Thoughts on Physician Assisted Suicide.

Agreed.

 

I absolutely support voluntary euthanasia. It's either stupid or sadistic not to support it; it wastes hospital space and causes someone a lot more pain than necessary. It does nobody any good to force someone to live in agony for weeks/months/years when their death is imminent and they've gone over their choices.

Suicide is not the same as euthanasia, and that is plainly obvious to all but the exceedingly ignorant. Suicide is borne of completely different circumstances, and not in a state of mind to choose to end life. Euthanasia is clearly considered and comes after professional approval.

 

One of my former coworkers committed suicide, and even though I barely knew him, it was hard.

However, I do think that in the cases where someone is basically staring down a painful death from a terminal illness, I don't have a problem with it. My mom died from cancer at 39 when I was 8, and it's no way to go.

 

I completely agree with this. (Not to mention that Aussie stated it in a much more eloquent manner than I would have been able to )

 

I personally support Assisted Suicide- at least if it is in someone's will.
If someone is supported by machines to live and that contradicts their religion, belief, or whatever, then they sure as hell have the right to die if their will states it. If parents/ family try to prevent this, then it goes straight to media and isn't that just awful?
If someone is terminally ill, 110% going to die, they know it's going to be painful, it's going to cost thousands of dollars, they aren't going to enjoy it. I definitely feel that if they are logical enough to understand that they're going to die no matter what, then they should be able to have a less painful death. Again, this must be out of a logical mind- not if they are Dementia sufferers or if it is in the heat of the moment during some sort of painful time. I'm not an expert on the subject- but isn't there a law saying that suicide is illegal? A bit stupid if there is, but c'mon, it's their life, and they understand the importance of it, government, religion, family should not deny people the right to choose an "easier" way out.

 

I think it's unconscionable to take away the choice between ending it, cutting off life support and dying slowly, and being pumped full of anything that can extend life. Why shouldn't the dying be allowed to choose which manner fits them best?

 

I am for Assisted Suicide especially if your really sick or have some painful disease. I work at the hospital so i see all these things. People dying from cancer in a lot of pain sickle cell patients etc. I would want on my will if i get any form of dementia or alzheimer's put me to death instead of being strapped in some chair or bed for the rest of my life. Its one of the saddest things watching someone brain deteriorate from these diseases.

 

I absolutely support Medicide, and if I were terminally ill and in that much pain, I'd probably want those drugs myself.

 

I agree completely. People who know that death is imminent should get a choice. But then this raises a question, what if the person is physically incapable of making a decision? Could the family decide to end the suffering for them?

 

Perhaps it should be registered with their health insurer or publicly recorded in another way. But if there's no record available, perhaps it would have to be up to the family or a standard opt-in or opt-out system if there's nobody to make a decision.

 

I actually don't support this. I don't really think any doctor, or person for that matter, should "play god". If someone is brain dead and it was their wish was to not be kept alive on life support, then yes, I think they should be taken off life support. However, a person who is brain dead is medically dead and doesn't really have a chance at recovery. They are basically a body being kept alive through a machine, and that's it. A person who is fighting cancer or some other terminal illness is an alive and awake person, with thoughts and feelings. There have been many cases where a sick person was told they would die and they wound up surviving. I realize that a person may genuinely want to die (especially in a state of sickness), but I just don't think it's another person's place to make that happen before their designated time. That's just my opinion, and I realize many will disagree with it.

 

100% support

 

I wish we lived in a world where we didn't have to think about this but, alas, that is not the case. Out of deference and respect for the pain and suffering some people must bear with terminal illnesses, I believe physician-assisted suicide is the most humane and noble thing we can offer those who are outside of the edge of science and medicine's curative wonders. It is what I would want if faced with a terminal illness fraught with pain and misery.

