• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

I got emotional when I read this...

Dogdoctor said:
It sounds to me like a good outcome of a bad situation.
Click to expand...
And the situation I will very soon find myself in with my father, though I somewhat doubt that will be the solution. But I can't think of an alternative that is in all ways better

Cheers,
Rat.
 
Dogdoctor said:
It sounds to me like a good outcome of a bad situation.
Click to expand...

Swiss Death Charity

For another perspective, here's a newspaper article on the "clinic" where the assisted suicide took place, which is apparently an apartment in an occupied building, where other tenants are made nervous by seeing people going up in the elevator, and coming down shortly thereafter in a body bag.
 
Cyphermage said:
Swiss Death Charity

For another perspective, here's a newspaper article on the "clinic" where the assisted suicide took place, which is apparently an apartment in an occupied building, where other tenants are made nervous by seeing people going up in the elevator, and coming down shortly thereafter in a body bag.
Click to expand...
Still sounds like a good end to a bad situation (that other people don't agree with.)
 
Dogdoctor said:
Still sounds like a good end to a bad situation (that other people don't agree with.)
Click to expand...

Where I fall off the bandwagon is that they take people in relatively good shape. Most laws permitting assisted suicide require that you have a terminal diagnosis with less than six months to live and unremitting discomfort. Additionally, you must not have clinical depression, and must restate your wish several times over some reasonable period.

I was reading about one person they processed, who was able to walk, talk, and feed herself, and was facing death from a degenerative illness seven years or so later.

So the service is really just offering a painless death to anyone who applies. I'm not surprised there's some public outrage.
 
Cyphermage said:
Where I fall off the bandwagon is that they take people in relatively good shape. Most laws permitting assisted suicide require that you have a terminal diagnosis with less than six months to live and unremitting discomfort. Additionally, you must not have clinical depression, and must restate your wish several times over some reasonable period.

I was reading about one person they processed, who was able to walk, talk, and feed herself, and was facing death from a degenerative illness seven years or so later.

So the service is really just offering a painless death to anyone who applies. I'm not surprised there's some public outrage.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with that. I think people like to try to force others to have the same values that they do. Who should decide which life is worth living? I hope no one other than me decides that for me.
 
Dogdoctor said:
I have no problem with that. I think people like to try to force others to have the same values that they do. Who should decide which life is worth living? I hope no one other than me decides that for me.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there are often a lot of other issues going on. The relatives may be grousing that the cost of care is using up their inheritance. The person may be a burden on the family. There may be pain control issues.

I have no problem with sedating to relieve pain, even if it hastens death. If people feel motivated to look up the lethal dose of whatever they're taking on their own, so they can take enough to end their lives, more power to them.

Offering it as a service to anyone, on the other hand, probably transcends the boundaries of good taste.
 
There are very strict rules under Swiss law as to who can be offered this service (and I realise that sounded ambiguous but I struggled for an alternative) one of which is that there must be a full medical assessment.

Can anyone tell me that this person should not have had the right to end his life (such as it was) on his own terms?
 
I agree that people should be assisted to take their own lives but with strict controls. If your quality of life is zero and you have only a few months to live what is the point of living?
 
Diamond said:
Can anyone tell me that this person should not have had the right to end his life (such as it was) on his own terms?
Click to expand...

Probably the Pope would argue with that. Some people consider it a sin for you to kill yourself. That’s the problem with all this. I have a problem with governments that say it’s OK to kill unborn babies, but it’s not OK for people to take their own life. It doesn’t make sense to me. For years doctors have been telling terminally ill patients, don’t take more than 4 of these pills (wink, wink). Eskimos float useless persons out of the ice. People always say “there’s always hope”. I don’t agree, sometimes life has no hope.
 
Last edited:
Years ago there was film called (I think this right) "Whose life is it anyway" starring Richard Dreyfus as an artist that has accident and is paralysed from the neck down. He sues the hospital to allow him to die. It was interesting to hear the different points of discussion.
 
Euthanasia is a tricky topic. Personally, I'm in favor of it - with some caveats. I think Dogdoctor and Cyphermage have really hit the problematic issue: Who decides when life should be ended?

I worked as a veterinary assistant for seven years and helped euthanize many, many animals during that time. I imagine that Dogdoctor (and others with similar experience) will agree that having the option of euthanasia for animals is, in many cases, a great boon - both for the animal and the owner. More than once I have thought of the benefits of being able to expire with dignity when the time comes.

However, abuse of euthanasia is possible and occurs all the time in veterinary medicine. Too often it is used to get rid of a perfectly healthy, happy pet who has simply become a nuisance or a burden. If extended to human medicine, the same abuse will be possible. Why put grandma in an expensive nursing home when the kids can just have her "put down"?

I agree with Dogdoctor in that I *hope* that I would be able to make the decision when (if?) the time comes. But what about cases involving the mentally handicapped, chemically imbalanced or insane? Should people in such states be able to choose to die? If not who chooses? Who decides when a person is no longer competant to make the choice?

Unofficially, some doctors already make the choice for their patients in some cases. My wife is a rad-tech at a nearby hospital. She has seen many instances where doctors have been forced to treat terminally-ill, elderly patients who have no chance of recovery. It is not an uncommon practice for some doctors in this situation to prescribe a battary of tests for the patient simply to wear down the patient to the point that they just "slip away". Happens all the time.

Just my 2c... or so.
 
Rat said:
And the situation I will very soon find myself in with my father, though I somewhat doubt that will be the solution. But I can't think of an alternative that is in all ways better
Click to expand...

I know how you feel. My mother died in February of heart failure and complications of scleroderma. The 3 years since the first heart attack were a slow decay for her then at the end she just kept telling us she'd had enough. Nobody should have to go through what she did.
Sometimes there is no better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom