I could under the right conditions. When the patient is terminally ill and in pain. When the assistance is performed by a Non Medical person. When the person providing assistance is absolved from all liability or responsibility.
In complete agreement with you Lon. Why should only our beloved pets get this? We don't want to lose them, but worse is knowing they are suffering. Let's be humane to humans too.
I could. And I would choose it for myself under certain conditions. There are far worse things than death.
I would never vote for something like this to become legal (because there would be to many who would misuse this law) and I have searched my heart and do not believe I could help someone die. I could...like Hospice...help make them as comfortable and free from pain while they are in the process of dying...but I could never help them "pull the plug".
If I was asked the same question a couple of years ago there would be no doubts. Logically, if a person wished to end their life due to a malady so heinous that death was the better course of action, then so be it. Now though, I am not so sure. Lately it seems as though we are in an age whereby many laws regarding human life are being amended to perform another function. Abortion for instance, has been amended in many states to mean that a life can be taken at any stage of development including those newly born infants with some sort of major problem or even if the parents will be psychologically challenged. Who is to say that a simple assisted suicide due to an incurable disease will not advance to much greater and horrible mandates based on the same premise? For that matter, who is to say that someone like many of our own members here will not meet some societal standard and it is their caregivers, family or institution, who will pull the plug, so to speak, without the patient’s permission to do so? To me, it takes a lot more thought than the knee jerk “yes” reaction I would have previously been in line with. Personally, at this date and time, if there were something so terrible happening with my body that I could no longer bear living any longer, I am perfectly able to end my life myself.
Reasonable arguments can be made for it. However, even with laws prohibiting the practice, people have found ways to make that decision throughout our history. Setting aside religious considerations, my greatest objection to legalized euthanasia is that it is inevitable that, in order to cut costs, this will soon become the only option that the non-elite will have, whether they want it or not. When euthanasia is legal and accepted, the hard facts will be that it will be cheaper then palliative care, and cheaper than operations, medication, or other attempts to cure or maintain an elderly person who is no longer viewed as contributing to society. This is the other end to the questions that come up when we hear of medical innovations that would potentially allow a person to live forever, or to greatly extend their lives. Clearly, these medical marvels will not be available to everyone. Medicare isn't going to pay for it because the Earth would soon be vastly overpopulated. I don't get too excited about such things because, not being a part of the elite, it won't be available to me, and probably wouldn't be available to me if I were able to afford it. The reasons that longevity through medical science wouldn't be available for me are the same reasons that euthanasia would likely be my only option shortly after legalization. I would be considered a useless eater and, at some point, my medical plan wouldn't pay for anything else. Obama discussed this when asked one time. In reference to the ACA, someone asked him about what would be available to her eighty-year-old mother if she were to develop a condition that required expensive treatment, and he said that the most sensible thing would be for her to be given a pill to make her feel comfortable in her final days. While medical science has enabled great things, these are made available to the elderly only when they are among the elite. For the rest, if euthanasia were an option, it would eventually become the only option that any insurance policy would pay for. While sold as something that would allow me to make decisions about ending my life, it wouldn't really be my decision. In fact, particularly given the recent support (among Democrats and perhaps some Republicans) for "aborting" children after they are born, I can see a point where euthanasia would be applied to anyone who is deemed as no longer useful to society.
I think that making it legal would just be a step towards ending a person’s life instead of treating them, regardless of what they wanted to happen. Once that kind of euthanasia is made legal, then it will undoubtedly be mis-used, which is scary to think about. Being able to end life if you are dying anyway, and want to have help ending it is one thing, having someone else make that choice is totally something different. Nonetheless, I think that is where we are heading, whether we like it or not. This has already happened with animals. While it is wonderful that we can have our suffering pet put peacefully to sleep, and this is a good thing for them; what about all of the dogs who are simply picked up by animal control and then put to sleep for no other reason than difficulty of housing and rehoming them ? What is to say that it will be any different with people once a law is passed to allow euthanasia of humans ?
There is a strong movement afoot to simply cheapen human life. The abortion question that is currently an issue is just an example. Perhaps it is a means to do away with things like Special Olympics and Shriner's Hospitals. I am sure that most of the Special Olympics athletes would be aborted, and many of the disfigured kids that are served by the Shriner's Hospitals would not be alive either. The same appears to be the case with the elderly. We are a "drag" on society and some don't make a significant economic contribution to society. When Sarah Palin mentioned the "Death Panel" in the ACA, she was ridiculed, but the panel did, and in some form, still does exist. It is a "Utilization Review" committee at the Federal level. I don't think it is currently used, but it is an idea waiting for implementation. Its role is to determine the best way to use the resources available, and determines who should receive care. The elderly will probably be the first to be deprived of care for curable diseases, but it will eventually be expanded to the addict, drunk, and miscreant who do not contribute to the economic well-being of society, i.e, pay taxes. It could also (sometime in the future) be used for genocide, or ethnocide. That is my personally pessimistic view of things. I am an advocate of life from conception to natural death, that is not requiring exceptional measures to sustain life.
I think Oregon already has an assisted suicide law. The doctor prescribes pills and the terminal patient takes them on their own. It has already been mentioned by people like Opera Winphrey and Will Smith that old people should die for the greater good of " the movement " because we stand in the way of the new world order, especially white people. So I have no doubt that it will be more than a discussion at some point. I'm not sure at some point in time there may not be a choice for the elderly.
In the last period of his life, my father while still of sound mind begged my sister to bring him poison. Of course, she could not do this. Further down the road as the family agonized over whether to opt for installing a feeding tube against his prior wishes, my parent died naturally. When my own quality of life has become non-existent, I would wish for the option of a painless death with dignity...
Did they have Hospice back then William? Hospice has made the end of life so much more comfortable and pretty much pain free.
Hospice allows folks to die with dignity and comfort, but does not accelerate the decline. It is a wonderful innovation in care, and has been around in the UK (I think) since the 1960s, but was not introduced into the U.S. until much later.
I have seen a man in the last stages of cancer plead for release from his torment. So, yes, I can support assisted dying.