak, stand or swallow. His fervent wish was to have control of the last moments of his life. I am driven by John's death at Dignitas to try to change the law in Britain. He would have preferred to die in the bay window of his flat at sunset with the help of his own GP."
Source
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/30/2022 at 12:50:15