Assisted Suicide

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby eynon81 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:01 am

still an "exit mask" sounds creepy. I wanna go out kicking and screaming, just like grand-dad.
User avatar
eynon81
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 19475
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
Location: Golden, Colorado
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3875 times
Been thanked: 1821 times
Political Leaning: Very Conservative

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby Sandman » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:16 am

eynon81 wrote:still an "exit mask" sounds creepy. I wanna go out kicking and screaming, just like grand-dad.


Sounds like some weird side plot in a "Looper" sequel.
User avatar
Sandman
Mayor
 
Posts: 356
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:23 am
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 86 times
Political Leaning: Libertarian

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby Mathurin » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:48 pm

lil bit wrote:You are confusing DNR with euthanasia.


I am extrapolating involuntary DNR to a very low level of euthanasia, yes.
Because withholding resuscitation is one step, next might be certain life prolonging drugs or treatments, how long until death is the only treatment offered?

If you have faith in this 'new world' humans have created in a small section of the world in very recent history then by all means, go right ahead, I am just far more cynical.

Rest assured, I am totally behind people being able to decide to end their own lives, I am just worried that assisted suicide and government provided healthcare will come together with a euthanistic crash, so its something I want to watch carefully.
Mathurin
Congressman
 
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:58 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 19 times
Political Leaning: Slightly Conservative

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby The Dude » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:53 pm

eynon81 wrote:
Nancy Reagan wrote:Do you agree with helping people leave this earth, or do you consider it assisted suicide? If no foul play is involved, I believe assisted suicide is OK. If I were terminal, I'd rather go when and where I wanted to go.


I'm not against it, although I would regulate it. My quick and dirty is that you'd need too things: 1. a note from a Doctor stating you are dying. 2. a note from a Mental Health Doc stating you do not suffer from any major mental illnesses.

In my system you have to be physically sick but mentally well to off yourself.


Pretty much my opinion on the matter.

However, I do think there are cases where a family member should be allowed to make the decision if the person is terminally ill (doctor) but the person is incapable of conveying they want to go.
Image
User avatar
The Dude
Governor
 
Posts: 4341
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:11 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 277 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby lil bit » Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:47 pm

Mathurin wrote:
lil bit wrote:You are confusing DNR with euthanasia.


I am extrapolating involuntary DNR to a very low level of euthanasia, yes.


Then you are wrong, because it's not the same at all.


Because withholding resuscitation is one step, next might be certain life prolonging drugs or treatments, how long until death is the only treatment offered?



One thing does not follow the other. There are times when it is not in the best interests of the patient to resuscitate them if they suffer a cardiac arrest - which is stating the obvious.

Resuscitation can be painful and invasive and can sometimes mean instead of slipping away peacefully, the person lingers on for perhaps weeks in great discomfort.


It's not a decision that is made without the knowledge of at least the next of kin whenever possible.

You should have read the link properly.


If you have faith in this 'new world' humans have created in a small section of the world in very recent history then by all means, go right ahead, I am just far more cynical.

Rest assured, I am totally behind people being able to decide to end their own lives, I am just worried that assisted suicide and government provided healthcare will come together with a euthanistic crash, so its something I want to watch carefully.


Then you are worrying needlessly.

Watch it carefully by all means, but don't try to make something out of nothing.
'She couldn't help wondering what use Carl had for a double bed in his bachelor establishment' - Rafferty's Legacy -Jane Corrie
lil bit
Senator
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:45 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby The Dharma Bum » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:15 pm

I definitely think euthanasia should definitely be allowed. I wanna go out on my own terms if it ever gets to that, I think many would agree with that view.

Neither society or government has the right to regulate an individual's autonomy in such a manner.
Image
User avatar
The Dharma Bum
Vice President
 
Posts: 11594
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:31 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 3285 times
Been thanked: 617 times
Political Leaning: Anarcho Communist

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby Mathurin » Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:55 am

lil bit wrote:
Mathurin wrote:
lil bit wrote:You are confusing DNR with euthanasia.


