Assisted suicides

[pintsofguinness]

So you would only be for some sort of voluntary euthansia?

Just reading that BBC link again:

Dignitas offers help to people to end their lives if they are suffering a terminal illness, a chronic condition (including paralysis) or a mental illness.

That's shocking. 

[Maguire01]

So you would only be for some sort of voluntary euthansia?

Yes, but as opposed to what? Is this not about voluntary euthanasia? And assisted suicide (by use of the term suicide) implies that it is a voluntary action.

[pintsofguinness]

Involuntary would be if I fell and banged my head and was left like a vegetable and my family took it upon themselves to pull the plug because in their opinion I hadnt a life worth living.

[Maguire01]

But if you need a plug in the first place, then that could be construed as human intervention in the life/death decision in itself. The same goes for resuscitation. If you hadn't used the plug in the first place, the person would have dies 'naturally'.

[pintsofguinness]

It's not a case of being natural or unnatural.
Would you think that it would be my family's right/decision to pull the plug, stop feeding me through a tube or whatever because they think my life is worth living?

[Maguire01]

Okay, so it's not about natural or unnatural. But it is about human intervention making the life or death decision - and it's something that happens both ways.

Yes, your family should have the right to decide to pull the plug. It's unlikely to be a decision they'd take without serious consideration and would also likely have to be consistent with medical opinion in any given case. But this already happens, does it not?

[pintsofguinness]

Yes, your family should have the right to decide to pull the plug. It's unlikely to be a decision they'd take without serious consideration and would also likely have to be consistent with medical opinion in any given case. But this already happens, does it not?

Only if I'm dead i.e. no brain stem activity would doctors take the decision to stop pumping blood around my body and my heart beating as it was pointless.   
I could be conscious but a vegetable and I assume you still think they've a right to end my life?

I think it's all about the survival of the fittest with a lot ofyou, if someone can't look after themselves then kill them, if a pregnancy is unwanted then kill the unborn child, oh but let's call it a foetus to try and dress it up - the fact that someone is able to say they want to die, no matter their state of mind just saves the inconvenience making an argument that their life isn't worth living anyway and they should be killed.  It's quite appalling.

[Maguire01]

It's not about survival of the fittest at all. It's about people having a choice and not being forced to live because of the moral viewpoint (normally informed by religious belief) of others.

If one of your family wanted to die in such circumstances, would you be happy to make them continue to live in pain and misery indefinitely, just because you don't think it's right?
I'd have no problem with caring for family should they ever be in such a situation, but i'd like to think i could respect their choice as well, if they wanted to die with dignity. It wouldn't be easy for anyone (nor would the alternative), but it wouldn't be my choice.

[Puckoon]

boys euthanasia is physician assisted suicide. There is no difference in the two except that this place is set up for the purpose.
I spoke to the wife about this yesterday and was amazed to learn how many patients who are not psychiatric ask her to help them die.
AGain this argument becomes like the abortion one in the regard that until one of us understands the pain and helplessness of total paralysis we can't decide whether we would want to live or die, and so we shouldn't be in charge of stopping those who wish otherwise.

[Capt Pat]

Terrible stuff lads. No way should that kid have been allowed to kill himself. Life is not long at all at the best of times. If people were willing to look after him he should ahve been allowed to live. How do you know he wasn't forced into the decision by people not wanting to look after him. The medical technology to cure paralysis is in develpment and this was a young guy who might have been able to benefit from such developments in the future.

[J70]

J70, I didn't say suicide was against the law

You said that "assuming" that "the legal right to kill one's self exists" was a big assumption. Either suicide is illegal or it isn't.

Jeez, ok, if you want to be really pernickety about it then, ok, the legal right to kill oneself doesn't exist.  But, like, what's going to happen to you if you do commit suicide?

I've always been under the impression that if something isn't specified as illegal, then its legal. As far as I know, suicide isn't illegal. And if suicide is legal, then, is it not a denial of someone's legal right to prevent them from having someone assist them? (I am not saying it isn't a horrible issue, I'm merely wondering about the legal side of it).

Regarding the morality of it, Socrates and Plato would have both said your interpretation of morality was wrong if you don't think this is clear cut...

Greek philosophy is not a strong point of mine, so please elaborate, if you don't mind!

