Should Euthanasia be legalized?

[Hits]

The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment.
What are your thoughts on the practise of Euthanasia? Do you think it is a moral practise?
I think it would moral, but only in specific situations. Terri Schiavo for example, was very unfair. The government failed to interact with the situation and her feeding tube was taken off when not all party were for that. Her husband was selfish, letting her die when her family still believed she had a chance.

[Luso Clemens]

I don't know, I suppose it depends on the situation... if they're in pain and in some way ask for it and other people consent to it, I would think it's ok, I mean... I wouldn't want to see someone I love in so much pain and not be able to end it for them

But if they do it without actually even getting a nod from the victem or the family/caretaker of the person (by that I mean more then one person, cause majority rules!) then they should just leave them...

[Purokku-kun]

I believe it would depend on the situation, and on the individuals involved.

From a personal point of view, I would rather have my existence ended by an authorised individual in the medical community, rather than live on in a vegetative state.

It's hard to prepare for such a circumstance; perhaps if I had a degenerative illness, I'd make some provision for my life not to be sustained under certain circumstances, and I'd make sure that my next of kin were informed of my decision, so that there'd be no ambiguity.

Then again, what if you're knocked down by a vehicle, and become really messed-up physicially? It's not like you'd have been able to prepare for this outcome.

In the well-publicised example above, if the husband had the legal authority to request the end of his wife's life support, then so be it. The buck really does have to stop with someone.

[dark_kitsune]

What are your thoughts on the practise of Euthanasia? Do you think it is a moral practise?
I think it would moral, but only in specific situations. Terri Schiavo for example, was very unfair. The government failed to interact with the situation and her feeding tube was taken off when not all party were for that. Her husband was selfish, letting her die when her family still believed she had a chance.


The government tried to get involved....which is a big no-no. While the family still held out hope that she would recover...all signs pointed to the negative. She was a veg. and had been for a long time. I'm glad they finally removed her tube - let her die with a sliver of dignity at least.

btw - did you know that Terri Schiavo was in that vegetative state because she suffered a stroke as a result of being anorexic? Kinda ironic - force feeding someone who had been starving herself to death.

[Tokoyami]

The government tried to get involved....which is a big no-no. While the family still held out hope that she would recover...all signs pointed to the negative. She was a veg. and had been for a long time. I'm glad they finally removed her tube - let her die with a sliver of dignity at least.

btw - did you know that Terri Schiavo was in that vegetative state because she suffered a stroke as a result of being anorexic? Kinda ironic - force feeding someone who had been starving herself to death.

That is ironic. I say that if a person is concious and is in pain, to much to bear then yes, a doctor should be able to assist in killing them. But hey, its not like they can make a law against suicide. That woudlnt work. As for being in a vegitative state, i mean if there is no hope that they will ever come out of it, then i dont see the point of keeping them alive, or having them suffer such a prison.

[Apocalypse]

While I agree that the government shouldn't have gotten involved in Terri Schiavo's case, I also do not feel that it was right to allow her to exist in such a state for such a long period of time. She was not really alive, in the sense that her mind wasn't there, and her chances of recovering her mind was virtually non-existant. In the end; I feel as though it was indeed the choice of the family. Afterall... so long as they are willing to pay to keep her alive; there is no reason to end that life. It is not the decision of the government when a person in such a scenario should leave this world... in a physical sense.

Personally, I wouldn't have anyone exist like that for such a long period of time. Of course, it is not in my right to say others must follow that example.

[Purokku-kun]

This then begs the question of what being "alive" consists of; is it being conscious, being self-aware?

In the Schiavo example, I would say that these things were absent; as others have said here, I don't think she was truly "alive".

[_strangechild_]

If I were dying in pain, I'd like someone to 'pull the plug'. That or I'd try to kill myself somehow.
I think if I were in the hospital for something I'd always be on the "Do Not Resuscitate" list. Assuming they do that, I dunno much about hospitals. I'd like to think of it as dying near enough to natrually.

I used to think that as long as people have permission they could actually 'kill' someone through euthanasia, when I was younger, then I found out that wasn't true for reasons such as some people would be forced to permit it or something like that.

[prime91]

I think I would want them to leave me when not critical.. but if al vital things are negative I just want to end the 'nothingness' And after all.. if they had not put you on those machines you would've died anyway.

[Chord]

The government was wrong to keep that Schiavo lady alive for so long. She's in a vegetable state, she can't think, talk or move, she was a living corpse. No one should have to live through that. Her family believed that she would be able to move again, even though it was obvious she was permanently paralysed.

Also, someone said that you shouldn't pull the plug without a sign of response, if they can't move, or even think, it's not gonna happen, it's impossible.

[Darts15]

I think euthanasia is bad to a certian point. Ur taking another persons life. Wouldn't u be some what like a killer? No one has the right to end another persons life even if they suffer. That person should look at the brighter things in the world. the person who's suffering should keep on living, try to over come it. In terri schaivo's case, it was kind of okay because she was in the vegetable state and she couldn't talk or do much.

to me it's bad to take a life and yet if the person is going to suffer in pain such as terri had it's okay because they'll end up suffering for the rest of their lives.

[SLVR]

Yes I think it is moral. If they are gona live thier last few years of days in a dyper and in a bed not being able to say anything and looking right through you when ya talk you should pull the plug. Tp many legal actions acan come by lettin them live. It would be the same thng if they pull the plug but when ur dead U cant comeback.

[munkey]

all i have to say is that if ever i am hooked up to a machine to keep me alive... save yourselfs the time un-plug the machines and incinerate my corpse
help the people who are still living and responsive for goodness sake forget about the living corpses...

[Tokoyami]

all i have to say is that if ever i am hooked up to a machine to keep me alive... save yourselfs the time un-plug the machines and incinerate my corpse
help the people who are still living and responsive for goodness sake forget about the living corpses...