I am extrapolating involuntary DNR to a very low level of euthanasia, yes.


Then you are wrong, because it's not the same at all.


Because withholding resuscitation is one step, next might be certain life prolonging drugs or treatments, how long until death is the only treatment offered?



One thing does not follow the other. There are times when it is not in the best interests of the patient to resuscitate them if they suffer a cardiac arrest - which is stating the obvious.


One thing does not _HAVE_ to follow the other, that does not mean one thing does not increase the chances of another.

lil bit wrote:Resuscitation can be painful and invasive and can sometimes mean instead of slipping away peacefully, the person lingers on for perhaps weeks in great discomfort.


Yes, resuscitation can be the the difference between life and death, sometimes that life is not worth living, but that decision is only for the patient to make, maybe next of kin. Not the doctor, and most definitely NOT when the patient has clearly and obviously stated they were opposed to it.


lil bit wrote:It's not a decision that is made without the knowledge of at least the next of kin whenever possible.

You should have read the link properly.


Which part of the link stated the hospital had consent for the DNR.
Maybe you mean: "The trust, which strongly disputes the family's claims, says a doctor did seek Mrs Tracey's informed consent."

At absolute best I see a hospital harrassing a patient they dont want to treat anymore into an agreement.


lil bit wrote:
If you have faith in this 'new world' humans have created in a small section of the world in very recent history then by all means, go right ahead, I am just far more cynical.

Rest assured, I am totally behind people being able to decide to end their own lives, I am just worried that assisted suicide and government provided healthcare will come together with a euthanistic crash, so its something I want to watch carefully.


Then you are worrying needlessly.

Watch it carefully by all means, but don't try to make something out of nothing.


Yeah, I guess nobody has ever used euthanasia to clear out hospitals to 'make room' or otherwise used the concept of reduced public expenditure as an excuse to practice euthanasia.
Mathurin
Congressman
 
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 10:58 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 19 times
Political Leaning: Slightly Conservative

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby lil bit » Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:33 am

Mathurin wrote:
lil bit wrote:
Mathurin wrote:
lil bit wrote:You are confusing DNR with euthanasia.


I am extrapolating involuntary DNR to a very low level of euthanasia, yes.


Then you are wrong, because it's not the same at all.


Because withholding resuscitation is one step, next might be certain life prolonging drugs or treatments, how long until death is the only treatment offered?



One thing does not follow the other. There are times when it is not in the best interests of the patient to resuscitate them if they suffer a cardiac arrest - which is stating the obvious.


One thing does not _HAVE_ to follow the other, that does not mean one thing does not increase the chances of another.


In this case it does. Why should it?

lil bit wrote:Resuscitation can be painful and invasive and can sometimes mean instead of slipping away peacefully, the person lingers on for perhaps weeks in great discomfort.


Yes, resuscitation can be the the difference between life and death, sometimes that life is not worth living, but that decision is only for the patient to make, maybe next of kin. Not the doctor, and most definitely NOT when the patient has clearly and obviously stated they were opposed to it.


Unfortunately, doctors aren't miracle workers and cannot prevent people dying from terminal illnesses.


lil bit wrote:It's not a decision that is made without the knowledge of at least the next of kin whenever possible.

You should have read the link properly.


Which part of the link stated the hospital had consent for the DNR.
Maybe you mean: "The trust, which strongly disputes the family's claims, says a doctor did seek Mrs Tracey's informed consent."

At absolute best I see a hospital harrassing a patient they dont want to treat anymore into an agreement.


The husband is grief stricken and looking for someone to blame for his wife's death from terminal lung cancer and a broken neck, when there is no one to blame.

Nobody killed her. She died.

Even while his wife was intubated after the road accident, he lived in hope.
He was told by a doctor that if there were problems with ventilation being withdrawn, they would let her "slip away" but he was not aware of the first DNR notice until after it had been cancelled.
Although known as DNR notices, they are officially termed 'Do not attempt cardio-pulmonary resuscitation' forms.
Mr Tracey looked up cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) but did not think it was relevant in his wife's case as she did not have a heart condition, and he did not speak to the doctors about it


As you can see, he's not too bright which doesn't help. He didn't have a problem with the doctor telling him they would let her slip away, but didn't realise that meant she would need a DNR order so that any doctor reading her notes would know know she was to be allowed to die.