Some equate euthanasia with "suicide," and as Aussie stated, they are "borne of completely different circumstances." Unfortunately, many consider them to be one and the same and rely on the Biblical interpretation that we humans are simply stewards of the physical body we inhabit and caretakers of it for God. As such, the ethical and legalistic right to commit suicide is not there according to such interpretations of Biblical and canon law.

I just hope human compassion and mercy are able to eventually override the taboos our heritage has placed upon us.

 

I completely support it. As many have said, this is a pretty straightforward matter. You're allowing people the choice to save themselves months of suffering. I think a more important question is what of severe, but non-terminal disability? There were a couple of court cases of people with 'locked in syndrome' here, who basically were totally mentally capable, but paralysed, and nearly unable to communicate. What about assisted suicide for those who aren't terminally ill?

My mother has actually made her wishes clear on this (she isn't ill or anything, but she's worked with people in these situations, so I suppose it makes her think about these things). She says if she begins to develop dementia that she wouldn't want to live with that condition, and would prefer to have the option of assisted suicide.

Also, all my grandparents still living have 'do not resuscitate' orders in their medical files.

 

I'm in favor of assisted suicide.

I won't get into the nitty-gritty of the whys, but I will point out that I think it should be an option for the terminally ill and the chronically enfeebled. For example, if you've struggled with chronic pain every single day for a decade, I think you ought to be allowed to enlist a medical professional to help end your suffering.

We don't force irreparably injured pets to suffer, so I don't think we should force irreparably loved ones to suffer, either.

 

In complete disagreement. I'm shocked that my province is imposing on us this type of legislation without even consulting with the population. It's a horribly slippery slope that I feel can lead to atrocious outcomes, and will detract us from improving standards and practices in palliative care. I feel that this politically-correct form of murder will become a standard method of clearing spaces in hospitals/nursing homes, and that those who don't want it will be faced with a lack of alternatives in terms of palliative care and will have little choice but to consent to this macabre end and the hands of a person who swore under oath to protect their life (as a matter of fact, many doctors will refuse to perform this).

Furthermore, in some countries where this is already allowed, they are now talking of allowing people with mental illness and minors to consent to this. A complete travesty, in my opinion.

Now, I understand why it is an issue. I understand that people suffer tremendously in their last moments on earth. But killing them is not the answer, better palliative care is.

"First do no harm."

---------- Post added 2nd Feb 2014 at 06:07 AM ----------

And this is exactly where the slippery slope into plain murder starts. People will start making these decisions in order to get their inheritance faster, or the life insurance money, or whatever. Others will make it because they are too scared to see the reality of their relative's death, even if it's a part of life. Still others will do it because it's most likely cheaper than long-term care for their relative.

Scary to think about.

 

Forcing a person to live when they're in constant agony whilst simultaneously refusing palliative treatment is tantamount to doing harm.

Meanwhile, the person who is suffering gets to sit around waiting for moderately-healthy, largely pain-free politicians to determine the perimeters of better palliative care (a process notorious for going nowhere).

There needs to be a middle ground.

 

Well in my book, killing is doing harm. People have been dying since the beginning of times, and only now do we want to start killing them off.

The reason why we don't advance in palliative care is that our society doesn't give value to the life of those who are not young, healthy, and "productive." So we consider these people a waste of space and resources, and will look for any good excuse to get rid of them. We treat them so badly that they are in agony, and look to death as a deliverance from their pain (much like suicidal people don't want to die, but merely want their suffering to end). So when they ask to die because they don't see any chance of their pain letting up, we jump on the opportunity to free up a nursing home bed, with no regard to the' person's right to adequate medical care.

People do not want to die in the vast majority of cases. They just want relief from their pain, and to be treated as full beings with dignity (which is what hospice care is all about). .And when you give them that, they usually want to live out the time they have left, because being sick, they have an acute understanding of the value of life.

Some time from now, after countless have been snuffed with "consent" acquired under what amounts to torture and monetary pressures, we will look back and see the insanity of what we did.