Well put, who wants to be a vegetable.

[Steady Chaos]

It's true tho...

[hawkmun]

I suppose that I don't think it's fair unless a person or animal is in a great amount of pain. Even people suffering from terminal illnesses can lead happy and fulfilling lives. On the other hand, I have seen people in massive amounts of pain before dieing, with no hope of ever recovering, I think then, that if the person wishes it and can respond to tell you that is what they wish, then it should be perfectly legal.

[Darts15]

To me, I think Euthanasia is wrong! People shouldn't give up on life because u never know what's going to happen the next day. and if u put a life to rest wouldn't u be kind of killing them? I dunno know but it's wrong because not every one who's suffering can tell a person if their suffering or not...then someone just decides that they should be put to sleep forever!

[Rabid_Wolverine]

To me, I think Euthanasia is wrong! People shouldn't give up on life because u never know what's going to happen the next day. and if u put a life to rest wouldn't u be kind of killing them? I dunno know but it's wrong because not every one who's suffering can tell a person if their suffering or not...then someone just decides that they should be put to sleep forever!

But you do know what's going to happen if it's a terminal illness. You die. It's that person's choice if they want to end their life or not. It's usually that person's choice if they want to die. For example if you suffered from motor neurone disease and you know that you are eventually going to die of suffocation because your lungs will stop functioning then euthanasia is just. What I think you're referring to is when people can't make their own decisions. That's not really euthanasia.

[Ren Höek]

What do you think about this? When you're old and cannot move anymore or talk would you want to continue living? or would you let someone end your life? this has been trying to become a law for 4 years (i can't remember). And i know that taking someone's life is against the law and you might end up in prison, but it's sad that the old folks that cannot do anything at all just sit or lay there helpless

[fuoheru]

Isn't this the same topic as euthanasia? If so, there's already a thread on it.
http://forums.bleachportal.net/showthread.php?t=6183&highlight=euthanasia

[Caity_walsh]

when im old i and wrinkely and can move and i have 2 get some1 else 2 wipe my a$$ id want someone to put a pillow over my face when im asleep why would you live on ? i mean your life is over youve done everything so move on and die .....

[maximoose666]

I am deeply unsure about euthanasia.

The word is derived from the greek "euthus" and "thanatos", meaning "good death". But is this not a contradiction in terms?

In the real world, euthanasia is also often prone to exploitaion by greedy relatives. It is rare that a person in a coma, for example, will have a say in whether euthanasia is practiced on them or not. Therefore I would regard it with extreme caution.

[Neve]

It could be a good thing, as it allows people to be put out of their pain, but I believe it should not be made lawful because of the risks it carries in terms of how many people who might want to die would not have a say in it, people who want to die may have been persuaded by others, and may not be in their right minds, not to mention it creates easy ways for murderers to prove themselves innocent.

[akin_t]

Isn't this the same topic as euthanasia? If so, there's already a thread on it.
http://forums.bleachportal.net/showthread.php?t=6183&highlight=euthanasia

Umm ... good looking out for duplicate threads. Only problem is ... the thread on euthanasia you linked just happens to be this very one.

My thoughts though, it's ethically wrong as decided by doctors, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be practiced. I mean, everyone has a choice whether they want to give up on life or not.

[maximoose666]

Erm.. that's because DB merged the threads...

everyone has a choice whether they want to give up on life or not.


Is that not simply the easy option? you wouldn't give a lunatic or baby the right to decide whether to live or die.

[akin_t]

Same difference ... those who aren't capable to decide such a thing would have people to do so for them; in a babies case it might be his or her parents as for a lunatic anyone who wants to take responsibility for him.

[maximoose666]

So you would allow people to decide the life and death of someone in his stead?

But that is incredibly prone to exploitation, as I've said. Life is full of greedy children who wish to gain their parents wealth - or they may genuinely need it out of circumstances. Therefore I believe euthanasia for those unable to decide for themselves is completely impracticable.

[akin_t]

So you would allow people to decide the life and death of someone in his stead?
But that is incredibly prone to exploitation, as I've said. Life is full of greedy children who wish to gain their parents wealth - or they may genuinely need it out of circumstances. Therefore I believe euthanasia for those unable to decide for themselves is completely impracticable.

I can't argue against the fact that it can be exploited. Nevertheless, that fact shouldn't be the deciding factor as to whether or not euthanasia should be practiced.

There'll always be a drawback with decisions concerning life and death. In this case, relatives may be actively seeking the death of a comatose patient; regardless, that doesn't warrant the outlawing of euthanasia.

Relatives actively seeking to kill someone can do so by other means.

Euthanasia helps people deal with extreme situations by giving them an easy out, just because there are a few possible drawbacks to the practice is not a good enough reason to stop it.

[Tyenkrovy]

Personally, I'm even against euthanization of animals, unless they're so bad off that nothing can be done for them and they're better off dead. That's what happened to a cat I had named Gizmo. He had a congential kidney defect, and his kindeys had swelled up to 3 times their normal size. The vet said that they could have sewn him up and sent him home, but that he would have lasted only a few days more anyway. So we decided to have him euthanized right on the operating table, while they had him anesthetized for surgery. :sadd:

With humans, though, I believe that it should be restricted to those indivuduals that are capable of making the decision for themselves, and only in dire circumstances, such as if they're facing a brutal terminal disease. Or, in the case of a braindead patient, they should be simply allowed to die, as I've always wondered if their souls or whatever are stuck, bound to what amounts to not much more than a living corpse.