Asking a patient or their next of kin to agree to a DNR order isn't always best thing to do, as it just adds to the fear and distress of the ill person and their family.

By law doctors are supposed to ask, which is why this poor woman was "badgered". The staff had to have a decision from her, which she refused to give.

As she was mentally capable and conscious, it was up to her to decide - not her husband or family.



He reassured his shocked wife, who was in tears, that neither he nor their daughters agreed to the notice


The poor woman obviously didn't understand, and her family didn't try to reassure her or get hold of a nurse to talk to her about it.

Stupid people.


lil bit wrote:
If you have faith in this 'new world' humans have created in a small section of the world in very recent history then by all means, go right ahead, I am just far more cynical.

Rest assured, I am totally behind people being able to decide to end their own lives, I am just worried that assisted suicide and government provided healthcare will come together with a euthanistic crash, so its something I want to watch carefully.


Then you are worrying needlessly.

Watch it carefully by all means, but don't try to make something out of nothing.


Yeah, I guess nobody has ever used euthanasia to clear out hospitals to 'make room' or otherwise used the concept of reduced public expenditure as an excuse to practice euthanasia.


Not as far as I know. I can't speak for the US, but I doubt it happens there, either.

You're just looking for a reason to discredit UHC.

On the one hand you have this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/ ... /dnr.shtml


It's difficult to make a judgment as we don't know her health problems, but this is sadly only too common:

Age Concern warned that the UK's elderly feared they were at risk of not being revived simply because of their age.

Arguing that DNRs might be a form of ageism in the NHS, a spokeseman said "Age Concern will not rest until the 'writing off' of patients' lives on the basis of their age has been stamped out."


That's not really the case. Elderly people are far more likely to suffer broken ribs and pneumonia if DNR is successful, so they will die anyway.

Also elderly people sometimes panic when they are asked about DNR orders. They immediately think the doctor is expecting their heart to stop, when there may only be a tiny chance of that happening.

On the other hand, you have this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2819149.stm

This woman knows exactly what can DNR involve.

Her granddaughter Dr Claire Polack, a GP in Edinburgh, told the BBC her grandmother was right that the medical profession did not discuss the issue of resuscitation enough

I think that's true. In the case of cardiac arrest caused by shock or trauma, DNR is vital.

But not when a patient has died because they were terminally ill.
'She couldn't help wondering what use Carl had for a double bed in his bachelor establishment' - Rafferty's Legacy -Jane Corrie
lil bit
Senator
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:45 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby eynon81 » Thu Nov 15, 2012 10:45 am

The Dude wrote:However, I do think there are cases where a family member should be allowed to make the decision if the person is terminally ill (doctor) but the person is incapable of conveying they want to go.


I used to believe this, then I became a public defender and saw how many people treat their families like shit. Perhaps, in these situations you should have a contested hearing, basically the family must show that they don't want to murder the person.
User avatar
eynon81
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 19475
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
Location: Golden, Colorado
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3875 times
Been thanked: 1821 times
Political Leaning: Very Conservative

Re: Assisted Suicide

Postby exploited » Thu Nov 15, 2012 11:47 am

I was talking about assisted suicide with a friend the other day... and I ended up trying to explain my point of view using this analogy:

"If you have a dog, and that dog gets brutally sick, and can no longer behave like a dog, and can't do any of the things it used to, and is clearly unhappy and suffering from alot of pain, what do you do? You put it down. And yet we don't extend this same courtesy to fully-cognitive human beings that say they don't want to live any longer. We show more respect, and offer more dignity, to dogs than we do human beings."
User avatar
exploited
Vice President
 
Posts: 20734
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 2144 times
Been thanked: 1680 times

PreviousNext

Return to Society

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest