[Butters 2011]

Last time this topic was done was way back in 2008 by Typhus, so I think it's fine to bring this subject up again, especially as it's seen a fair amount of debates in the recent years.

What are your views on euthanasia? Should it be made legal to end someone's life, if all their life is is suffering and pain?

Imagine going to hospital and sitting by the bed of one of your family members that you love to pieces, only for them to be a vegetable, unable to do anything in their life, even such mundane tasks as going to the toilet, or even being able to communicate with those around them. What if this person was able to somehow tell you that they didn't want to carry on with their life anymore, and wish to end it right there and then, but not being able to due to some law that goes against this? If a person has been given no chance of getting better at all, therefore being bed-bound for the rest of their life, suffering through pain and whatnot every day, why should their loved ones not be able to help them end their life, with the victim's wishes?

For me, I'm all for it, but only in circumstances where there is no hope for the person, and they have agreed to go through with it. It's their life at the end of the ay, and if they chose that they don't want to carry on anymore, why should a law prevent them from ending all their suffering?

[Chunkyman]

Yes, it should be made legal. It's not the governments business to dictate to people how they are going to die. If someone is suffering and wants to die, it should be their choice and not the governments or anyone else's.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Thursday, Apr 26 2012, 16:39)

Yes, it should be made legal. It's not the governments business to dictate to people how they are going to die. If someone is suffering and wants to die, it should be their choice and not the governments or anyone else's.

The only concern from my perspective is whether it's legalisation would put undue pressure on people to end their lives at a time that's convenient for those around them. Or, more worryingly, suffers of locked-in syndromes and the suchlike having their lives ended at the behest of a loved one because they cannot express that they do not want to be euthanised. For sane, consenting adults free of unreasonable external influences, then go ahead.

[Typhus]

I believe euthanasia is a very useful tool for ensuring the progression of society. Have you ever considered how miserable old people are? They're unable to acknowledge anything positive about the world they live in, they're luddites who seem to despise technology and, above all, they are a ticking time bomb of horrible diseases.
The honest truth is that I don't see any benefit in their existence.

Now, I'm obviously not advocating a campaign of boundless slaughter against our aged population. But they're dead weight, as are certain disabled people. And apart from trite arguments based on compassion and emotion, I honestly can't see a purpose for them.

So if they want to die, we should actively encourage them to end their life in a dignified, clean manner. No one in society should be reduced to hanging themselves or cutting open their wrists. It should be a clean transition, as swift and painless as possible.
But make it available to everyone, not just the old and crippled.

It could be a real leap forward for our society.

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Thursday, Apr 26 2012, 17:13)

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Thursday, Apr 26 2012, 16:39) Yes, it should be made legal. It's not the governments business to dictate to people how they are going to die. If someone is suffering and wants to die, it should be their choice and not the governments or anyone else's. The only concern from my perspective is whether it's legalisation would put undue pressure on people to end their lives at a time that's convenient for those around them. Or, more worryingly, suffers of locked-in syndromes and the suchlike having their lives ended at the behest of a loved one because they cannot express that they do not want to be euthanised. For sane, consenting adults free of unreasonable external influences, then go ahead.

For me, personally, if a member of your family or a loved one has locked-in syndrome, or something of a similiar nature, resulting in the victim not being able to communicate at all, letting you know what their wishes are, then I believe this is where the law should allow you to choose whether to end their life or not. Take a realistic look at it - would you really want to 'live' the rest of your life out if you had locked-in syndrome? Would you want all your loved ones to have to see that everyday of their life, to have to foot the bill just for you to lay there, day in day out.

I believe the only reason they haven't made this legal yet is so that people can't off a member of their family who has an illness and claim that they asked for this to be done.

I've seen stories in the paper where old people have killed their partner with a pillow or something, due to the other half having some form of illness of which they just couldn't bear to be around anymore.

[El_Diablo]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Thursday, Apr 26 2012, 10:13)

For sane, consenting adults free of unreasonable external influences, then go ahead.

pretty much sums it up.

there's no reason someone should have to suffer if they decide they do not want to based on their prospects for recovery (or not).

[SagaciousKJB]

The thing that bothers me about it is that I have seen a few documentaries or shows about this type of thing. Oregon actually passed a law for it in 2009 making it legal.

In any case, the thing that bothers me is that there's now a bit of a market for purchasing assisted suicide from a doctor to administer it. I really don't believe that is right personally. I think that if a person wants to end their life, that is an inalienable right and choice that no law or circumstance can take away from them. I think the exception is people who would for other reasons be unable to take such an action themselves, such as stroke victims or paraplegics or something of that nature who are completely incapable of such an action but still in their right mind to make such a choice.

However, to think that there are people who will be selling such a service to fully able bodied adults who could do the job themselves seems somewhat wrong and most importantly to me ripe for exploitation. I mean, how many people are sold life insurance or new long distance service by a convincing salesmen? What happens when there's some guy going out there selling death at wholesale prices to all the listless seniors? "Come on Martha, you can't tell me that life hasn't become boring and not worth living. How about your son, hmm? I bet he never calls." I feel like that might be the easiest sales job ever...

I think that in most cases, a person who has reached the end of their journey will end it willingly if that's what they wish. As I said it's a bit of an inalienable right... They could make as many laws as they wanted, but it wouldn't stop people from finding a means to kill themselves. A lot of the time the biggest challenge to some is finding a way to make it look "natural" so it doesn't bother their loved ones.

Personally I think that if you want to kill yourself, and you're capable of doing it yourself, you should. There shouldn't be some interjecting third party to make money in the middle. On the other hand, if a family member is suffering and unable to do do it themselves, it is unthinkable to ask another family member to end it, so then of course I could see that type of service being well worth the cost. As I said though, it just seems like exploitation any other way.

With that in mind, I think that it should be legal for a person to seek the assistance of another person to kill them for monetary compensation, only so long as they are significantly disabled, immobile or otherwise physically incapacitated, but in good mental health. On top of that, perhaps even make it against the law for such a procedure to be advertised or solicited. Basically try to prevent any kind of "assisted suicide market".

Like I said, it's just too ripe for exploitation... Imagine the funeral industry as it is already, but then imagine when you're lovely dear old grandma and grandpa go looking for a plot that the guy starts asking, "What can I do to get you in this grave today folks?" Heh, just to be a little lighthearted.

[Typhus]

QUOTE (SagaciousKJB @ Friday, Apr 27 2012, 11:56)

What happens when there's some guy going out there selling death at wholesale prices to all the listless seniors? "Come on Martha, you can't tell me that life hasn't become boring and not worth living. How about your son, hmm? I bet he never calls." I feel like that might be the easiest sales job ever...

Come now, what's wrong with that? Shouldn't we applaud the endeavour of people who can turn death itself into a commodity?
In actual fact, the complete legalisation of euthanasia could well create a lot of jobs of this nature.
And what will result from it? A few hurt feelings perhaps, but more importantly we will demystify death. And people will perhaps be at peace at the idea. They may even see the ending of life as a liberating experience, clearing away the old and rotten crops to make way for the new.

And imagine that, imagine a world where we weren't afraid of death. I think it would be a wonderful place to live.

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (Typhus @ Thursday, Apr 26 2012, 20:09)

I believe euthanasia is a very useful tool for ensuring the progression of society. Have you ever considered how miserable old people are? They're unable to acknowledge anything positive about the world they live in, they're luddites who seem to despise technology and, above all, they are a ticking time bomb of horrible diseases. The honest truth is that I don't see any benefit in their existence. Now, I'm obviously not advocating a campaign of boundless slaughter against our aged population. But they're dead weight, as are certain disabled people. And apart from trite arguments based on compassion and emotion, I honestly can't see a purpose for them. So if they want to die, we should actively encourage them to end their life in a dignified, clean manner. No one in society should be reduced to hanging themselves or cutting open their wrists. It should be a clean transition, as swift and painless as possible. But make it available to everyone, not just the old and crippled. It could be a real leap forward for our society.

Going maybe slightly off-topic here, but you sound like someone who believes in the practise of Utilitarian Bioethics?

[GTA_stu]

I think it should be allowed for severely disabled people, but only if they are judged to be of sound mental health and there should be other requirements too. I'm totally against the idea of people being able to choose for their loved ones, because it will innevitably be abused by those who want to make money. Plus, what if the person doesn't want to have the plug pulled? One of my teachers back in secondary school told us of this case where a man was in full paralysis, and his family were campaigning for him to be able to be euthanised. Eventually after a while it was noticed that he could twitch his eye a little bit, and they were able to communicate with him and they found out that in fact he didn't want to die. He wanted to see his daughters grow up and get married.

Nobody should be able to have their fate decided by someone else, because only that person knows whether they want to die or not. Even if they have it in their will "When I'm in a vegetated state I'd like to be allowed to die" it shouldn't be allowed imo, because people can change their minds.

And in response to Typhus' arguments, I think that's going down a very slippery slope and one which would greatly diminish society, not improve it. You seem to be advocating some sort of Futurama style suicide booth. And what is so important about "demistifying death", as you put it? Death is mysterious and it always will be, making it more prevalent in society won't change that fact. Death is supposed to be feared, it's a natural instict which helps us survive. Life is worth living for, it's precious and there's a reason we spend so much time trying to preserve it. That's the way it should be.

[Irviding]

QUOTE

ut only if they are judged to be of sound mental health and there should be other requirements too. I'm totally against the idea of people being able to choose for their loved ones, because it will innevitably be abused by those who want to make money.

I agree completely with this point, but -

QUOTE

Nobody should be able to have their fate decided by someone else, because only that person knows whether they want to die or not. Even if they have it in their will "When I'm in a vegetated state I'd like to be allowed to die" it shouldn't be allowed imo, because people can change their minds.

In cases of a vegetated state, can't you argue that their fate has already been decided? They wouldn't be alive if it weren't for technology, and furthermore, I fail to see why we should actually rollback rights on matters like this and take that out of the hands of the next of kin. When my cousin had his car accident and was in a vegetative state, we waited about a week or so and it was said by the doctors that there was no chance of him coming back. My aunt made the decision to pull the plug and his organs were donated, and I believe 3 people were saved. What is the better option? The chance that he might not want that so allow him to sit in a hospital bed on life support for god knows how many years.

[Typhus]

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Friday, May 4 2012, 03:32)

And in response to Typhus' arguments, I think that's going down a very slippery slope and one which would greatly diminish society, not improve it. You seem to be advocating some sort of Futurama style suicide booth. And what is so important about "demistifying death", as you put it? Death is mysterious and it always will be, making it more prevalent in society won't change that fact. Death is supposed to be feared, it's a natural instict which helps us survive. Life is worth living for, it's precious and there's a reason we spend so much time trying to preserve it. That's the way it should be.

Fear of Death led to man creating God to ease his uneasy mind. And that creation grew and grew, swallowing up logic, progress and a great many human lives.
Never underestimate how much damage a frightened human can do. By making death a common, desirable thing, we can rid the world of a great many evils. We can encourage people to live in the here and now, no longer bound to nostalgia and bitterness.
And we will eventually progress, because societal respect will shift from the old generation to the young. Because we will stop seeing the mewling, whining older humans as something to be respected and finally respect the ambition and drive of youth.
Now wouldn't that be progress?

[Butters 2011]

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Friday, May 4 2012, 03:32)

Nobody should be able to have their fate decided by someone else, because only that person knows whether they want to die or not. Even if they have it in their will "When I'm in a vegetated state I'd like to be allowed to die" it shouldn't be allowed imo, because people can change their minds.

But this is where one of the problems comes into play. If someone is unable to communicate with those around them, how are we supposed to know what their real wishes are? Yes, they could end up getting better one day and living their life as normal again, but how long should we wait for that? You stated about the man who got better and decided he didn't want to die, but wanted to see his daughter get married etc...well obviously he did, but what about when he was in a vegative state...maybe he was secretly crying out that he wished to have his life ended.

[GTA_stu]

QUOTE (Irviding @ Friday, May 4 2012, 04:21)

In cases of a vegetated state, can't you argue that their fate has already been decided? They wouldn't be alive if it weren't for technology, and furthermore, I fail to see why we should actually rollback rights on matters like this and take that out of the hands of the next of kin. When my cousin had his car accident and was in a vegetative state, we waited about a week or so and it was said by the doctors that there was no chance of him coming back. My aunt made the decision to pull the plug and his organs were donated, and I believe 3 people were saved. What is the better option? The chance that he might not want that so allow him to sit in a hospital bed on life support for god knows how many years.