[Byakuya7]

I actually did a report on this at school. I think that putting someone down is perfectly acceptable, as long as that person has consented, and strictly stated that they dont want to live in such a state. However, I dont think that doctors should impulsively end a patients life based on what they think is the best choice. Basically, it's all up to the patient to decide whether they want to live or die. That was why the terry schiavo case caused so much controversy, because the woman in the vegetative state could not clearly make a response, and thus her husband and her parents battled it out over removing the feeding tube, or keeping it in. It's a very touchy issue.

[cheeseonfire]

Went through two grandparents in vegetable states..If they dont want to live or dont have mind enough to know their alive..Well I think its fine..Other wise keeping them alive on medication is just cruel.

[maximoose666]

just because there are a few possible drawbacks to the practice is not a good enough reason to stop it.

Oh really? In the case of the death penalty, a very small and rare drawback (an innocent person may die) is reason enough for people to wish to stop it.
This is also almost parallel to the case of Euthanasia, where someone may die unwillingly. Sometimes one exception is enough to make the rule worthless.

Went through two grandparents in vegetable states..If they dont want to live or dont have mind enough to know their alive..Well I think its fine..Other wise keeping them alive on medication is just cruel.

Hmm... I want through a grandfather in a 'vegetative state', and I would have liked him kept alive, although he died in the end. I think what's worrying is your talk of if they "dont have mind enough to know their alive.."
I think that unless the person has specifically said than they wish to die, then they should not be killed. It is a supreme arrogance on the part of anyone else to think that they know what the preference for life and death of another person - even a close relative - is.
A good film to watch which deals with this theme is Krystof Kieslowski's "Three Colours: White".

[akin_t]

Well the death penalty is still practiced simply because the benefits out weigh the possible drawbacks. Same applies here.

Really, how often are people going to try to kill a relative through means of euthanasia? I mean, it makes for good drama in movies and novels, but seriously, it's like their last resort; if they wanted him/her dead, they would have done so far more efficiently.

It's a shame that practices such as these can be exploited, but given the rarity of the affliction, I doubt a majority of the afflicted are being targeted by their family.

[maximoose666]

Well the death penalty is still practiced simply because the benefits out weigh the possible drawbacks
Heh... I come from a different perspective as I live in Europe, in Britain where the Death penalty has been abolished...

Really, how often are people going to try to kill a relative through means of euthanasia? I mean, it makes for good drama in movies and novels, but seriously, it's like their last resort; if they wanted him/her dead, they would have done so far more efficiently.

I'm not suggesting that people are generally out to kill their relatives. I'm suggesting that if a family is staggering under the physical and emotional burden of looking after a relative who is very ill, then euthanasia may seem to them a way out - an attractive option, even. And what I cannot stand is the fact that the invalid, if not in a position to speak for themselves, can then be killed without their consent, at the word of their relatives. I don't want this to happen to me. Imagine being trapped in a body that no longer worked for you, but wanting to live, and fearing the people you once loved were now going to end your life out of 'mercy'.
In my view euthanasia without the permission of the person who would die is immoral and dangerous.

[akin_t]

Well your points make alot of sense to me ...

I guess the best thing to do would be for medical institutions to find a way to get people to decide whether or not they would rather be put out of their misery, were they to become comatose patients.

I can't refute any longer; after all, there's really nothing lost in keeping comatose patients alive besides money. I concede.

[M-50]

So should it? For all those tha't don't know about it, euthanasia is assisted suicide. It is illegal in many countries on the grounds that it is immoral. If you want more information on it click here (http://www.euthanasia.com/) and here (http://www.euthanasia.com/definitions.html) The second might be more informative to you if you don't know what euthanasia is. I think that it should be allowed as everyone has the right to do what they want as long as they do not harm others, and euthanasia does not. It is legal in The Netherlands and I think in Switzerland ( I will check that one up and tell you) but illegal everywhere else. I personally think that euthanasia should be allowed as long as the people dying chose to do this themselves and they were not forced to do this. :headbang:

[Neve]

I personally believe that people do have a 'right to die', but that it is a little too risky to legalise it, as deaths can be made very 'convenient'. Many more murderers would be able to get off crimes simply by saying they were 'helping the victim out of a painful life'.

[s3r3n1ty]

Only if the person illness or whatever is beyond saving and its causing pain and misery. Where to draw the line is the question.

[M-50]

I personally believe that people do have a 'right to die', but that it is a little too risky to legalise it, as deaths can be made very 'convenient'. Many more murderers would be able to get off crimes simply by saying they were 'helping the victim out of a painful life'.
Thing is to actually take part in euthanasia you have to sign a consent form that says that you are doing it willingly and it is taped by an impartial person or by some hidden camera. Plus it is only allowed in a certain place. So a person can not just be killed and then the murderers can not say that I was assisting them in euthanasia because they will have no evidence to prove it.:headbang:

[Neve]

Alright, but what if a family 'convinces' their rich, elderly relative that they are in 'too much pain' to continue to live, that it would be better for them if they just signed that contract, and left them all their money. People are not always in a sound state of mind when they agree to sign contracts, and it isn't fair to kill someone who isn't in a sound state of mind, simply because they signed a piece of paper.

[M-50]

Alright, but what if a family 'convinces' their rich, elderly relative that they are in 'too much pain' to continue to live, that it would be better for them if they just signed that contract, and left them all their money. People are not always in a sound state of mind when they agree to sign contracts, and it isn't fair to kill someone who isn't in a sound state of mind, simply because they signed a piece of paper.
They just can't do that because you have to go to special 'hospitals' to commit euthanasia and you are not forced because the whole thing is forced, plus you are videod the whole time.:headbang:

[7D$]

thats shocking to here thats its legal in Netherlands because I have never heard about that In my entirly live lol but i think that you dont have the right to Legel kill your self because its a cowardly way to be out of missery while millions of ppl are bearing with it But then again i think its quite good aswell because nobody can find your body when you killed yourself and that will bring some of the trauma casualties a bit down and its good to have someone watch over you so it cant go wrong lol

[Rising Phoenix]

I voted yes. But I should have probably voted maybe.

As others have said if the disease is uncurable and there's nothing left for the patientbut a life in a white room filled with pain and misery. Yes I believe that if the person iswilling to pass on, he/she should be allowed to end his life. However it musy be the person that wants to die that decides. Not someone else. In other words the patient must be consious and fully awear of his surroundings. That way no one else can interfere and end the persons life without his/her permision.

Hope the above makes sense.

R.P.

[7D$]

it does RP because I am kinda thinking the same But i am against ppl that are just depressed anbd dont see any exit and just Kill them self because i think its a really cowardly thing to do. Anyways a Uncurable person may not be always fully awar of his surrounding so how are you going to deal with that if he wants death but he isnt a 100%

[Tenebrus]

Banning euthanasia is to destroy the freedom of a human. I have the right to do what ever i want. Like every human. If i choose to die, i die. I think euthanasia shouldn't be "given" to mentally sick ppl, since they might not have an idea what that means. But to everyone else...why not. Why should i be denied the right to die, if i cannot be saved. Isn't suicide the same. I could just leave the hospital, go drink and eat like a pig, and then jump of a building. The choice is really easy.
I think even underaged should have the right to euthanasia, since parents would think egoistic. If i'm in pain all the time, my mother would rather stuff me full with painkillers, rather then to let me die (since she loves me). Is that right...?

[7D$]

Sorry if i am spamming But you are right Aizen especially on the last part

I think that euthanasia should be "investigated/planned better and have some rules to it then i guess it would be no problem with me

[Rising Phoenix]

7d$, Aizen,

I agree with your points. I don't think that someone should be euthanased 'cause he depressed. It should only be given to people that have bo hope of regaining a decent, pain free, non hospital life and on top of that the patient must be fully aware of his surroundings. It would be stupid (o light a word maybe?)just to let evryone who wants to die achance to do so easy. Besides ending ones life pematurely only brings out more pain to the ones around that person...

That said the system that allows euthanasia should gain a very strict set of rules,regulations etc before it functions freely. To take life willingly is a a very big responsibility.

Cheers,

R.P.

[Neve]

They just can't do that because you have to go to special 'hospitals' to commit euthanasia and you are not forced because the whole thing is forced, plus you are videod the whole time
In what way can't they do that? Are all relatives going to the home of an elderly person gonna be monitored XD?

[M-50]

In what way can't they do that? Are all relatives going to the home of an elderly person gonna be monitored XD?
What does it matter if the relatives are going to an elderly persons home?

Plus if I did not make it clear, euthanasia is only allowed to people that have terminal illnesses or a disease which will render them useless as in they are literally brain dead. :headbang:

[Neve]

Oh, okay, I agree with you if its only that, but I don't believe that just anyone should have the 'right to die' for the reasons I stated above.

[7D$]

I am kinda or less talked out cus i stated my piont and many ppl are agreeing lol

how can we make this Intresting to debate? hmmmmzzz

[M-50]

I am kinda or less talked out cus i stated my piont and many ppl are agreeing lol
how can we make this Intresting to debate? hmmmmzzz
By talking about what type of people are allowed to commit euthanasia?, where they should be allowed to commit euthanasia? :headbang:

[7D$]

yeah good idea then i'll make a statement then

I think ppl who want to commit euthanasia should do it in a private room where only the docters can access and see you

[Vampyrelord]

I personally believe that people do have a 'right to die', but that it is a little too risky to legalise it, as deaths can be made very 'convenient'. Many more murderers would be able to get off crimes simply by saying they were 'helping the victim out of a painful life'.

They have all sorts of problems like this in Holland.

[theCandyman]

I was just talking to a friend about this and now I run across this, pretty weird.

To sum up what I was telling my friend, unless I really care about you, I'm not going to stop you from killing yourself - your choice, as bad as I think it is. However, if I was the owner/director of a hospital and you asked to be euthanized, I would turn you out of the hospital, I wouldn't have your blood on other people's hands.

[M-50]

They have all sorts of problems like this in Holland.
What they say to the authorities that the person died under euthanasia?

To thecandyman: Their blood will not be on your hands. They will sign to say that they are willing to die under euthanasia. Plus they can not go to an ordinary hospital and say I would like to be euthanized, they have to go to certain places run by the government or by people who have been researched by the government.:headbang:

[Neve]

What they say to the authorities that the person died under euthanasia
I presume they say "It wasn't murder, he begged me to end his life...so, out of kindness, I did so..." or something to that effect.

[7D$]

hmmm I think its still a murder because a murderer can always say that and I think the Court here in Holland arent that stupid i bet ya they would investigate till the case is closed or solved

[Neve]

I'm sure they aren't, but murderers get away with murder all the time - there was recently a case in England where a paedophile almost got off rape and murder under the guise of manslaughter of two young girls by saying that one of them 'accidentally' drowned in 10 inches of water and he 'accidentally' knocked the other into a wall to stop her from screaming at the death of the first. Imagine what a muderer could do with a weapon like 'I was helping them out of a painful life'.

[7D$]

oke i see what you mean but still do you think judges will simply bail the "Murderer" out if he says that, I dont think soo i think when they finished the case with investigating and they cant tell off it was murder or a "'I was helping them out of a painful life" that they will give the murderer a certain punishment and a metal programm(dont know how you say it but In Holland we call it TBS) and from that programm the shrinks will get a answer or a certain view whats happend and that will determine the jail sentence of the suspect i dont think nowadays ppl can get easily away with that excuse

thats what i think, dont know if its going like this in reality

[Neve]

oke i see what you mean but still do you think judges will simply bail the "Murderer" out if he says that, I dont think soo i think when they finished the case with investigating and they cant tell off it was murder or a "'I was helping them out of a painful life"
I know it won't get everyone out of every situation, but it will be another weapon for the real murderers to use against justice being done - more and more people will simply be able to escape from a life sentance in prison, and more lives will be taken because of that. Barristers are very clever - the better ones can get people out of most situations whether they did the crime or not, and obviously it would not be simply a case of stating it, they would be able to work it cleverly into their argument in order to get someone who is guilty of murder off free of charge.

