|
|
Post by Oriet on Nov 14, 2011 16:54:18 GMT -5
I'm another person that watched someone slowly die from cancer; only knew for the last year and a half what was doing it, but it was noticeable before then.
I would say there needs to be a screening process, but that you can only qualify for the actual screening if you are suffering from something that is currently having a drastic impact on your life. There are other options for depressed people, whether the depression is circumstantial or clinical, and for those whom their condition is not yet having a major impact on their quality of life there are also options, either to improve their quality of life in the interim or other options that might be, or become, available before that point. There really does come a point when a person's suffering makes euthanasia a valid option, but until then there are other, better, options available.
|
|
|
|
Post by sylvana on Nov 15, 2011 1:25:43 GMT -5
There really does come a point when a person's suffering makes euthanasia a valid option, but until then there are other, better, options available. In my books, when doctors stop administering treatment for cancer because the chemo-therapy is actually killing the patient faster than the cancer, there are no other options than euthanasia (or a long period of pain, lack of mobility, being bedridden and just about everything going wrong that can go wrong followed by death). I agree that if someone is depressed they should try and find a better option, but if they want to die I will not stop them. I may try and convince them to try something else, or see a psychologist, but the decision to die is always their choice alone. There is a doctor on trial in Australia I think, who is being charged with murder for euthanizing his mother as she was dying of cancer. The only reason anyone found out about it was he wrote about it in a book, where he described how his mother asked him to do it, and even thanked him and said he was such a good boy after he administered the lethal dose. I honestly support this doctor. |
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Nov 15, 2011 19:10:56 GMT -5
I think "aiding" in suicide is a crime, and I'm not exactly sure what constitutes "aiding," so that is a cause for concern.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenfold_Maquette on Nov 15, 2011 19:50:42 GMT -5
Society allows (hell, encourages) us to spend every effort to keep someone in horrendous pain, unable to breath or shit on their own, or locked in a body slowly going immobile with paralysis...but won't let us end their acute, hopeless degeneration. How noble of us to decide when someone else gets to suffer.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: We all die. It's not like trying to keep them alive via medical intervention is going to change that. All you're doing at that point is prolonging their pain. It's not noble, it's not compassionate, and it's certainly not a decision made with the interests of the patient in mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oriet on Nov 16, 2011 12:52:30 GMT -5
There really does come a point when a person's suffering makes euthanasia a valid option, but until then there are other, better, options available. In my books, when doctors stop administering treatment for cancer because the chemo-therapy is actually killing the patient faster than the cancer, there are no other options than euthanasia (or a long period of pain, lack of mobility, being bedridden and just about everything going wrong that can go wrong followed by death). I was including that as part of suffering, but I guess I didn't make it clear. 'Cause yeah, chemo is really harsh on the patient, especially when they end up sick until just before their next chemo session or have to skip one 'cause their white blood cell count is too low. Also when they can only exist without excruciating pain by being constantly doped up on morphine. |
|
