Ask Me Help Desk - Should assisted suicide be a crime!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nez

Hope 12:

When one commits suicide while in possession of one’s mental faculties, this shows one to be void of morality, lacking faith, having no fear of God. It is a cowardly act, where one refuses to face up to the problems and responsibilities of life.

Total crap.I will not write anymore as I might get thrown out of AMHD. :mad:

We are talking here of someone in severe pain, on deaths door I believe. I have seen hospice patients with such severe bedsores they ooze. I have seen ones in so much pain when they are turned they cry out in pain. This is when they are so doped up you would not think they would feel. At that point I do not think one is in possession of one's mental faculties. Do you really think they are refusing to face up to the problems and responsibilities of life?

I hear where you would be coming from for some issues but not this one.

I am not saying I would personally chose a certain path, but my paths are not for everyone. I may have a different view when I am on the outside looking in rather than when I am "IN". Some choices in life should be ours to make.

Cassie-
I agree with you it should be my choice and if I choose to be put out of the misery you wrote of and ASK for relief of death shouldn't I get it? At that point I would rather take my chances before GOD, not man!

I truly believe, as has been said here, that unless you are in that position that it is truly hard to decide what you would do.

Some of you have seen others in that condition, but few have been close enough to even truly consider it.

I, for one, have been close to making that decision. Death was staring me down, well, I do win staring contests, so I am still here LOL.

If you read my other post here you probably have figured out what my decision would have been. I look back now and wonder if it would have been the right decision.

I have since written an Advanced Directive and a DNR order in case I am ever in this condition again. My AD gives direct orders to the docs on how I wish for them to handle my specific situation. I do not think I would ever again consider having a family member or friend do anything for me. It would be solely up to my health care providers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Cassie-
I agree with you it should be my choice and if I choose to be put out of the misery you wrote of and ASK for relief of death shouldn't I get it? At that point I would rather take my chances before GOD, not man!!

Thank you, I have spread it around

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainForest

What if I am a vegetable?

I have stated in my will before hand I do not wish to live like that, I am kind of in tough waters then eh?

If I was a vegetable, I couldn't kill myself, despite the fact that I want to.

Therefore, assisted suicide should be allowed, but it must be evaluated on a case by case basis.

Perhaps even with a government board to review each file.

Nothing else needs to be said here, totally agree captain dude, terminal illness sucks and to have the "balls" to fight something like cancer or multiple sclerosis etc and say "i`m gona take my life not this f**king disease" is in my eyes more courageous for wanting to make such a choice

1 in 3 people, just remember that...

1 in 3. very scary, very real. Cancer does not discriminate. I know.

Thank your government(s) for that one.
:mad:

Sorry for bringing such an old post up, but I was doing a paper on it, and it just sparked my interest in what everyone else thought about it.

Anyway I think assisted suicide is a crime in many country, because of the uncertainty that may result if it was legalize. First I have to say that I have never experience the death of someone that I hold close and dear to my heart, so I cannot comprehend what some of you went through. So I would like to apologize in advance if I offend anyone.

I think it is not legalized in many country, because:
1. There is always a possibility that the decision to die is not from the person suffering, but by their family or doctors.
2. It would devalued the life of people with disability and illnesses
3. The decision can never be rational, because patients are often not well informed of their conditions and future prospects (There could always be science break through)
4. The decision might not be due to their physical conditions alone, but by others and circumstances. E.g. Can't afford treatment
5. it would be difficult to distinguish murder from assisted suicide
6. Specific legislation defining appropriate and inappropriate conditions for euthanasia will not end ambiguous or inappropriate uses of euthanasia or assisted suicide
7. illness or disability is no more a rational reason for suicide than any other reasons
8. Also many people with illness or disability are capable of committing suicide without assistant. In many country, they are allow to refuse intake of food or medicine. If they really have the will to die, they should be able to do it without assistant.

Anyway I hope I'm never faced with this kind of circumstances.

To add to what I put before

Who gets to decide under what circumstances is assisted suicide fine and under what circumstances is assited suicide inappropriate?

Doing it on a case to case basis is ideal, but impossible. There will be disparity between case to case, because of different circumstances, and different judges. It is also difficult for a third person (the judge) to understand all the circumstances.

kaitou, I didn't know this thread existed. Frankly, I wish you had left it alone. This is a very painful reminder of what I have been put through in my own life.