[7D$]

i see what you are trying to say and i think that would be the case but then the Justice system or the laws of a country should be changed then, as an example: if anyone say and uses this as an excuse or for its defense in the court of law "I just helped him out off his painfull life" he/she will get a life sentence.

that could be a possibility but idk if this can happen

just a thought :D

[Shinjitsu]

I think that we should be given the choice of euthenasia or not. For some, it's a horrible thought, but then how about those that will have to live as vegetables their whole lives? Being unable to feed, clean or clothe themselves, a lot of people lose their dignity and sometimes it can be a little too much. It's practically like 'pulling the plug'; which people tend to 'agree' with more often than not, it's just a different way of putting someone out of their misery.

[Nicole]

I'm surprised a topic like this hasn't been created, or maybe it has and been deleted. I'm not completely sure. The title is self explanatory.

As far as me believing on whether it's ethical or not depends on which way it's being used. I don't believe in someone handing someone a gun and asking for his/her death. However, in the case of a physician assisted suicide, I can agree with this, as the patient mostly doesn't have any other options and will likely die in the future. Of course, it has to be voluntary or else it's considered murder. Better to end the suffering, right? =\

So, uh, what do you guys think about this issue?

[Delta]

I live in Florida, and I'm not sure how many of you remember this, but there was a huge debate here a few years ago about this very topic, all of it revolving about the case of a woman named Terri Schivo (I probly messed up that spelling). Anyway, here's my thoughts on the matter: If a person is in an extreme ammount of suffering and pain and there is little hope of them recoving they should have the option to decide of their own free will, whether the want to end their lives or not. In the case I was talking about earlier this woman was in a coma for years and her husband wanted to let her go but her family wanted to keep her alive, she couldnt feed herself ect. and was being kept alive by a feeding tube. Now the case between the husband and family was brought before a court and eventually the judge decided to order the feeding tube removed, based on evaluations by doctors that basicly said she was brain-dead. Governor Bush, that's Jeb Bush btw (who wont be Governor for long, thank christ, mby we can start to recover from the damage he did to the education system in this state), overstepped his bounds as Governor and showing a real disreguard for the limits and separation of powers, made something called "Terri's law" if I remember right, which had the feeding tube replaced and thus keeping her alive, if you can call it that. He did this because of his strong moral objections to the taking of life, makes sense since he spoke out openly against all the executions his brother failed to stop durring his time as Governor of Texas (oh wait, that shit never happened, "moral objections" my ass, more like political posing). Anyway eventually the courts overturned the Governor's order and the feeding tube was removed and Terri Schivo died, not a Disney ending by any means. In situations like that I think we need to take things on a case-by-case basis, If loved ones or family dont want to keep them on life support and it looks like they will never recover (im not just talking about a coma here, i mean brain-dead 0% chance of comming back type deal) then I think they should have the option. And before I get any "you cant do that, you're playing god" arguements consider this, to keep a person alive like that they normally need to be hooked up to one if not more machines at a time continusly or they will die, so are the people that say let them die playing god, or is it the people who are feeding them through a tube in their arm?

[Drac666]

Well this topic Came up in my law class the other day and i was wondering other peoples opinion and facts or incidents of this.
First off euthanasia is defined as Also called mercy killing. the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering from an incurable, esp. a painful, disease or condition.(As Taken from dictionary.com) And there has been many cases of this throughout the world and is taking place in hospitals today (even In Canada)

I personally believe that this practice is not right in most cases but In extreme cases it must be done. I believe this because put in a situation where a close family member of mine was in a huge ammount of pain,suffering or any of the kind, I could not watch the person suffer if there was no cure and I do not think its fair to the one I love to watch them suffer this is something I strongly believe in So please don't Belittle me

[Mighty Aramir]

I must say I believe is right, and have stated it trought this forum. Euthanasia is a solution for, sorry to say it this way, already dead people. This will sound capitalist and I apologize for it, but why spending thousands of dollars in life support for an almost cyborg person, when with that exact same ammount of money, you can substain a life, take a family out of poverty, or educate someone, so they can be somebody. If I was the one on that state, i would certainly tell them to pull the plug, i dont wanna be a selfish person, who decides to live al tubed up. Id rather save a life, a young and full of hopes life

[Planeswalker]

Very very touchy subject...

I dont like the idea. Giving people the power to kill is a bad idea and it will be abused. In some cases with people suffering it may be the right solution, but in the big picture it will kill innocent people. Corruption exists everywhere. In the police force, government and hospitals. Giving somebody power to legally kill a person is extremely dangerous and I have no doubt that somebody would find a way to abuse the system.

To be honest...Id rather keep thousands of people alive suffering than even have 1 unnecessary human death.

[Que Sera Sera]

But, would you rather suffer for endless hours or end it in 1 second?. That would cause alot less pain to kill instead of trying to relive their pain. Also would you like your family to suffer even longer? Yes it would give them grief but the person would have died anyway and would stop the family from having to pity and comfort the dying person. Every moment they live(dying person) adds to the already huge amount of grief the famly already has. And again the death would not come as a shock as the famly would have known he would have died sonner or later

[Planeswalker]

You dont seem to understand what Euthanasia really is...