Just to clarify my previous post, when I was talking about a vegetative state I meant purely in a sense they are full paralysed in the body. I didn't mean completely brain dead also. I can accept that with a person who is fully paralysed and their brains are virtually dead then pulling the plug should be up to the next of kin. However, if the brain activity is still there then I think the issue becomes a lot more complicated.

We're all familiar with stories of people waking up from comas, even after decades in rare cases. People who are fully paralysed, but still maintain a healthy mind function can still live happy lives. It's not a death sentence by any means, although I understand how people can feel it might be and I myself would probably rather die in that circumstance. But then I don't know how I'd react in that situation, I might still enjoy life and seeing my loved ones. Unless you're certain it's what they want, then how can you make a decision like that for a person? Why put the rights of people who want to die, over the rights of people that want to live?

QUOTE (Typhus)

Fear of Death led to man creating God to ease his uneasy mind. And that creation grew and grew, swallowing up logic, progress and a great many human lives.

You're oversimplifying things a bit there. Belief in a deity/deities was around for tens of thousands of years and the reasons were wider than just a fear of death. Also, to then directly connect that to religious wars, supression of science, and supression of ideas which challenged religion is a massive leap and one which is flawed.

QUOTE

By making death a common, desirable thing, we can rid the world of a great many evils.

What evils will we rid the world of by making death "desirable" or "common"?

QUOTE

And we will eventually progress, because societal respect will shift from the old generation to the young. Because we will stop seeing the mewling, whining older humans as something to be respected and finally respect the ambition and drive of youth. Now wouldn't that be progress?

Now you just sound incredibly radical and slightly crazy. Progress how? How the hell would treating older people as 2nd class citizens who are detested and loathed be a good thing? Honestly Typhus, sometimes you can make some interesting points, but other times you just sound deluded.

[El_Diablo]

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Friday, May 4 2012, 20:16)

What evils will we rid the world of by making death "desirable" or "common"?

the superstition that death is somehow a big deal, when it's not at all.

[Irviding]

QUOTE (El_Diablo @ Friday, May 4 2012, 22:52)

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Friday, May 4 2012, 20:16) What evils will we rid the world of by making death "desirable" or "common"? the superstition that death is somehow a big deal, when it's not at all.

For the elderly, yes. Even then it's a crossing over from one stage of humanity to the next. For young kids though and even people below 50, I fail to see how that is not a big deal.

[tj11]

Of course it should be legalised. Our lives are ours and no-one elses, therefore we should have the right to do with them as we please.

[Typhus]

QUOTE (GTA_stu @ Saturday, May 5 2012, 03:16)

Now you just sound incredibly radical and slightly crazy. Progress how? How the hell would treating older people as 2nd class citizens who are detested and loathed be a good thing?

Good question, allow me to explain.
Our old people have, through their long lives, been allowed to wallow in ignorance and piggish obstinance. They hate most modern things, they take a dim view on the young, they are suspicious and, above all else, have an undeserved sense of entitlement.
They honestly believe that their age should afford them respect. Not their merits, not their achievements, just their age.

Now, let's say that it became commonplace to kill yourself. If, instead of needlessly succumbing to the slow decline of age, you could end your life with dignity, at a point in which your mind and body were still yours to command.

Think about all the worry and bitterness that would disappear. Old people act so horribly because they are degenerating and living in a world they no longer understand. But the ready presence of death would alleviate that, surely?
They would finally understand that futility of being bitter at the norms and values of the modern world, they would finally stop pining for the 'good old days', they would grasp the importance of enjoying what time you had.

Funnily enough, I feel that pressuring the elderly into killing themselves would allow them more freedom and happiness than they've ever experienced before.

Do you see my logic?

[SadisticOtters]

I think it should be legal for all above the age of 18. It should be a year long process with mandatory mental health treatment. That way said person would have enough time to see if his life is truly worth ending. I think that's fair.
It should be no one's business if I want to end my life in the most safest and painless way possible. Point blank.

[gta player13]

The way you put it,yes it should be better for him to die.But unfortunately,no one can make killing for any reason legal.