I understand completely what you are saying. You are taking the stance of a practical and logical person who has never been placed in a situation where emotion is the ruling factor, not logic. I used to pose the same questions myself. How do we manage to do this as logically, rationally, and legally as possible? I have been in the unfortunate position of watching people I love die unnecessarily painful deaths. I do believe that assisted suicide can be accomplished legally in a way that would extinguish all problems or questions associated with it. I am sure that I will be reopening a can of worms and take a lot of flack from some people, when I state what I believe would be an effective method to legally resolve this dilemma. So be it. I have given this quite a lot of thought over the years.

First, let me say that, to a certain extent, assisted suicide already exists legally. Most people just aren't aware of it. I have seen this done a few times, so I know it to be true. When a patient is entering the final stages of a terminal illness, when they are in excruciating agony and they are past all hope of recovery, the patient's doctor prescribes dosages of morphine that will ensure the patient will die. This is perfectly legal and it is done every day. If not in all countries, I know it to be fact that it is done in the U.S.

As I stated, I do believe that there is a way to allow a patient to make his own decision regarding assisted suicide, to die with dignity, and avoid any possible mistakes associated with it, that would absolutely negate all the issues and concerns that you have listed above.

Whether this is a moral sin, as some have pointed out, is in the hands of whatever God you pray to or believe in. It is not something that should be a moral judgement made by people here on this earth. Until you have walked in the shoes of someone placed in such torment or watched someone you love dearly going through the agony, you cannot begin to comprehend how mentally and physically detrimental it is to prolong their life. This should be a decision that is placed solely in the hands of the person whose life we are discussing.

I believe, as far as the United States is concerned, each State should have a panel of 50 - 200 specialists on call (depending on the State and caseload, a large resource pool is required) consisting of oncologists, psychiatrists, and other medical experts. Basically, an individual with a medical degree, who works with patients (and is highly regarded in their medical field) with varying illnesses across the board. Specialists in differing cancers, Lou Gehrig's Disease, MS,. anything that can be deemed an illness that is completely incurable at the time a formal request has been made. These people will work on a rotating basis in "teams" of 7. Due to the timing involved, it is necessary to have as many experts "on tap" to allow a hearing to commence and end in a short span of time.

They will convene on a regular basis to hear all the pros and cons of each "case". "Case" being defined as a patient who has initiated a formal request for suicidal assistance. This request is done through the patient's own doctor, who has intimate knowledge of the patient's case. Prior to this request being made, ideally when it is first brought up for discussion by the patient (timing is a major factor that has to be included and considered), a minimum of two other doctors who are experts in the particular disease, should be brought in to examine the patient, run whatever tests they deem necessary, and state their opinions in a written report. The result being that at the time of the FORMAL request, at least three medical experts have had an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the patient and his/her disease, and all the necessary papework to move forward will already be in place. All that is necessary is for the patient to call his doctor and give him/her the go ahead. Once the formal request has been made, the patient, the doctors, any people intimately involved with providing the day to day healthcare for the patient, and family members, are the only ones who should be allowed to attend the hearing. Each person who is intimately involved with the case will be allowed to state their opinions and the reasoning behind it. Each panel member will ask as many questions as they feel is necessary to all individuals involved, based upon statements made and the reports that have been submitted, to render an appropriate decision. This would absolutely ensure that someone's life is not being taken unnecessarily or unwillingly. If the panel agrees by a 2/3 majority that, indeed, there is no question that the patient's illness is terminal, a formal decision is rendered to allow the patient to legally be assisted to commit suicide. It is then left up to the doctor and the patient as to the how's and whens to proceed, IF, the patient wants to proceed. Doing this allows the patient the freedom of decision, without legal repercussions for the doctor. The majority of doctors who have patients in these situations have established a rapport with the patient and will not choose to do anything that is against the wishes of that patient.

This is as close to a "perfect plan" to resolve the problem that I can come up with. Other than that, allowing the patient's doctor to prescribe a lethal dose of morphine to the patient, is the only solution and seems to have worked well. The biggest considerations with this is timing, the patient's ability to take the dose themselves, and an outsider's interference.

So, start punching holes if you like, I don't mind. I am always up for a logical debate. Maybe we can come up with a viable legal plan together. However, anyone that is of a mind for it, be forewarned that a religious take on this will be completely negated by me. Frankly, I don't want to hear it, and it will not be considered in my discussion. I am looking for constructive feedback from a legal standpoint only. I will check back on this post and answer when I am able.

It's a controversial mater. I believe that, in an emotional mater, if you're not willing to do it yourself, you don't deserve to have your pain ended. It's the peak of selfishness to ask someone else to kill you.