It is not the right to kill yourself (suicide). It is giving somebody else the power to kill. History (In Nazi Germany and Holland) has taught us that euthanasia is easily abused. Many people in Holland are rightly terrified of going to hospital and being euthanised against their will. Theres an article here about it being abused in Holland:
http://www.euthanasia.com/holland99.html

This also isnt simply a debate about those in extreme pain. Youve got to look at the bigger picture. Even if someone sincerely wants to take the euthanasia option, this may well be due to depression or to a misapprehension of their true prognosis. Bam a life is lost for no good reason.

Once again. I would much rather have people (as well as myself) being in agony than having innocent lives lost because of abuse and confusion of the system.

[M-50]

http://forums.bleachportal.net/showthread.php?t=12069&highlight=euthanasia
There are already quite a few threads on euthanasia.
Personally I think that euthanasia should be allowed to be performed upon people who want it. Why? Because it is their right to die if they want.

[Planeswalker]

^^ o0o0o Ive countered that already

This also isnt simply a debate about those in extreme pain. Youve got to look at the bigger picture. Even if someone sincerely wants to take the euthanasia option, this may well be due to depression or to a misapprehension of their true prognosis. Bam a life is lost for no good reason.

Theres also a matter of how do you prove that the people actually wanted it? There are strict laws in the Netherlands that patients must be aware of their condition and give their consent, however the system is still abused and people die against their will.

It simply shouldent be avaliable as an option. That way it cant be abused.

If people want to die thats fine. Let them commit suicide. But dont give other people power to kill.

[M-50]

You have to ask the person, video tape it and stream it live to coroners across the web. This prevents the video from being edited and also the coroner can see that the patients are not being coerced into saying they want euthanasia. And the way to do that is to take the patients and the lawyer who will be present, to a special room which has secret cameras positioned around the room in various places so the whole room can be seen. That way you can make sure that no one is in the room who is not supposed to be.

[Vampyrelord]

There have been several threads on this already. Four, to be precise.

USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION

/threads merged

[Planeswalker]

You have to ask the person, video tape it and stream it live to coroners across the web. This prevents the video from being edited and also the coroner can see that the patients are not being coerced into saying they want euthanasia. And the way to do that is to take the patients and the lawyer who will be present, to a special room which has secret cameras positioned around the room in various places so the whole room can be seen. That way you can make sure that no one is in the room who is not supposed to be.

Do you honestly think governments will go to all the trouble spending time and a hell of a lot of money to set that sort of system up?

And if they do spend the millions of dollars setting this up in hospital systems around the country what happens when it becomes common practice in a few years time?

Heres a quote Ive been fond of for a while:
"We shall begin by doing it because the patient is in intolerable pain but we shall end up doing it because it is Friday afternoon and we want to get away for the weekend"

Instead of spending millions to let people kill themselves why not spend it on finding a cure for the ones who want to live?

[M-50]

Do you honestly think governments will go to all the trouble spending time and a hell of a lot of money to set that sort of system up?
And if they do spend the millions of dollars setting this up in hospital systems around the country what happens when it becomes common practice in a few years time?
Heres a quote Ive been fond of for a while:
"We shall begin by doing it because the patient is in intolerable pain but we shall end up doing it because it is Friday afternoon and we want to get away for the weekend"
Instead of spending millions to let people kill themselves why not spend it on finding a cure for the ones who want to live?
Some countries already have those properties that enable patients to commit euthanasia. I will try to get the information about what countries that do it. If I am not mistaken the Netherlands has those special 'rooms' that are specifically built for euthanasia.
It does not cost millions of dollars. It will not even cost a hundred thousand dollars. All you have to do is to buy some wireless video cameras and place them inside some walls. Then get a wireless connection to a remote reciever and install recording software. Or you can hook it up directly to a secure website so the coroner can view it himself with an ajudicator present.

[Planeswalker]

Double posting = teh badz

If its as cheap as you say to set it up then Id imagine all of them should be. Unless they couldent afford such procedures.

Why would that interest me? Im a little confused at why you brought that up.

A study published by Dutch researchers in the September 20, 2005 edition of the Journal of Clinical Oncology showed that at least 50% of patients killed under the Dutch euthanasia programme were suffering from depression.

Do you see how dangerous it is to let it be an option? People are throwing away their lives simply because they are depressed for the moment. You might say that people have a right to die if they want. A real problem in society is that people really dont know what the hell they want in these circumstances. Depression is a psychological illness, which can be cured. Instead of people learning to get over this illness they have an option to choose death in their unnatural mental state. It isnt right to let people kill themselves when they have a chance at life. If you had a friend who wanted to commit suicide because he was depressed, would you just go "meh sure its your life" or would you do everything you can to help them?

Even with the "special rooms" the system is too dangerous and only ends up taking more lives away.

[milkjunkie]

I live in one of those countries that has already legalized euthanasia; the Netherlands. I think it's OK, however there must never be an occasion where the victim gets a feeling that he's being forced to commit euthanasia. And yes, that happens a little too often.

[M-50]

A study published by Dutch researchers in the September 20, 2005 edition of the Journal of Clinical Oncology showed that at least 50% of patients killed under the Dutch euthanasia programme were suffering from depression.

Do you see how dangerous it is to let it be an option? People are throwing away their lives simply because they are depressed for the moment. You might say that people have a right to die if they want. A real problem in society is that people really dont know what the hell they want in these circumstances. Depression is a psychological illness, which can be cured. Instead of people learning to get over this illness they have an option to choose death in their unnatural mental state. It isnt right to let people kill themselves when they have a chance at life. If you had a friend who wanted to commit suicide because he was depressed, would you just go "meh sure its your life" or would you do everything you can to help them?

Even with the "special rooms" the system is too dangerous and only ends up taking more lives away.
To actually be taken to a ''special room' you have to fulfil all these parameters (This is for Oregon):
patient must be resident in Oregon
patient must be aged over 18
patient must make 2 oral and 1 written request for euthanasia
there must be at least 15 days between the first and the last request
patient must be terminally ill with a life expectancy of less than 6 months
this prognosis must be confirmed by a second consultant physician
both doctors must confirm that the patient is capable of making this decision
both doctors must confirm that the patient does not have medical condition that impairs their judgement
patient must self-administer the lethal medication
About 30% of patients who started the process died before it was completed. 19 patients in the period who were given access to lethal medication decided not to use it. One survey showed that 45% of patients who were given good palliative care changed their mind about euthanasia.

And this is for the Netherlands:
must be convinced that the patient has made a voluntary and well-considered request to die
must be convinced that the patient is facing interminable and unendurable suffering
has informed the patient about his situation and his prospects
together with the patient, must be convinced that there is no other reasonable solution
has consulted at least one other independent doctor who has seen the patient
and given his written assessment of the due care requirements as referred to in the points above
has helped the patient to die with due medical care
The Dutch law also permits euthanasia for non-adults. Children of 16 and 17 can make their own decision, but their parents must be involved in the decision-making process regarding the ending of their life. For children aged 12 to 16, the approval of parents or guardian is required.

If a patient can no longer express their wishes, but made a written statement containing a request for termination of life before they became incompetent, a doctor is allowed to carry out their request providing the other conditions are met.

Links for both sources are: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/euthanasia/against/against_8.shtml

Only if all of these are done can they be taken away to the special room for euthanasia to occur.

If I had a friend who wanted to commit suicide/euthanasia then I would try to talk him out of it. But if he really wanted to die, had nothing to live for and his life had no meaning, then mabye. I would take him to a doctor first.

[Planeswalker]

So the Netherlands dont use the special room system? Interesting.

Lets say America, England, Australia all of those big western countries introduce it with the special room feature. Once America has given it the go we know lots of other countries will follow all over the world. However, just like the Netherlands they may not use the special room system. Infact I really dont see the entire world using it. Therefore it will still result in innocent lives being lost. maybe not in the countries that use that feature, but in the many who wont be bothered.

[Guy]

I personally think euthanasia should be up to the family members to decide. I know I would rather die than suffer as a vegetable. It is humiliating, I can do nothing to promote this world, and I'm wasting money on keeping myself to live. Why would I want that? I'd rather have all those money to be used on real people who are suffering throughout the world. Of course, for everyone, it is different. I'm just saying, if I ever lose conscious forever: kill me, end my suffering, and use the money to keep me alive to the starving children of Africa or something.

[II Xion II]

A mercy killing is still a killing, only with added euphemisms and Pilatean reasoning. Yes, death can be a horrible thing, and suffering through an incurable and insurmountable illness may be extremely difficult to deal with. However, no matter how much pain or suffering one must go through (I am saying this with myself in my mind), "helping" someone die is not the way to go. We should all accept our fate and our death (as everybody dies; there is no such thing as living forever) no matter what pain it brings with it. Euthanasia may seem like the answer when confronted with extreme suffering personally, but I believe that in the end, it is morally wrong and we should let nature take its course.

[KingKong]

Of all people discussing this, did anybody ever witness a person in a vegetative state, hooked on numbers of oxygen, food, etc tubes?
You know what happens?
The patients body swells up because water doesn't flow through the body the way it should anymore. It really throws you off, I mean really.

Euthanasia is A-OK. IF there is no room for improvement, no way out, no redemption, no options, no light at the end of the tunnel - it is the most humane thing to end a patient's life by eg cutting the oxygen and drastically increasing morphine dosage.

The argument that legalizing Euthanasia causes unnecessary deaths is really unfair towards those where it is the natural thing to do - opposed to unnaturally prolonging a life that is ending.

[Seta]

This topic has a lot of grey areas; there are some who support it and some who don't. Also, there is not enough Empirical data in relation to the decision making process of patients amongst other things.

There have been states that have implemented laws in support of Euthanasia in the past (besides the Netherlands), but they have always been overturned after a short while...

One argument against Euthanasia is depression, patients become depressed during illness and it’s natural for them to want to request death.

Another argument against it is that family's force it on the patient, or places a guilt-trip on them - the patients feeling they're being a burden.

However, I do believe that in the right circumstances, people should be allowed to request hastened death i.e. if they have no chance in recovering and are in the last stages of their illness.

[.System]

For those who disagree consider this.

You are suffering from a tumor in the brain, which has rendered you into a vegetable state i.e. you can't move, or talk or you can do is see and think, you are suffering every day and you will not die any time soon because you are sill young, your parents sympathize with your plight and so do the doctors and nurses that look after you, now say euthanasia was legal, your parents could fill in some forums and they will give you a quick injection that would put you to sleep and you will die without any pain.

But no, it is illegal and you are stuck in your state of mental agony until you die of natural causes, which is more humane?

[Mighty Aramir]

But think it this way, for every second you spend dollars are spent, even though you're already done for. So why being selfish? When someone the same age as you is suffering with hunger, or freezing to death, or even dying of something as normal as a fever, and that few dollars could be more than enough for feeding him/her, or buying medications. Will you be so egotist? Will you let his/her whole future go to waste?
And i'm sorry if i sound harsh, but would you rather to keep your family living in a false hope, spending most of their money in you. When peolple with out a penny are suffering caus they're newly born kids cant be fed, and if they live past 15 years old they're already a miracle.
The world is stuck, society has lost its interest on itself and began caring for the pieces of paper we value as money. Its rotting itself, and all because of being selfish, of not giving the money we dont need to those who really do

[paige_]

i don't know the right answer here. I'm only giving my opinion. this is a very sensitive matter to touch though. If they declare a person brain dead, even though his heart is still beating but his brain doesn't function anymore, then I think it would be ok to pull the tubes and turn off the monitor. he's already dead, anyway. if he's in coma and he still has a chance, then why let that person die? even though it takes for him to wake up, they shouldn't kill him. he isn't dead, he's just in coma.

[backwardsnemo]

I belive that if you look at it rationaly you are saving time and money from being wasted on somebody who will not notice it. if you look at it passionatley you are saving the person from pain, imense bordom or watever else they suffer from. either way you look at it, it can be justified and i belive it is right in some cases to do so.

[Hollow_Man_ct]

No, even if the peson's family agrees to "pull the plug".

Reasons:

-Suffering before death might either be, punishment for bad deeds done in the person's lifespan or merely bad luck, either way he should be tended to until he dies, however much he screams, moans, breaks things or anything.
-For people who believe in god, suffering before death might actually be a good thing, it washes away your sins and replaces suffering in the afterlife with suffering in the real world which is much more merciful (Do you want satan with fiery S/M tools or a little pain in the real world?)

also, the most important reason... HE MIGHT FU***** LIVE!! you'd be like "sh!t, we made a boo-boo", that is so illogical..

[Monkey_man]

i don't even get what people say is wrong about it anyway if someone is in alot of pain and is terminally ill and they are going to die any way as long it is with the said ill person's consent what is wrong about it

[M-50]

I have already said I am for euthanasia but I want to make a point clear.
@Mighty Aramir, there have been many cases where people who have been hooked up to various machines to make recoveries. If you read the Sunday Times Magazine you would have seen the article on it. A little child who was blind, speech and lost all movement because he choked on a grape can now see, can move and talk. If that child had been euthanasiased then his family would not have that joy.

[Mighty Aramir]

*has no access to Sunday Times Magazine*
Choking is not what i meant, besides the fact of his obvious short age, people tend to have soft spot for childs, and its quite obvious for our future depends on them. Yet cases of recovery are not the same as cases of sustained living, when people are not alive by themselves, but being kept alive by machines. That's when eutanasia kicks in, when life is no longer life, and the flame is close to being extinguished if not covered by a hand. There's when life leaves, once you cant enjoy the happiness of a sunrise, or the melancholic yet cleansing feel of the rain on your head, when only the perpetual beeps of life support keep you on the thin lone betwwen life and death. Is that reasonable? its more similar to torture than to anything else. To be confined in your own skinned, shut down from the sun and the outside, to listen solely (if u can listen) to the piercing beep that goes to your ear everything a little servo pumps your blood back in, and another puffing sound of oxigen being pumped to your lungs, but not your brain. For it is eternally drowning, yet... not dying. Think about it, try to imagine it...

[Aerias]

I am for Euthanasia in certain situations...I don't think it should be used if there is even a small conflict within the family on using it, but both of my parents have asked me if they ever were in an accident and it was determined that there was no chance of recovery to pull the plug. I personally am all for it being used on me if I ever turn into a vegetable 0.o

[M-50]

That kid I was talking about was hooked up to a ventilator for a few months before he showed signs of recovering because of his extensive brain damage.
From your post you are saying that euthanasia kicks in when a person is being kept alive by machines, but what about if a person has a terrible accident. survives and is taken off the machines after being able to breathe on his own. but due to damage to his body he cannot walk, talk, or hear. essentially brain dead but moving. The family of the person willl look after him, but he/she will be essentially a dead weight. S/He cannot talk, so cannot say what is wrong, if they need the bathroom. They will just wet themself and then it will be changed when the family checks. Shouldn't euthanasia be allowed then?

[Angel_shikigami]

Depens on what the person who's dying wants to do. Usally, they tell the family what they wanna do, but sometimes the family goes aganst there wishes and it gets in a giant mess. Isn't there some document, sortof like a will, that you can write up in case anything ever happens? But seriously, What's the point of liveing if you can't go out there and live.

[飛雲]

well, if the person is in a serious/painful illness that can't be cure (or very hard to) and by the agreement of the one in question, I think it should be legal. People should have their own choice to end their suffering/life or not

[Edgey]

Revive! :D

I think Euthanasia is wrong since I just think that it's a way of making murder sound nicer, and BTW it is against my morals as a human being to kill anyone, so I think it is wrong and should not be legalized.

[opusx]

In regards to the thread started earlier about the persons Grandmother, I am a live and let live, or die i should say, type of person. Who am I to force someone to suffer in the worst pain imaginable because of my beliefs. How should someone else have to suffer for what I believe? So with that I say sit down with your grandmother and talk to her. Make sure she is of sound mind and let her know how much you love her and will miss her. I truly wish your family the best, and I hope your grandmother will be at peace with whatever decision she makes. We will all send positive thoughts to her to safely bring her to a low numbered and tranquil part of soul society:pangel3:

[Setsuna Ai]

Revive! :D

I think Euthanasia is wrong since I just think that it's a way of making murder sound nicer, and BTW it is against my morals as a human being to kill anyone, so I think it is wrong and should not be legalized.
as long as the person signed a will stating that they are fine with euthanasia if they were to fall into a vegetated state, comma, incurable disease with probably 0 chances of living, then why not? How could it be murder? Who are we humans to justify such things?

Also, morals is a hard issue in debating. Mostly because not everyone believes in someone else's morals.

[.:raydancer:.]

it matters on occassion. as a catholic i view euthanasia for emotional pain as finding the easy way out. death is so easy. but if the pain is physical then i do believe it is fair to the person that they have suffered enough. but it shouldn't be legalized. if it were it might be used as an excuse for murder. or promote the fact that if your lifeis to hard you should end it. i respect life because each person only has one.

[Pyramus]

If the person in question has 100% no chance, and is in pain, then it shoul be done! If they have 100% no chance, but arnt in any pain, then they should be left to die in time! Also, if the person asks to be killed, then their final wiah should be carried out!