From what you said it seems to me that your interpretation of what is moral is somewhat skewed.  You don't seem to take into consideration others apart from the self in the act of suicide.  That is a big mistake to make.  Socrates and Plato would have ripped you to shreds for being so selfish in your outlook.

I am still not sure exactly what you're saying here. Are you objecting to suicide itself as a selfish act, or to the role of others in assisting it?

[pintsofguinness]

Magurie

It's not about survival of the fittest at all. It's about people having a choice and not being forced to live because of the moral viewpoint (normally informed by religious belief) of others.

It's nothing got to do with moral or religious viewpoints - I'm not religious at all - normally in these debates it's people on your side of the argument that bring religion in to it first. 

If one of your family wanted to die in such circumstances, would you be happy to make them continue to live in pain and misery indefinitely, just because you don't think it's right?

I wouldn't kill them or have them killed.
I've gathered that if I was lying like a vegetable and my family wanted to stop feeding me so i'd die you'd agree with that - what about my rights?

Puck

AGain this argument becomes like the abortion one in the regard that until one of us understands the pain and helplessness of total paralysis we can't decide whether we would want to live or die, and so we shouldn't be in charge of stopping those who wish otherwise.

We stop people killing themselves all the time puck.  In this case it wasn't a matter of the parents not stopping him it was a matter of them actively helping him/getting him killed.
This clinic helps people with mental illness kill themselves - how the f**k does someone with a mental illness know if they want to die or not?

What I don't understand, althoguh it obviously won't apply in this sad case, is that these people who have had some illness where they've progressively got to a stage where they can't kill themselves - why didn't they end it all before they got to that stage? They knew it was coming? 


capt pat

How do you know he wasn't forced into the decision by people not wanting to look after him. The medical technology to cure paralysis is in develpment and this was a young guy who might have been able to benefit from such developments in the future.

Exactly and apparenlty he was getting feeling back in his fingers? 
The mother's statement makes my blood boil too. 

[Puckoon]

Terrible stuff lads. No way should that kid have been allowed to kill himself. Life is not long at all at the best of times. If people were willing to look after him he should ahve been allowed to live. How do you know he wasn't forced into the decision by people not wanting to look after him. The medical technology to cure paralysis is in develpment and this was a young guy who might have been able to benefit from such developments in the future.

Pat you have totallymissed the point, he was "allowed" to live, he clearly didn't want to. Y'all can hypothesize bout the motives of the parents but they have my benefit of the doubt.

[Maguire01]

Terrible stuff lads. No way should that kid have been allowed to kill himself. Life is not long at all at the best of times. If people were willing to look after him he should ahve been allowed to live. How do you know he wasn't forced into the decision by people not wanting to look after him. The medical technology to cure paralysis is in develpment and this was a young guy who might have been able to benefit from such developments in the future.

Pat you have totallymissed the point, he was "allowed" to live, he clearly didn't want to. Y'all can hypothesize bout the motives of the parents but they have my benefit of the doubt.

Yes indeed - it was his choice.
Plus, Capt Pat, you say life isn't long at the best of times... well i'm sure 'life' would be very bloody long if you couldn't move for 60 years.

[Maguire01]

Magurie

It's not about survival of the fittest at all. It's about people having a choice and not being forced to live because of the moral viewpoint (normally informed by religious belief) of others.

It's nothing got to do with moral or religious viewpoints - I'm not religious at all - normally in these debates it's people on your side of the argument that bring religion in to it first. 

You mightn't be religious, but it clearly is a moral issue for you, otherwise you wouldn't be debating it.  And i have no doubt that for many people in the 'against' camp are informed by their religion - which is fine for them, and is to be expected. I acknowledge that you don't fall into that category.

If one of your family wanted to die in such circumstances, would you be happy to make them continue to live in pain and misery indefinitely, just because you don't think it's right?

I wouldn't kill them or have them killed.
I've gathered that if I was lying like a vegetable and my family wanted to stop feeding me so i'd die you'd agree with that - what about my rights?

But would you explicitly say 'No' to them if they pleaded with you to help them? Would you let them suffer indefinitely, against their wishes, just because you didn't agree? Would that not be incredibly selfish?

As for being in a vegitative state, i'd trust your family to make the right decision for you, taking on board any medical advice.