In a medical sense, you should write down or type up your wishes and send it to the most trusted people in your life. If, in a coma lasting for more than two months, you want them to let you go, tell them before hand, that way the people who have to make the disision have a little closure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twayblade

It's a controversal mater. I beleive that, in an emotional mater, if you're not willing to do it yourself, you don't deserve to have your pain ended. It's the peak of selfishness to ask someone else to kill you.

In a medical sense, you should write down or type up your wishes and send it to the most trusted people in your life. If, in a coma lasting for more than two months, you want them to let you go, tell them before hand, that way the people who have to make the disision have a little closure.

Although I agree with your second paragraph, the creation of Living Wills and Healthcare Proxies are specifically for that purpose, I do not fully agree with your first paragraph. If a person is physically capable of ending their own life, then yes, it is selfishness to ask someone else to do this for you. Personally, I was not speaking about that. I am speaking about people who have deteriorated to the point in which they cannot just give themselves an overdose of morphine, or whatever else may be available to them. Lou Gehrig's disease is a physically degenerative disease. Most cancers will lead you to the point of no return, in which you cannot physically give yourself the killer dose. That is what I am referring to. As long as someone is physically able to move around on their own, they may still hold out hope and do not want to die. I am talking about when they get to the point where they hit the "point of no return" and are still hanging on, in pain. Why should they be placed in a position where the pain is so unendurable. That does happen to people and they are left for days, weeks, a month or so, in excruciating agony.

I know for myself, after watching enough people go through this, I don't want to be left hanging on, in diapers, unable to move. But, I don't think I have it in me to give up hope if I am able to move about freely. It is only when my body has betrayed me, I am still cognizant, and I am in such pain, that I would want to enforce the law that has been passed for my benefit. It allows me freedom of choice, with the help of my doctor, that I would not otherwise have. If you have ever seen anyone go through this kind of agony, you will have an understanding of exactly what I am saying.

Even though Dr. Kevorkian went to jail, everyone he was involved with thanked him for his help, and as a fact the families called him. Sounds like they were sure of what had to be done. I think everyone should have the choice of dying with dignity and not suffer through pain and misery to die anyway.

I agree completely T-Man. Dr. Kevorkian was unfairly and unnecessarily vilified. I think it takes a great deal of courage to do what that man did. He truly took his hippocratic oath to heart. He became the voice for these people and many more. The fact that he was found guilty and sent to prison shows me how the line is most definitely blurred when it comes to separation of church and state.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RubyPitbull

Although I agree with your second paragraph, the creation of Living Wills and Healthcare Proxies are specifically for that purpose, I do not fully agree with your first paragraph. If a person is physically capable of ending their own life, then yes, it is selfishness to ask someone else to do this for you. Personally, I was not speaking about that. I am speaking about people who have deteriorated to the point in which they cannot just give themselves an overdose of morphine, or whatever else may be available to them. Lou Gehrig's disease is a physically degenerative disease. Most cancers will lead you to the point of no return, in which you cannot physically give yourself the killer dose. That is what I am referring to. As long as someone is physically able to move around on their own, they may still hold out hope and do not want to die. I am talking about when they get to the point where they hit the "point of no return" and are still hanging on, in pain. Why should they be placed in a position where the pain is so unendurable. That does happen to people and they are left for days, weeks, a month or so, in excruciating agony.

I know for myself, after watching enough people go through this, I don't want to be left hanging on, in diapers, unable to move. But, I don't think I have it in me to give up hope if I am able to move about freely. It is only when my body has betrayed me, I am still cognizant, and I am in such pain, that I would want to enforce the law that has been passed for my benefit. It allows me freedom of choice, with the help of my doctor, that I would not otherwise have. If you have ever seen anyone go through this kind of agony, you will have an understanding of exactly what I am saying.

I do understand what you're saying, and that is what wills are for. Or even if you can't put that situation in a will, you could talk to one of your loved ones, or even a nurse, and spell out the specific details you mentioned. Hence, if the person in question is going through a physical ailment, assisted suicide should and must be allowed.

I appreciate that you understand what I am saying, and that you agree assisted suicide should and must be allowed. But regarding wills, no, it doesn't cover it. Wills are followed after someone dies, not before. Living wills are used when someone is unconscious, not conscious. That is why I suggested a specific assisted suicide law. As it stands now, if you speak to someone you love, or a nurse, and they follow your wishes, they can be arrested and charged with murder. Which is exactly what happened to Kevorkian.

Fully agree. When they feel that there is no hope,and the pain is too much then assisting is good